The brent appreciation society meeting!

Well that was a great chance for Brent haters to have their say.......I can only assume none of you turned up....or spoke very quietly so you weren't heard....looke like you missed a chance to put your points over.

Zyph - If I made the effort to go, I would of manked like feck about the mini-stand size and how it inhibits all/any future prospects/vision of football in the higher echelons of the football league.

Do you think Mr.Brent would take even the slightest interest in what I had to say about that particular point? He probably would of given me some contrived BS answer and then ordered Newell's boys to give me a beating.

PS: I'm not a Brent hater - I just don't trust the mofo.

Well...    I thought Brent did well with the fluff questions.

But when Graham questioned him...  It was a different situation

And the supporters bar question... James Brent and the Board had no answer or were not prepared to give one - which is staggering considering it must have been the most anticipated question.

Kinda says it all really.

ZYPH wrote:

Well that was a great chance for Brent haters to have their say.......I can only assume none of you turned up....or spoke very quietly so you weren't heard....looke like you missed a chance to put your points over.

Like your beloved brent gives a shit. You brent lovers have the club you thoroughly deserve - at best lingering around the bottom of the basement with no hope of ever again seeing even an 18,000 HP crowd or a serious promotion challenge back to the 2nd tier. You must be ecstatic.

So I take that as a no Freathy......you didn't ask a question and you didn't go.....you missed a chance to put your point over......just hot air as usual then.

ZYPH wrote:

So I take that as a no Freathy......you didn't ask a question and you didn't go.....you missed a chance to put your point over......just hot air as usual then.

With all due respect most of the major descisons have been made and this meeting just bolstered them up - can't think of anything new to come out of it!! As some have said, the rest on the panel looked bored at best - it was a waste of time!!

What point is zyph talking about?

ZYPH wrote:

Well that was a great chance for Brent haters to have their say.......I can only assume none of you turned up....or spoke very quietly so you weren't heard....looke like you missed a chance to put your points over.

Gob.....How about the above point for starters ?

ZYPH wrote:

ZYPH wrote:

Well that was a great chance for Brent haters to have their say.......I can only assume none of you turned up....or spoke very quietly so you weren't heard....looke like you missed a chance to put your points over.

Gob.....How about the above point for starters ?

I understand what you're saying but do you seriously think that any question asked by ATD [or any other body for that matter] members is going to elicit a meaningful response at one of these meetings? During the Stapleton/New world era's,there were umpteen Q and A sessions which were very well attended,including as i remember,some current ATD posters.The common thread of answers obtained at those meetings was they turned out to be utter bullshit-not really surprising that a measure of cynicism exists.And why pick out posters on this site? I would suggest that only a very small percentage of PASOTI posters attended that meeting,in spite of some fairly trenchant criticism of Mr Brent on there,especially regarding the capacity of the new stand.Are you making the same points to outspoken posters like Samjones,ejh,withmenace etc on PASOTI? Just wondering like.

"say", say about what?

Lots have had their say, the AFT has had its say, the comments in the Herald are people having their say, people are having their say on the message boards of ATD, people are commenting in pubs before matches as well as the public consultation hoax. But none of it has made a hint of a difference to the greedy ambitions of the developer so God only knows what difference making yet another point will make as zyph seems to hell bent to suggest.

60 people attending Brent's PR bash says it all, consider that a snub Brenty.

I am voting to only go to a few home games instead of the usual season ticket because I don't agree with the clusterfuck. Why would I bother going to this load of shite Zyphe? Good on Graham for asking some well worded questions but do you really think that anything will change because of a few fans asking questions. As we know from the rent and rates debacle what the top boys at Home Park say isn't neccessarily what is true.

Well I've woken up bright and refreshed so decided to endure that 48 minute presentation.

Agree with Ricks really. Brent and Starnes would have been salivating at the powderpuff level of questioning - Graham Clark aside.

What that video clearly demonstrates though, is through the general tone of the whole meeting, if a group of ATDers had rocked up and told Brent exactly what we think of his plans, then there would have been carnage.

What was far more constructive and telling was Grahams probing. He managed to coax a 180 degrees u-turn out of Brent from saying he'd...

"genuinely given no thought to what happens in 2016" as regards buying back the freehold from the Council, to....

"if we had the money to put into the football club to enable the club to buy the stadium back, I think I'd be inclined to do that"

These two statements were made by James in the space of three minutes.  

So he'd genuinely given no thought to it before?  

The precise wording doesn't make it an actual contradiction, but to all intents and purposes it pretty much is one.

Bottom line is Graham Clarks concerns are fully justified, and you can bet your life Brent will be buying the Freehold in 2016 and selling it on at a tidy profit for himself. What happens after that is not Brents or Akkerons concern, and Argyle may well be in the hands of another bunch of unscrupulous chancers.

So apart from that, attending this latest hoax WAS A TOTAL WASTE OF TIME!

Not entirely.

We learned of Mr Brent's deep concern for Plymouth's needy elderly which is ironic given that Mr Brent negotiated the £254,000 business rates holiday and that same £254,000 would have contributed nicely to the costs incurred by the council when supporting its needy elderly citizens.

And that "complex" negotiations are under way regarding the cost of parking in Central Park.

And that the "jobs" for catering staff in the new ground will be filled by unpaid students gaining "work experience".

And that current demand does not justify building a bigger stand (the 4000 crowds McCauley's Argyle attracted didn't justify the 18600 seats he provided at the time either, of course).

The emphasis on the importance of hospitality income from the new stand suggests that the financial case for a supporters' bar is weak.

And that it is all justified by unpublished "figures" which only add up one way. Apparently.

There was also a rambly bit about the enhancement in value for the ground, given the new stand, in reply to Graham's question that I'd like to listen to again before I comment on it further.

And not much of the developoment will benefit the club or the city very much, if at all.

So not exactly anything new but a few assumptions confirmed.

Lets do it Brenty's way and base everything on current demand, so why do we need a mini stand at all?

GOB wrote:

So apart from that, attending this latest hoax WAS A TOTAL WASTE OF TIME!

Having watched the recording three times...I thought the questions that were asked were answered satisfactory.

If there were more relevant questions to ask....what a shame that those who could have asked them didn't.

At least it would of been on camera for all to hear...than on some keyboard warriors PASOTI or ATD webpage that wouldn't of been read half as much.

Those with grievances, missed a great opportunity to inform a wider audience to their views and thoughts.

Of course they wouldn't be hiding in the depths of the internet and would have to get their facts correct...instead of lobbing grenades from behind their sofa's.

Who was the 'overseas questioner' who asked about the Grandstand size......a plausible answer which made sense to most people.....you cannot plan for an unknown future say five years down the line with money that can change things that are needed now.

GOB wrote:

Lets do it Brenty's way and base everything on current demand, so why do we need a mini stand at all?

Maybe because the currant stand is hard to maintain and is an health and safety problem.

GOB wrote:

Lets do it Brenty's way and base everything on current demand, so why do we need a mini stand at all?

There's no current demand for a Hotel or a cinema either, the one's we've already got are hardly thriving, dentists always seem busy though so why not just turn the whole HHP development into Europe's largest mdental surgery ?

ZYPH wrote:

GOB wrote:

Lets do it Brenty's way and base everything on current demand, so why do we need a mini stand at all?

Maybe because the currant stand is hard to maintain and is an health and safety problem.

OK, the other three stands are ample enough based on current attendances? Why not just knock it down, build a set of changing rooms, a fans bar and then leave it for a more ambitious owner in the future?

Can anyone understand/explain what is said between 30:13 and 13:20?

ZYPH wrote:

GOB wrote:

Lets do it Brenty's way and base everything on current demand, so why do we need a mini stand at all?

Maybe because the currant stand is hard to maintain and is an health and safety problem.

Lets hope they are careful when raisin the roof then!

ZYPH wrote:

GOB wrote:

So apart from that, attending this latest hoax WAS A TOTAL WASTE OF TIME!

Having watched the recording three times...I thought the questions that were asked were answered satisfactory.

If there were more relevant questions to ask....what a shame that those who could have asked them didn't.

At least it would of been on camera for all to hear...than on some keyboard warriors PASOTI or ATD webpage that wouldn't of been read half as much.

Those with grievances, missed a great opportunity to inform a wider audience to their views and thoughts.

Of course they wouldn't be hiding in the depths of the internet and would have to get their facts correct...instead of lobbing grenades from behind their sofa's.

Who was the 'overseas questioner' who asked about the Grandstand size......a plausible answer which made sense to most people.....you cannot plan for an unknown future say five years down the line with money that can change things that are needed now.

People who moan about other people moaning, always makes me smile.

It's the old pasoti attempted insult of slurring anyone that has an opinion trick, it doesn't work so well on ATD though  

GOB wrote:

It's the old pasoti attempted insult of slurring anyone that has an opinion trick, it doesn't work so well on ATD though  

Foreshore.