MAJOR ANNOUNCEMENT...BANTON SIGNS

GreenSam wrote:

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Chemical Ali wrote:

Good news- its bloody odd that Argyle seem on the rise once again (on the pitch anyway).

It was always going to happen, Brent is a proper bastard who doesn't do spunking cash, despite what a few bright sparks on here suggested it would never have been in his interests to allow the club to fail, shore you flirted with dreaded drop but that was a learning process for Harry Potter, there is nowhere for you to go now but up.


It's a fooking tragedy.

I've never once brought into the theory that it would be against Brent's interests to go up.

Not shore anyone would ever see you a "bright spark" though, eh Sam?

akagreengull wrote:

Don't know what you are bleating about - you got Tisdale as manger!   

Perhaps we could fill him up with hay and feed them sheep you are on about then.

Lord Tisdale wrote:

GreenSam wrote:

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Chemical Ali wrote:

Good news- its bloody odd that Argyle seem on the rise once again (on the pitch anyway).

It was always going to happen, Brent is a proper bastard who doesn't do spunking cash, despite what a few bright sparks on here suggested it would never have been in his interests to allow the club to fail, shore you flirted with dreaded drop but that was a learning process for Harry Potter, there is nowhere for you to go now but up.


It's a fooking tragedy.

I've never once brought into the theory that it would be against Brent's interests to go up.

Not shore anyone would ever see you a "bright spark" though, eh Sam?

Touche

Bye bye Lavery   

Gaining Banton won't make up for losing Lavery who appeared to be a genuine goal machine, BOLLOCKS.

Jack Sheppard wrote:

Gaining Banton won't make up for losing Lavery who appeared to be a genuine goal machine, BOLLOCKS.

I think there's a touch of hysteria about losing Lavery. He scored 3 goals, that's all. Shez even benched him for the first 4 games of his loan spell so it wasn't as if we were bringing in a proven quality player. He has done well recently and having seen him a few times he has definitely got better with each game. But remember Argyles best performance of the season on Sunday came without Lavery being there.

Czarcasm wrote:

Jack Sheppard wrote:

Gaining Banton won't make up for losing Lavery who appeared to be a genuine goal machine, BOLLOCKS.

I think there's a touch of hysteria about losing Lavery. He scored 3 goals, that's all. Shez even benched him for the first 4 games of his loan spell so it wasn't as if we were bringing in a proven quality player. He has done well recently and having seen him a few times he has definitely got better with each game. But remember Argyles best performance of the season on Sunday came without Lavery being there.

I can assure you i'm not hysterical dear, just disappointed.

P.S         Thanks Coalan, i'm really, really, really gonna miss u, thanks for everything, love Jack       

P.P.S   I think there's a touch of hysteria about gaining Banton.

i wonder if Calon will spend the next year having those FV throbbers tweeting him relentlessly like banton did.

There's a lot of hysterical joy about this Banton signing, on twitter & among some fans, like we've won a league title or something. You know, the sort of people who have a Wink about being above Exeter in the league, and actually acknowledged the event on twitter and elsewhere. What does that say about their view on what Argyle's aspirations are #facepalm.

Yes, it's good news Banton has signed, but it's a huge blow to lose Lavery. I'd say we're marginally weaker now.

Was feeling positive about a flirt with the playoffs before news about Lavery, but thinking a top half finish is more realistic now. Progress innum.   

Jack Sheppard wrote:

Gaining Banton won't make up for losing Lavery who appeared to be a genuine goal machine, BOLLOCKS.

Exactly

Pafcintheplace wrote:

Jack Sheppard wrote:

Gaining Banton won't make up for losing Lavery who appeared to be a genuine goal machine, BOLLOCKS.

Exactly

I like Lavery, and I agree some peoples hard-ons are way too high on the 'stiff-ometer' about Banton returning. But the nuts and bolts are that Lavery isn't a kid, and yet his only career goals to date (3)have come in his last four games.

Czarcasm wrote:

Pafcintheplace wrote:

Jack Sheppard wrote:

Gaining Banton won't make up for losing Lavery who appeared to be a genuine goal machine, BOLLOCKS.

Exactly

I like Lavery, and I agree some peoples hard-ons are way too high on the 'stiff-ometer' about Banton returning. But the nuts and bolts are that Lavery isn't a kid, and yet his only career goals to date (3)have come in his last four games.

Seems a shame to lose him when he's in the form of his life.

So did old quiver lips actually fork out el dosherihno for him then?

Interesting that the BBC are reporting an 'undisclosed fee', which suggests some money had changed hands. Also as Chadwick has had his contract terminated we can assume that he has at least partly been 'paid off'. Although the absolute values are unlikely to be large, it does suggest that we are at least seeing some cash investment in the playing squad. Maybe this has come from the unbudgeted income from the FA Cup run?

Sounds like there might be a few more coming in, as some of Sheridan's unsuccessful loan players will be moved on, free up some wages.

Flat_Track_Bully wrote:

Interesting that the BBC are reporting an 'undisclosed fee', which suggests some money had changed hands. Also as Chadwick has had his contract terminated we can assume that he has at least partly been 'paid off'. Although the absolute values are unlikely to be large, it does suggest that we are at least seeing some cash investment in the playing squad. Maybe this has come from the unbudgeted income from the FA Cup run?

Sounds like there might be a few more coming in, as some of Sheridan's unsuccessful loan players will be moved on, free up some wages.

given there is a sell on clause added to banton contract i dont think any fee was that high

I'm not quite sure how "undisclosed fee" fits in with Jimmy's new transparency. It all just sounds like the last bunch. They were fond of that one.
I hope he hasn't shelled out a couple of million that could put the club in trouble.  

Maybe he was gagged, bullied, and forced to sign an NDA.

GreenSam wrote:

Excellent news - looks like this season at least we're really going for promotion.

As you're now a trust leader, I really believe you need to sit back a little and reflect.

It's a good signing, nothing more nothing less.

GreenSam wrote:

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Chemical Ali wrote:

Good news- its bloody odd that Argyle seem on the rise once again (on the pitch anyway).

It was always going to happen, Brent is a proper bastard who doesn't do spunking cash, despite what a few bright sparks on here suggested it would never have been in his interests to allow the club to fail, shore you flirted with dreaded drop but that was a learning process for Harry Potter, there is nowhere for you to go now but up.


It's a fooking tragedy.

I've never once brought into the theory that it would be against Brent's interests to go up.

Yeah sure the costs would be higher but the income would be higher still.

Costs would be higher in our present situation as most of our players are out of contract at the end of the season. We'd be looking to pay wages in a new higher division competing with giants like Brizzle City, Sheff Utd, Coventry etc. Can you explain how income would be higher?

Coxside_Green wrote:

GreenSam wrote:

Excellent news - looks like this season at least we're really going for promotion.

As you're now a trust leader, I really believe you need to sit back a little and reflect.

It's a good signing, nothing more nothing less.

Does that mean I can't have a personal opinion?

Coxside_Green wrote:

GreenSam wrote:

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Chemical Ali wrote:

Good news- its bloody odd that Argyle seem on the rise once again (on the pitch anyway).

It was always going to happen, Brent is a proper bastard who doesn't do spunking cash, despite what a few bright sparks on here suggested it would never have been in his interests to allow the club to fail, shore you flirted with dreaded drop but that was a learning process for Harry Potter, there is nowhere for you to go now but up.


It's a fooking tragedy.

I've never once brought into the theory that it would be against Brent's interests to go up.

Yeah sure the costs would be higher but the income would be higher still.

Costs would be higher in our present situation as most of our players are out of contract at the end of the season.  We'd be looking to pay wages in a new higher division competing with giants like Brizzle City, Sheff Utd, Coventry etc.  Can you explain how income would be higher?

The end of season play-off run and wembley final would be a windfall, undoubtedly season ticket sales would hugely increase and League One sides get a bigger chunk of the TV money cake for starters.

Also, we wouldn't necessarily be competing for the best teams in league one. We'd probably only have a budget good enough to survive in league one if we got there which would hardly require it to go through the roof imho. If we really were aiming to compete with the biggest sides in that league yes I agree that'd require a considerable outlay but I don't imagine we would do. I think the majority would be happy with staying up first season back in league one (not all, but I would guess a majority would). I can't imagine the 20th best budget in league one would require going through the roof especially if we are in the black this season.

GreenSam wrote:

Coxside_Green wrote:

GreenSam wrote:

Excellent news - looks like this season at least we're really going for promotion.

As you're now a trust leader, I really believe you need to sit back a little and reflect.

It's a good signing, nothing more nothing less.

Does that mean I can't have a personal opinion?

Coxside_Green wrote:

GreenSam wrote:

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Chemical Ali wrote:

Good news- its bloody odd that Argyle seem on the rise once again (on the pitch anyway).

It was always going to happen, Brent is a proper bastard who doesn't do spunking cash, despite what a few bright sparks on here suggested it would never have been in his interests to allow the club to fail, shore you flirted with dreaded drop but that was a learning process for Harry Potter, there is nowhere for you to go now but up.


It's a fooking tragedy.

I've never once brought into the theory that it would be against Brent's interests to go up.

Yeah sure the costs would be higher but the income would be higher still.

Costs would be higher in our present situation as most of our players are out of contract at the end of the season.  We'd be looking to pay wages in a new higher division competing with giants like Brizzle City, Sheff Utd, Coventry etc.  Can you explain how income would be higher?

The end of season play-off run and wembley final would be a windfall, undoubtedly season ticket sales would hugely increase and League One sides get a bigger chunk of the TV money cake for starters.

Also, we wouldn't necessarily be competing for the best teams in league one. We'd probably only have a budget good enough to survive in league one if we got there which would hardly require it to go through the roof imho. If we really were aiming to compete with the biggest sides in that league yes I agree that'd require a considerable outlay but I don't imagine we would do. I think the majority would be happy with staying up first season back in league one (not all, but I would guess a majority would). I can't imagine the 20th best budget in league one would require going through the roof especially if we are in the black this season.

Of course you can have a personal opinion, you're still going to be assessed by your views come voting time (or perhaps not while we're shit). It's probably why Ed Shillabeer has lasted so long. If Andy or Tim had came out with "Excellent news - looks like this season at least we're really going for promotion", they would've got slaughtered. Please take my comment as constructive and not negative or patronising as I am giving the benefit of doubt of a little naivety here.

I'll answer the 2nd bit shortly when I have a bit more time (getting earache right now)

Sam Part 2

The very fact we're at this moment in time out of contract with the vast majority of our players is why promotion to League 1 would be very expensive for us. Your extra income is largely based on one-off payments via play-offs & Wembley, nothing sustainable. TV income, doesn't Suroy have a claim on this?

Part one: My views are (only slightly on certain issues) different to voting time (incidentally I might add there wasn't actually a voting time and would have been if enough people had challenged me which I would have preferred) because I think the circumstances have changed. As a rule I judge by evidence. Maybe I get the evidence wrong, many times I have but I've always said what I believe to be the case and not a twisted agenda to make everything either positive or negative. I was and still am massively against the half-arsed HHP plans. That's on public record that I think it will permanently kill off any hopes of us ever reaching our potential at Home Park. I haven't stopped thinking that just because we're in much better shape this season. Whilst I'm much happier with the way the short-term is looking, the medium and long-term for me is still a big concern. It's also on public record that I have said that I fear that if we don't get promoted this season we probably won't get promoted for years to come due to the rumoured budget cuts if we don't go up. I think to an extent it's go up this season or we won't get as good a chance again for years.

However, all that doesn't mean I'm not objective enough in my ability to look at a situation and analyse it and say that so far this season I'm happy with the team and also the way it's currently being backed. If we hadn't been able to sign Banton and had been limited to low budget signings then we'd all been saying the team hadn't been backed and rightly so too. Now though, with Banton sealed and Parsons probably to come for me that is a sign of a team being backed.

What about if Andy and Tim said so? I won't presume to speak for them on any issue but I know that they are both the type to say when they think something is positive and when they think it is negative and not just blindly stick to a pre-concieved idea. I like this site- I know I don't often make out that I do but I really do. Pasoti for me is a bit too stale to enjoy it as I once did and I'm not coming on here with a second face saying different stuff to you as I am to them as I've said the same to people high up in pasoti that I just feel the recent bans of ejh among others serve to lower the tone of the debate and decrease the site's quality. So make no bones about it, I like this site and will explain why to anyone's face. Just at times like this it seems that to judge something positively is inherently a bad thing to do which I don't think has to be the case. If we'd signed some low budget non league winger from rag arse rovers then that would be cause to be critical of the backing and our ability to go for it. As it stands, this is a cause to be positive of those two things.

Part two: the Wembley money would be short term but it'd also mean that the next 12 months would guarantee James Brent wouldn't have to put his hand in his pocket. As for TV money, Surroy doesn't get any. I am of the understanding he gets a lump sum of £100k for each promotion we get which isn't a great deal more than a piss in the water really. Attendance money is the biggie too. More people are going to attend HP (and if we're looking at JBs motivations, use the HHP facilities too) if we are in league one than league two.

Believe me when I say that I'm not saying that I'm of the opinion that JB wants us to be in a higher league out of some emotional bond. I think he'd probably prefer us to go up for emotional reasons than not to sure but I'm not naive enough to know that he is a capitalist and it was primarily about the money from day one. On that consideration, I think it would be in his OWN interests for us to be in a higher league. People used the same line of thinking to say that he'd prefer us to go down than stay up. It was rubbish then (hence the sacking of Fletcher who was taking us to the Conference) and imo it's rubbish now. He's not an ambitious man with regards to PAFC but he's had to pay a lot into the club to cover its historical debts (yes loaned but I bet he'd still sooner not pay it). Would he prefer a club making profit and looking after itself in League One so probably easier to sell on to a potential new owner for more cash or prefer a floundering League Two club that he has to make hefty cash injections into every 6 months to help them function? Obvious for me.

I am in no way shape or form a lover of Brent as chairman of the club BUT by backing the club to make these signings he has backed us in a way he could have not done so. Of course that doesn't mean he's suddenly gonna be the owner you and I want him to be and he's probably doing it more for the fact that it'll benefit him than anyone else... but in this case what he's doing is also good for the club and deserves credit. I don't do binary thinking, I just use a bit of nuance and I think this is cause for saying 'yeah, that's good'.

Maybe if he gets out the drawing board for a new HHP redesign taking the capacity to 22,000, I'll be properly happy. Maybe we all would. Maybe pigs will fly.

Do you want to précis that for us Sam?
Anyway has the thought crossed any bodies minds that Sheridan has an agreement that if he say gets up to twelfth at the end of the Christmas period then his budget goes up? Bear in mind that we have no legacy players left most players are having their wages pay paid by parent clubs and overheads must have gone down. Also it's not Brent backing the team as such he's backing the clusterfuck, if it all goes tits up he's lost £2m of Akkerons money that will get paid out at 7p in the pound but he must get the clusterfuck built whilst we still have a functioning football team. £2m pound gamble (and I'm sure that he's hedged that bet somewhere anyway) versus £50million pound development that by all accounts will cost £41m to build. Philanthropist he ain't.

Fookin 'ell Sam. I'll probably have to go through that lot tomorrow.

Just to start though, on your 1st sentence, I never stated anything about your views at 'voting time'. I merely suggested that your own personal views may sway future votes. There really wasn't any need to be so defensive.

The reality of your point of view is it will be public, there's nothing wrong with that. What I will say is when you come out with statements like "Excellent news - looks like this season at least we're really going for promotion", it will not be taken as Sam the poster by all but Sam the AFT Leader by some. You are representative and you'll find it very difficult to seperate the two. I wont apologise if you don't like this. I'll read the rest tomorrow.

GreenSam wrote:

Part one: My views are (only slightly on certain issues) different to voting time (incidentally I might add there wasn't actually a voting time and would have been if enough people had challenged me which I would have preferred) because I think the circumstances have changed. As a rule I judge by evidence. Maybe I get the evidence wrong, many times I have but I've always said what I believe to be the case and not a twisted agenda to make everything either positive or negative. I was and still am massively against the half-arsed HHP plans. That's on public record that I think it will permanently kill off any hopes of us ever reaching our potential at Home Park. I haven't stopped thinking that just because we're in much better shape this season. Whilst I'm much happier with the way the short-term is looking, the medium and long-term for me is still a big concern. It's also on public record that I have said that I fear that if we don't get promoted this season we probably won't get promoted for years to come due to the rumoured budget cuts if we don't go up. I think to an extent it's go up this season or we won't get as good a chance again for years.

However, all that doesn't mean I'm not objective enough in my ability to look at a situation and analyse it and say that so far this season I'm happy with the team and also the way it's currently being backed. If we hadn't been able to sign Banton  and had been limited to low budget signings then we'd all been saying the team hadn't been backed and rightly so too. Now though, with Banton sealed and Parsons probably to come for me that is a sign of a team being backed.

What about if Andy and Tim said so? I won't presume to speak for them on any issue but I know that they are both the type to say when they think something is positive and when they think it is negative and not just blindly stick to a pre-concieved idea. I like this site- I know I don't often make out that I do but I really do. Pasoti for me is a bit too stale to enjoy it as I once did and I'm not coming on here with a second face saying different stuff to you as I am to them as I've said the same to people high up in pasoti that I just feel the recent bans of ejh among others serve to lower the tone of the debate and decrease the site's quality. So make no bones about it, I like this site and will explain why to anyone's face. Just at times like this it seems that to judge something positively is inherently a bad thing to do which I don't think has to be the case. If we'd signed some low budget non league winger from rag arse rovers then that would be cause to be critical of the backing and our ability to go for it. As it stands, this is a cause to be positive of those two things.

Part two: the Wembley money would be short term but it'd also mean that the next 12 months would guarantee James Brent wouldn't have to put his hand in his pocket. As for TV money, Surroy doesn't get any. I am of the understanding he gets a lump sum of £100k for each promotion we get which isn't a great deal more than a piss in the water really. Attendance money is the biggie too. More people are going to attend HP (and if we're looking at JBs motivations, use the HHP facilities too) if we are in league one than league two.  

Believe me when I say that I'm not saying that I'm of the opinion that JB wants us to be in a higher league out of some emotional bond. I think he'd probably prefer us to go up for emotional reasons than not to sure but I'm not naive enough to know that he is a capitalist and it was primarily about the money from day one. On that consideration, I think it would be in his OWN interests for us to be in a higher league. People used the same line of thinking to say that he'd prefer us to go down than stay up. It was rubbish then (hence the sacking of Fletcher who was taking us to the Conference) and imo it's rubbish now. He's not an ambitious man with regards to PAFC but he's had to pay a lot into the club to cover its historical debts (yes loaned but I bet he'd still sooner not pay it). Would he prefer a club making profit and looking after itself in League One so probably easier to sell on to a potential new owner for more cash or prefer a floundering League Two club that he has to make hefty cash injections into every 6 months to help them function? Obvious for me.

I am in no way shape or form a lover of Brent as chairman of the club BUT by backing the club to make these signings he has backed us in a way he could have not done so. Of course that doesn't mean he's suddenly gonna be the owner you and I want him to be and he's probably doing it more for the fact that it'll benefit him than anyone else... but in this case what he's doing is also good for the club and deserves credit. I don't do binary thinking, I just use a bit of nuance and I think this is cause for saying 'yeah, that's good'.

Maybe if he gets out the drawing board for a new HHP redesign taking the capacity to 22,000, I'll be properly happy. Maybe we all would. Maybe pigs will fly.

   jabba Sam.