Just how wrong can you be?

http://www.pasoti.co.uk/talk/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=82035&start=60

LOL..

Bermudan Green raises a question we all know the answer to...

Newell jumps in like a pit bull to correct him, but is completely wrong

Can't wait for Newell to read Graham Clark's response on the following page.

Which leads to the question... How can somebody be so close to James Brent, have the opportunity to get his questions answered, and yet be so wrong about everything?

I thought Sam and Newell were wrong posting that. The retail units are not for the club are they - they are the developer's, to be leased out at the developer's discretion. In other words, Brent's - and his investors.

As in so much of this, if the club had a chairman that didn't have so much money to make in the development, things could have been so, so different.

ponty talks complete and utter bollocks as per usual still. esmer clearly talking out of his arse again too.

"Astonishing response" from Hoop Van Snoop the Dutch detective.

Tony Hooper, what a plank, can't we just talk about the football ?   

who is the ejit that says 'stop asking questions'?

Got to say Graham Clark stopped old Tone in his tracks there - guy has the best handle of any fan on this mess!!  

When is Hooper up for re-election? Is he incompetent or corrupt? Something stinks about his "performance" as a PASB rep.

I was surprised by Sam's interpretation of the "development funder" receiving the rent.

As I stated over there (no need to owt me again "the two Ians") the development funder was presumed to be an JB / Akkeron company at the time. Latest Martyn Starnes article stating they are looking for institutional investors to fund whole project suggests part of the Home Park footprint may be owned by a hedge fund.

You would have thought that sort of scenario would ring the "Never Again" alarm.

Hopefully IJN is more accurate with his information that PCC have decided against charging to park on P&R sites.

green_genie wrote:

I was surprised by Sam's interpretation of the "development funder" receiving the rent.

As I stated over there (no need to owt me again "the two Ians") the development funder was presumed to be an JB / Akkeron company at the time. Latest Martyn Starnes article stating they are looking for institutional investors to fund whole project suggests part of the Home Park footprint may be owned by a hedge fund.

You would have thought that sort of scenario would ring the "Never Again" alarm.

Hopefully IJN is more accurate with his information that PCC have decided against charging to park on P&R sites.

i hope so although i cant see it given the carpark his lordship is building is a pay one it will be empty as people will just park in the free one instead meaning its pointless building the thing in the firstplace!

Angry wrote:

green_genie wrote:

I was surprised by Sam's interpretation of the "development funder" receiving the rent.

As I stated over there (no need to owt me again "the two Ians") the development funder was presumed to be an JB / Akkeron company at the time. Latest Martyn Starnes article stating they are looking for institutional investors to fund whole project suggests part of the Home Park footprint may be owned by a hedge fund.

You would have thought that sort of scenario would ring the "Never Again" alarm.

Hopefully IJN is more accurate with his information that PCC have decided against charging to park on P&R sites.

i hope so although i cant see it given the carpark his lordship is building is a pay one it will be empty as people will just park in the free one instead meaning its pointless building the thing in the firstplace!

Getting a bit tenuous but if NCP (other private car parking operators are available) have pulled out as they have heard PCC wouldn't play ball it might explain the news that they are now looking for institutional investors to fund whole project.

Frank Bullitt wrote:

When is Hooper up for re-election? Is he incompetent or corrupt? Something stinks about his "performance" as a PASB rep.

He's spent more time spying on fellow fans than he has done representing them that's for sure.

green_genie wrote:

I was surprised by Sam's interpretation of the "development funder" receiving the rent.

As I stated over there (no need to owt me again "the two Ians") the development funder was presumed to be an JB / Akkeron company at the time. Latest Martyn Starnes article stating they are looking for institutional investors to fund whole project suggests part of the Home Park footprint may be owned by a hedge fund.

You would have thought that sort of scenario would ring the "Never Again" alarm.

Hopefully IJN is more accurate with his information that PCC have decided against charging to park on P&R sites.

The reluctant one knew full well that by allowing the Windsor Boys to play with the train set, they would be putty in his hands. The same can be said for the rest of the farm controllers and most of the pasb.
It's like taking candy from babies. They are so full of themselves that what little intelligence and integrity they possess, is suppressed by the buzz of seemingly being someone at HP.
History will condemn them.

Tringreen wrote:

green_genie wrote:

I was surprised by Sam's interpretation of the "development funder" receiving the rent.

As I stated over there (no need to owt me again "the two Ians") the development funder was presumed to be an JB / Akkeron company at the time. Latest Martyn Starnes article stating they are looking for institutional investors to fund whole project suggests part of the Home Park footprint may be owned by a hedge fund.

You would have thought that sort of scenario would ring the "Never Again" alarm.

Hopefully IJN is more accurate with his information that PCC have decided against charging to park on P&R sites.

The reluctant one knew full well that by allowing the Windsor Boys to play with the train set, they would be putty in his hands. The same can be said for the rest of the farm controllers and most of the pasb.
It's like taking candy from babies. They are so full of themselves that what little intelligence and integrity they possess, is suppressed by the buzz of seemingly being someone at HP.
History will condemn them.

i give Brent credit where its due, Keeping those two inside the tent pissing out rather than outside the tent pissing in allows him to pretty much get away with whatever he wants without any opposition.

It seems like I've got this one mistaken. Thanks for the heads up.

Where exactly did all this talk come from of Argyle selling off the ground floor retail units to companies who would use them in order to fund a larger stand actually come from then? Because it was very definitely mooted as a 'thing' and has been all throughout the debate.

My understanding was always that Argyle would sell off these retail units and the money we got from that would mean we had a 17,700 stand instead of the (minimum allowed) 16,300 stand. That could (loosely perhaps) be interpreted as the development funder getting the rent from the units- as the funders are funding a more impressive (ha ha) standard of development by funding the stand.

If that's complete rollocks as I now begin to think it may well be, then what is the actual truth of the matter and how on earth did such a miscomprehension be so widely believed and taken to be true?

GreenSam wrote:

It seems like I've got this one mistaken. Thanks for the heads up.

Where exactly did all this talk come from of Argyle selling off the ground floor retail units to companies who would use them in order to fund a larger stand actually come from then? Because it was very definitely mooted as a 'thing' and has been all throughout the debate.

My understanding was always that Argyle would sell off these retail units and the money we got from that would mean we had a 17,700 stand instead of the (minimum allowed) 16,300 stand. That could (loosely perhaps) be interpreted as the development funder getting the rent from the units- as the funders are funding a more impressive (ha ha) standard of development by funding the stand.

If that's complete rollocks as I now begin to think it may well be, then what is the actual truth of the matter and how on earth did such a miscomprehension be so widely believed and taken to be true?

The truth is elastic I'm afraid - whole thing is a mess now, it's a clutching at straw affair now!!

The truth is, nobody knows the truth...............unacceptable.

never mind b'andy...keep on reading pasoti guys and gals....

greensleeves wrote:

never mind b'andy...keep on reading pasoti guys and gals....

Wise words.

Read Pasoti all you ATDers, and get an instant 'feel better about yourselves' moment.   

greensleeves wrote:

never mind b'andy...keep on reading pasoti guys and gals....

Yep.  Just to see its owner is so hopelessly out of touch with what is actually going on, despite James Brent being his BFF.

How could Newell be so wrong?

How could so many sheeple believe him?

He's losing control of his own forum, the natives are restless.

people believe and trust graham clark though...a safe pair of hands ....

You and your masters are petrified of him greensleeves,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,he knows too much.

greensleeves wrote:

people believe and trust  graham clark though...a safe pair of hands ....

And why not... I don't think people have found Graham to be wrong factually about anything he has said regarding the HHP development.

One thing is certain.. He has never been found to be deliberately lying about almost anything, time after time like Newell has.

you are free to do as we tell you pasoti motto