Tony Wrathall set to return to Plymouth Argyle's board of directors

Czarcasm wrote:

Hitch wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

Thinking about this, I reckon that the club may actually not necessarily be in Dire Straits in terms of finance. I think it may be that Brent has reached a point whereby he simply doesn't want to loan the club any more to keep it ticking over. Therefore he'd rather that someone else - ANYONE else, put some money in to the club for a small stake.

If there were a small number of people ready to throw £100k at Argyle for a 5% stake, this lessens the liability as far as Brent is concerned, should it all go tits up again.

One thing I'd like to know is if these goons on the Board aren't backing the club with Wonga, WTF else to they bring to the party because there's been no sight or sound of anything tangible in terms of their specific expertise.

Can't say that I share your optimism on the financial front Czar - reports suggesting Wrathall was the ONLY person willing to chip-in must be close to the truth. Brent has already kicked in a £2m loan, the club is still loss-making and there is a whopping £2m-£3m admin bubble payment not very far around the corner. But it's OK coz Nool and the gang have looked him in the eyes. Frankly, I'm struggling to see any light at the end of the tunnel.

I wouldn't call it an optimist view Hitch.   

I just think that maybe Brent has reached the point where he personally has had enough. I'd love to think that there was a Consortium out there of relatively wealthy fans like Wrathall or even nikkk that would be able to make him an offer to hasten his increasingly obvious exit strategy. If that were the case and the Clusterfuck development was shelved, then for me that'd be like birthday, Christmas and Steak & Blowjob Day all rolled in to one!  

Didn't that used to be called the Steak and Omelette? That end of town has really gone downhill.

Iggy wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

Hitch wrote:

Czarcasm wrote:

Thinking about this, I reckon that the club may actually not necessarily be in Dire Straits in terms of finance. I think it may be that Brent has reached a point whereby he simply doesn't want to loan the club any more to keep it ticking over. Therefore he'd rather that someone else - ANYONE else, put some money in to the club for a small stake.

If there were a small number of people ready to throw £100k at Argyle for a 5% stake, this lessens the liability as far as Brent is concerned, should it all go tits up again.

One thing I'd like to know is if these goons on the Board aren't backing the club with Wonga, WTF else to they bring to the party because there's been no sight or sound of anything tangible in terms of their specific expertise.

Can't say that I share your optimism on the financial front Czar - reports suggesting Wrathall was the ONLY person willing to chip-in must be close to the truth. Brent has already kicked in a £2m loan, the club is still loss-making and there is a whopping £2m-£3m admin bubble payment not very far around the corner. But it's OK coz Nool and the gang have looked him in the eyes. Frankly, I'm struggling to see any light at the end of the tunnel.

I wouldn't call it an opti  mist view Hitch.   

I just think that maybe Brent has reached the point where he personally has had enough. I'd love to think that there was a Consortium out there of relatively wealthy fans like Wrathall or even nikkk that would be able to make him an offer to hasten his increasingly obvious exit strategy. If that were the case and the Clusterfuck development was shelved, then for me that'd be like birthday, Christmas and Steak & Blowjob Day all rolled in to one!  

Didn't that used to be called the Steak and Omelette? That end of town has really gone downhill.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

  

Only 2 weeks to wait   

I'm a tad interested that Wrathall says he'll involve himself in the Academy side of the club. Does the club fund the academy? I recall Kevin Hodges having to do a sponsored bike ride to raise funds. And of course Nikkkkk had to pay for the teams to get over to the Milk Cup in Northern Ireland.

How does the Academy sit within Akkeron PLymouth Argyle Inc and who pays the bills?

I'm more concerned about the future ownership of Home Park.

Presumably Brent/Akkeron will now no longer be looking at buying the freehold (if only because he/it can't) but what if Wrathall puts up the money and it goes ahead?

Who then owns HP? Would it be Brent, PAFC or Wrathall?

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

I'm more concerned about the future ownership of Home Park.

Presumably Brent/Akkeron will now no longer be looking at buying the freehold (if only because he/it can't) but what if Wrathall puts up the money and it goes ahead?

Who then owns HP? Would it be Brent, PAFC or Wrathall?

It would be PAFC if anyone- the deal was only ever for PAFC to buy back the ground and not for an individual to do so.

However, when PAFC is owned by that certain individual then the lines inevitably become blurred.

Is there anything to stop Wrathall lending "Argyle" money on Monday, "Argyle" buying Home Park on Tuesday, selling it to Wrathall on Wednesday and paying back Wrathall's loan on Thursday?

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Is there anything to stop Wrathall lending "Argyle" money on Monday, "Argyle" buying Home Park on Tuesday, selling it to Wrathall on Wednesday and paying back Wrathall's loan on Thursday?

What would be the point? Why not just sell the club to TW on Thursday for one pound?

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Is there anything to stop Wrathall lending "Argyle" money on Monday, "Argyle" buying Home Park on Tuesday, selling it to Wrathall on Wednesday and paying back Wrathall's loan on Thursday?

Would they chill on Sunday?

(sh*t Craig David reference there   )

Iggy wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Is there anything to stop Wrathall lending "Argyle" money on Monday, "Argyle" buying Home Park on Tuesday, selling it to Wrathall on Wednesday and paying back Wrathall's loan on Thursday?

What would be the point? Why not just sell the club to TW on Thursday for one pound?

TW doesn't have the buy-in option to get the ground himself.

And on Friday I'm in love.

What with the directors telling Brent to do one, and the AFT telling him to do one over the 400k, and Nikkkkyboy taking a tumble, Brent probably looked around for mates to keep the ship buoyant , and could only see his faithful poodle, beaming and slobbering, bearing another framed shirt, and thought I'm not getting any deeper into this..... I don't even like football.
As for Wrathall, it all stinks. I just don't get it at all.
Who is to say he doesn't hold a long term loan note with the club just like Mastpoint. Just because he wasn't securitised doesn't mean he didn't get a deal in the admin process, Ticketus weren't securitised either and yet nobody seems to know what is the situation there. Maybe Brent was looking to see REAL fans cough up, or at least take some of the responsibility. Maybe Wrathall possibly changed part of his loan note for shares, thus freeing up money. Only surmising.

Winter Green wrote:

What with the directors telling Brent to do one, and the AFT telling him to do one over the 400k, and Nikkkkyboy taking a tumble, Brent probably looked around for mates to keep the ship buoyant , and could only see his faithful poodle, beaming and slobbering, bearing another framed shirt, and thought I'm not getting any deeper into this..... I don't even like football.
As for Wrathall, it all stinks. I just don't get it at all.
Who is to say he doesn't hold a long term loan note with the club just like Mastpoint. Just because he wasn't securitised doesn't mean he didn't get a deal in the admin process, Ticketus weren't securitised either and yet nobody seems to know what is the situation there. Maybe Brent was looking to see REAL fans cough up, or at least take some of the responsibility. Maybe Wrathall possibly changed part of his loan note for shares, thus freeing up money. Only surmising.

Or the whole thing was a massive pre pack in the first place and Brent is going to be out of here before too long.

Indeed Hugh.
Life is very strange. Who would have believed the security forces in Egypt actually "ditching Mubarak and joining the "revolution" at the 12th hour, rather than being shot themselves by the masses.
Two years on, and guess what... they're back, and the masses are under the boot again. It's all about momentum, cunning, face, and planning. That's what I call a pre pack.

How about a scenario where TW puts more money in as and when needed in exchange for shares? A gradual takeover?

I wonder how much of this goes back to the time TW was invited for a pint by El Pres?

and who pays for the shenanigans of the greedy? - The staff, the creditors, the fans and the council tax payers!

This whole "he wasn't quite as responsible as the others" is a complete disregard for history and facts. He wasn't a child at the time or a silent Director who knew nothing - that's a nonsense. He's not and was not an idiot. He wasn't blissfully unaware of what was happening. Perhaps he couldn't do very much to stop what was happening but he woukd have been fully aware of it. The debts are his responsibility in moral terms and this is immoral.
James Brent going back on his word doesn't bother me as things change and circumstances change. What bothers me is there's a shifting concensus of "well, he wasn't the most evil one" and "hmmm, he is a 'fan'". We, as fans, really shouldn't just accept him back. We're fans too. We put money in buckets because he, as part of a group of men, almost ended the club we support. If someone burnt your house down, you wouldn't invite them over to your new house for a barbecue.

I'm looking forward to a new poster telling us all of how Webb has laid the law down to Wrathall and this will of course be backed up by Newell and a mod or two.

Good heaven I agree with Hairy

The whole Webb/Newell stuff needs to take a back seat as it's white noise. Keep your eye on the ball. Keep your eyes on James Brent's balls.

hairy j wrote:

The whole Webb/Newell stuff needs to take a back seat as it's white noise. Keep your eye on the ball. Keep your eyes on James Brent's balls.

You got to get pass Web/Newell ass licking before you can get to his balls

I'll predict Webby will jump ship soon. I don't think many people would see that as Chris Webb losing face. Newell on the other hand is a parody of what he likes to see himself as - a proper fan. A proper fan wouldn't trust James Brent. A lack of trust doesn't mean hating someone or finding 'wrong' in everything they do but a lack of trust should be applied through justifiable scepticism.
Newell will be left in the car park as a cloud of dust washes over him from Brent's rapidly disappearing car zooms off. Poor old Ian will just be standing there in the wake looking puzzled and muttering, "not prapper fan 'im".
Having said that, the issue shouldn't be what two fairly insignificant people think or do - it's the significant people we need to be scrutinising. Wrathall should get an enormous amount of bad feeling today at the ground and Brent should be getting that ten-fold.
The whole thing reeks.

Tgwu wrote:

hairy j wrote:

The whole Webb/Newell stuff needs to take a back seat as it's white noise. Keep your eye on the ball. Keep your eyes on James Brent's balls.

You got to get pass Web/Newell ass licking before you can get to his balls

I know where Hairy is coming from and I tend..ish to agree. But I also agree Tgwu, that both Newell and Webb place far more significance to the defence of Brent and his ambitions than any care that they claim to have for the Club/fans.

I think Hairy is right when it comes to Newell. Newell has shot himself so many times that everyone is aware of his reputation and, anyone that is prepared to remain in the parish of that character will never be convinced anyway, no matter how convincing the argument. There is little point in derailing someone that has already derailed himself.


Once I read Webb's little speech of insincere passion twice, it was plainly obvious that it was just an attempt to deflect any criticism away from Brent and move it onto the shoulders of the Directors. Webb has access to the media and he is very much a player in this, that makes Webb a target for exposure, by exposing Webb you help to expose Brent's values and ambitions.

I think Webby's way more influential with the fans than Ian Newell is. He's light years ahead in the brain department too. I didn't like Webb's defence of Brent either and I'd have huge respect for him if he rammed the President title up Brent's pjg rich arse.

The 56-year-old has bought a five per cent stake of the League Two club from owner and chairman James Brent.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

So, it appears that the money from the 5% sale has gone to the shareholder and not the club.

What is it now then, 95% v 5%?