Shit hitting the fan again?

Graham Clarke with an E FFS wrote:

I can confirm that it was intended to be a PM. It was a personal view. I have now had a long and very pleasant conversation with James Brent with an honest exchange of views on the club and the City I am much more reassured on the club's immediate future by facts that are not and will not be in the public domain. I am very happy for that to be on the record.

Thang fook fer that.

CALM DAIN EVERYONE FFS CALM DAIN U FOOKIN NUTCASES

It's all OK now apparently.

Nikkk said much the same.

Peggy wrote:

Flat_Track_Bully wrote:

How does one accidentally post instead of PMing? Sounds a bit like it might have been modded and a quick excuse found.

They seem to be saying that the person who posted it might be vulnerable to libel. As I think most of us have a lot of respect for said individual, might it be worth changing the name of this thread (perhaps to 'were f*cked'!)? After all Brent has a bit of a rep for being keen to call in the lawyers.

Good point - apart from anything else, it's being reported that he's very upset and worried about it. Who can change the thread title?

Thanks, anonymous person   

Brent has never had any real liquidity so nothings changed, he's just struggling to fund upper league 2 football.

Peggy wrote:

Peggy wrote:

Flat_Track_Bully wrote:

How does one accidentally post instead of PMing? Sounds a bit like it might have been modded and a quick excuse found.

They seem to be saying that the person who posted it might be vulnerable to libel. As I think most of us have a lot of respect for said individual, might it be worth changing the name of this thread (perhaps to 'were f*cked'!)? After all Brent has a bit of a rep for being keen to call in the lawyers.

Good point - apart from anything else, it's being reported that he's very upset and worried about it. Who can change the thread title?

Thanks, anonymous person   

  

Nothing to see here, move along, lets just talk about the football, the ministand is imminent.  

Iggy wrote:

Brent has never had any real liquidity so nothings changed, he's just struggling to fund upper league 2 football.

Balls out for promotion in the immediate future it is then.

Iggy wrote:

Brent has never had any real liquidity so nothings changed, he's just struggling to fund upper league 2 football.

It's not just league 2 football he cant fund, it's servicing a £37million debt.

Graham Clarke with an E FFS wrote:

I have now had a long and very pleasant conversation with James Brent with an honest exchange of views on the club and the City I am much more reassured on the club's immediate future by facts that are not and will not be in the public domain. I am very happy for that to be on the record.

It appears that news travels fast (in the direction of Brent) when you post on Pasoti. Has Sir Francis Drake had a similar tete-a-tete with Brent?

I was having a drink on Saturday with some mates and one of them, who incidentally knows people at HP, told me that James was selling all their childrens crimbo presents on eBay to raise cash for new boots for Parsons and Morgan, that's why we haven't played them before now, no boots.

Flat_Track_Bully wrote:

Graham Clarke with an E FFS wrote:

I have now had a long and very pleasant conversation with James Brent with an honest exchange of views on the club and the City I am much more reassured on the club's immediate future by facts that are not and will not be in the public domain. I am very happy for that to be on the record.

It appears that news travels fast (in the direction of Brent) when you post on Pasoti. Has Sir Francis Drake had a similar tete-a-tete with Brent?

He doesn't have my phone number.

Viewing figures high tonight. Pasoti covers up so everyone comes here for the news.

It was a bit stupid sending that sort of information on a Pasoti PM anyway. After all pasoti PMs have mysteriously become public before, have they not?

Or is this another deliberate leak and patch, was it weird Al that posted it first or GC? I can't believe that one minute were doomed and the next were fine, smell bullshit.

Mrrapson wrote:

I am sorry to say the rumours are true. James Brent is in serious financial difficult where cash is hard to come by. That cash is a problem will be witnessed by the fact that the club is shortly to put next season's ticket sales on sale with the early bird offer ending on March 31st. After that they will go up £20. HHP won't now happen and Tudor Evans is bricking it because of the Pavilions and Civic a Centre deals with Brent. The Natatomisam Ltd accounts (the holding company for Brent) are dire. The hotel business is failing and he has borrowings of £37m to service.

That's a quote from Graham's post.

What part has James Brent reassured Graham over. It only takes a cursory glance at Nataetcetcetc accounts to see how much debt it carries. Surely it wouldn't need a great accounting mind to see if the assertion about the results being dire is true or not. Surely the Herald/dogs of war would have been all over something like that.

As for the rest. There is some evidence that funding HHP is a problem. Brent is looking for institutional investors. Not all the leases are taken up. The studio school missed out on a funding round. Wrathall has been bought on board for his money after a trawl round anyone who would listen including current directors had said no thanks.

The season ticket is a stretch and who would sell them now without knowing what division we will be in next year.

Or is it an orchestrated move by certain people to drive the ticket sales? YOUR CLUB NEEDS YOU!

So Wrathall joins the board and the club says basically nothing. Graham posts on an obscure footballing fan forum and Brent rings Graham up for a little chat. Go figure.

And surely the case for Natataetcetc financially security is proven by Brent taking 900k from it and plonking it in his pension fund.

Dougie wrote:

And surely the case for Natataetcetc financially security is proven by Brent taking 900k from it and plonking it in his pension fund.

To be fair you could read that one either way.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Dougie wrote:

And surely the case for Natataetcetc financially security is proven by Brent taking 900k from it and plonking it in his pension fund.

To be fair you could read that one either way.

Well, what it says in the Five Directions accounts of Feb 2013 is:

"During the period the company disposed of a 16% holding in the investment property for a consideration of £900,000 including VAT to the SIPP of J S Brent, a director."

Tim

It could be possible that Graham has got it wrong and Brent decided to give him the accurate picture.

Or it could be possible that Graham was right.

Or it could be possible that Graham is playing silly buggers.

Or it could be possible the posting of a PM was a genuine mistake and he's trying to correct it.

Or it could be possible that, based on the information we have, it's impossible to know.

Who knows?

What is certainly important though is that the fans and the AFT continue to ask the relevant questions.

Meaning Brent paid Brent £900k and now owns 16% of a £4 million asset that PCC paid Brent £1,999,999 to take off their hands.

This is bollox.

There is no way you can mistakingly make a post thinking it was a pm unless your very stupid and graham comes across as a very intelligent individual.

Secondly why would Brent act so quick re-assure just one person. When so many rumours are flying around right now. If there were no truth in any of the recent rumours, the club would have released a statement already.

I think graham posted deliberately. Then Brent called him and persuaded him to take it down and now there is a shit cover up going on.

Dane, When GC states that he didn't intend for that post to be in the public domain then I believe him. He is a very articulate and clever guy and I respect his integrity in all this.