More Akkeron Hotels in Admin

I'm not digging at him, I am asking a question. It's something that is tolerated and indeed, encouraged on ATD. If you're a hardcore deep-throater then you probably won't understand that.

pilgrimfather wrote:

Notice on the corressponding Pasoti thread, Newell uses every opportunity to mention how he and Brent are best friends forever. I bet old JB can't stand the pie-munching oik.

Oh dear PF, you seem to have left the 'n' out of oink!!      

Total Bollox all of this, Simple facts are

Brent is in trouble

Graham Clark knows
Ian Newell Knows

Sad thing is neither of the above so called fans are willing to burn bridges with Brent over saving the club

Dane. wrote:

Total Bollox all of this, Simple facts are

Brent is in trouble

Graham Clark knows
Ian Newell Knows

Sad thing is neither of the above so called fans are willing to burn bridges with Brent over saving the club

Wouldnt say Brent is in trouble, his hotels are, the likes of him never suffer financial loss as they never put their own money up in the first place. Argyle probably have enough cash to see out the season thanks to Wrathall.

That's true Hugh, I would be very surprised if Brent was able to put his hands on the kind of money needed for his development obligations without the security of his businesses though.

I think some on here is driving Graham away, He is the only one who you can trust to enlighten us between fact and fiction that is swimming between the sites.

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

I wonder who on the Board is best placed to judge the assertion that Akkeron Hotels difficulties will not have ab effect on Argyle. Richard Holliday perhaps. Should the board come out and back Brent (well all of them apart from Wrathall who wouldn't spot a bad deal if it was a juggernaut with its full beams on racing towards him with a flashing advertising board saying Beware Bad Deal on it)

Great minds think alike. I think it says what I was saying.

Graham Clark wrote:

On the 5th March 2014 the Argyle Board made a statement in response to Tony Wrathall's confirmation as a Director of the football club together with an associated cash injection into the club. The statement contained two paragraphs of importance particularly given the administration and consequent restructuring of Akkeron's hotel operations.

"We also wish to point out that Plymouth Argyle is run separately from the other companies under the control of Chairman James Brent, with its own board of directors and funding.

The current financial restructuring programme within the Akkeron Hotels Group is entirely irrelevant in the context of PAFC."

Unlike before the football club company have non- executive directors of some calibre. The role and importance of a non-executive director is set out in the link below from the Institute of Directors.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] ... s_1006.pdf

I have often referred to the owner / directors of the football club as temporary guardians of the club. That comes with responsibilities and perhaps never more so than now. They have a legal duty equally shared, whether a shareholder or not, to run the football club with good financial governance. I have thought long and hard about this and we can speculate as much as we want but we have no alternative but to rely on what James Brent has told the Directors about the overall financial situation with his companies and its direct relationship with the football club company. I am not sure any of us are as qualified as say David Felwick as a former Chairman of Waitrose and John Lewis to make those proper judgements and provide a public reassurance to supporters.

This is why I have stressed the importance of good communication between the Board and the supporters. It has never been as important as it is now during James Brent's tenure.

Tgwu wrote:

I think some on here is driving Graham away, He is the only one who you can trust to enlighten us between fact and fiction that is swimming between the sites.

Trouble is we as a fan base are rapidly moving to a point we have seen about 2 years ago - time to choose who you are swimming with I'm afraid - Brent has led us up the garden path, we could well be looking at the very scenario I would have accepted at those bad days, clogging it out on a sodden field 6 leagues down!!

Has there been anything in the Herald about how serious this all is? Or not if it isn't?

How on Earth can they be missing this story entirely?

Tgwu wrote:

I think some on here is driving Graham away, He is the only one who you can trust to enlighten us between fact and fiction that is swimming between the sites.

How do you work that out then, how is it possible to drive someone away from a fans forum without the use of abuse?

Rickler asks a question and I ask pretty much the same question so since when has asking a question on ATD ever been a concern? I am sure that Graham isn't that precious so you shouldn't judge him to be.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Has there been anything in the Herald about how serious this all is? Or not if it isn't?

How on Earth can they be missing this story entirely?

Not a dickie bird, unbelievable eh!

The collapse of some Akkeron subsidiaries was mentioned on Radio Devon news summary today.

Dougie wrote:

Great minds think alike.  I think it says what I was saying.

Graham Clark wrote:

On the 5th March 2014 the Argyle Board made a statement in response to Tony Wrathall's confirmation as a Director of the football club together with an associated cash injection into the club. The statement contained two paragraphs of importance particularly given the administration and consequent restructuring of Akkeron's hotel operations.

"We also wish to point out that Plymouth Argyle is run separately from the other companies under the control of Chairman James Brent, with its own board of directors and funding.

The current financial restructuring programme within the Akkeron Hotels Group is entirely irrelevant in the context of PAFC."

Unlike before the football club company have non- executive directors of some calibre. The role and importance of a non-executive director is set out in the link below from the Institute of Directors.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] ... s_1006.pdf

I have often referred to the owner / directors of the football club as temporary guardians of the club. That comes with responsibilities and perhaps never more so than now. They have a legal duty equally shared, whether a shareholder or not, to run the football club with good financial governance. I have thought long and hard about this and we can speculate as much as we want but we have no alternative but to rely on what James Brent has told the Directors about the overall financial situation with his companies and its direct relationship with the football club company. I am not sure any of us are as qualified as say David Felwick as a former Chairman of Waitrose and John Lewis to make those proper judgements and provide a public reassurance to supporters.

This is why I have stressed the importance of good communication between the Board and the supporters. It has never been as important as it is now during James Brent's tenure.

Stapleton the professional accountant, Keith Todd, Sir Roy 'doesn't do failure' Gardener etc etc all apparently successful businessmen fecked up Argyle - it wouldn't exactly be earth shattering if Brent (Akkeron already failing) and Felwick (hands-off non-exec) fecked Argyle up too. Infact it must be odds-on now.

When we were relegated to the Conference, I remember eyeing up Telford United as a set up to be wary of for promotion contenders as they were signing the likes of Trevor Challinor and Sam Ricketts and other (relatively) big names. I thought they were going to be an outfit to watch out for, and indeed they turned as over both home and away before 2003 was out.

I was saddened though when towards the end of our first season down there, when we were just making ourselves comfortable, (I think his name was Shaw) saw his 'other interests' hit the buffers, he pulled his funding/underwriting, and 120-odd years of not-particularly-successful-in-the-wider-sense yet noble-all-the-same existence was extinguished.

I don't know all the ins-and-outs at Argyle, and I don't know whether the story of Telford is remotely relevant or whether there are any legitimate parallels. However, as a City fan first but a Devonian a very close second, I just wanted to say I sincerely hope that you pull through what may or may not be a "sticky situation".

Tringreen wrote:

To be fair to GC he did suggest on here that 'elected' bodies should form the basis any new CG.

IMO the Trust now needs to take the bull by the horns and start insisting upon dialogue direct with Brent. Once meetings have taken place, or most likely if they haven't, the Trust needs to position itself as the natural voice of the fans and go public using every media channel availble to state their case, concerns and plans if the club should be heading onto the rocks again.

The appointment of Wrathall could be the precursor for others to return. The club and its debts could be sold for a £ to any other undesirable would be property developer. Whatever is going on behind closed doors, the Trust must step up now.

Just been asked to renew membership. Make me believe that it's worth it.

That, word for word, is how I see it.

Sorry, meant to add

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

for those who weren't interested in Conference football circa 2004.

GOB wrote:

I'm not dogging him, I am asking a question. It's something that is tolerated and indeed, encouraged on ATD. If you're a hardcore deep-throater then you probably won't understand that.

   

Bandwagon wrote:

pilgrimfather wrote:

Notice on the corressponding Pasoti thread, Newell uses every opportunity to mention how he and Brent are best friends forever. I bet old JB can't stand the pie-munching oik.

Oh dear PF, you seem to have left the 'n' out of oink!!      

Ferfoxake, he confuses driver/tool for friend.

GOB wrote:

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Has there been anything in the Herald about how serious this all is? Or not if it isn't?

How on Earth can they be missing this story entirely?

Not a dickie bird, unbelievable eh!

Concentrating on upcoming games, hey postey, who seems to be the Brent/pasoti/herald liaison chappy and is obviously not keeping them up to date.

Graham Clark wrote:

All the Presidents Men wrote:

Why is GC more important than the AFT & PASB?

Am i right to presume that GC has an influential, hi powered job with PCC with access to more info than the rest of us?

I left the employment of Plymouth City Council TWELVE years ago!!!!! Another incorrect 'fact'.

Look, I don't know you from Adam mate.

I never said it was a fact, I asked aperfectlylegitimate question, so thanks for clearing that up.

So as you are, The ex-Trust leader??, I guess you are in the loop then, except your non-pm conflicts considerably with your stance now, so as you can see itisveryraw and confusing to us
notso super fans, the club being like a library on this, but thanks for the update anyway, am I reassured, I'll watch this space.......

I don't understand why on the one hand GC dismiss the need for CG mk2 and I agree with him fed up with all these supporter groups ", but on the other has a hotline to Brent and can get answers that take everyone else weeks to get or never!

I'm getting confused with all these GC & CG's....can't we speke hin propar hinglsh so uz lez edikated tipes chan hunderzhand.

Hugh Watt wrote:

I don't understand why on the one hand GC dismiss the need for CG mk2 and I agree with him fed up with all these supporter groups ", but on the other has a hotline to Brent and can get answers that take everyone else weeks to get or never!

I have no hotline to James Brent. I have made one call to him, to my recollection in something like 18 months. Of more importance, at this time, is the role of the non-executive directors at the club. With no financial interest they are legally bound to ensure that the club is run soundly financially and is able to meet all of its liabilities. They are as liable as the shareholding Directors if things go wrong. There are some big players on that Board capable of asking the right questions.

For the moment, until a proper dialogue is re-established with the supporters through the AFT and Martyn Starnes the non-executive Directors is all we have to rely on. You will note that I have advocated elsewhere that a Q&A with the Chairman and the Non-executive Directors should take place and suggested the Trust request it and run it. You may recall that the last Q&A event was more illuminating, than any consultative mechanism in the face of direct and unexpected questioning.

Hugh Watt wrote:

I don't understand why on the one hand GC dismiss the need for CG mk2 and I agree with him fed up with all these supporter groups ", but on the other has a hotline to Brent and can get answers that take everyone else weeks to get or never!

I have a hot line