Argyle debts

Without wishing to muddy the waters any further than they already are, from the councils point of view this looks a good deal.

They lend £800,000 at a reasonably good interest rate with an important piece of land as collateral. I can't see how the council loses and I can't see much for the tax payer to complain about. Argyle pay the interest, PCC gains. Argyle fail to make the payments, PCC regain an important piece of land.

Richard Blight wrote:

Without wishing to muddy the waters any further than they already are, from the councils point of view this looks a good deal.

They lend £800,000 at a reasonably good interest rate with an important piece of land as collateral. I can't see how the council loses and I can't see much for the tax payer to complain about. Argyle pay the interest, PCC gains. Argyle fail to make the payments, PCC regain an important piece of land.

but thats all over time though there  are many services the council looks after that could do with that than a football club.

Sorry for an 'i'm in the know' type post, but just back from a beer with someone, who on good authority, has said that the PCC loan was made on the basis that the FL were in agreement with the principle of the offer and that the PFA had recommended to their affected members that they accept that offer.

If true this is fantastic news for the club. It means PAFC has two more installments of £200K to pay and 800K plus interest over 5 years to clear the remaining 1.9m of old debt, possibly saving the club close to 700K. Of course, it's more than likely that some of the creditors will hold out but you'd expect with a PFA recommendation that many will settle.

As always the statements / reports etc, and reaction to it, doesn't make for clear reading but really struggling to understand the negativity around this. And lets be clear the PCC money is not being taken from the budget or given to Argyle rather than a needier cause. Council's will always have large revenue balances, quite often down to the timings of when they receive money and when expenditure falls due. SFD is spot on this is just an example of the many investments a Council will make.

Do people really think Argyle will struggle to pay 800K over 5 years?? Now a massively hiked rent on a Council built grandstand... that could be altogether riskier.

Right so where is this 800k coming from? council tax ?? I hope not !!!! absolute joke, how many bail outs are argyle going to have !!! Losers

Richard Blight wrote:

I suggest the Trust speaks to both the club and PCC as soon as possible.

I do as well...

Especially as the club gave such a curt reply to the statement given by Tudor to the AFT.

But I don't hold out much hope..  The AFT has reduced itself to not much more than a Booster Club for the Plymouth branch of the RBL.

Chancellor wrote:

tagz wrote:

Found some more information. Of all the businesses Brent is involved in only 6 companies have a shareholders equity figure of above £0.00. The one for Plymouth Argyle Football Club Limited is -£1,192,750 and Akkeron Hotels Group Limited is -£5,175,992. The best one is Five Directions Limited currently £6,384,103.

Thats pretty misleading as Five Directions only asset is the Pavilions from what I can gather, and that was gifted to them. Its not difficult to acquire a property and immediately revalue it to bolster the balance sheet.

I don't know if that asset is in Five Directions assets as Brent is also the director (since some time this year) of a company called The Plymouth Pavilions Limited.

Five Directions is the development owner of the pavilions with Plymouth Pavilions Ltd being the operating compnay. When the Pavilions was handed over Brent had it valued at in excess of £4million and was gifted £2million for operating costs, hence the £6million asset. I think you'll find since those accounts that most of the operating costs have disappeared ajd £900k worth of Shares has been stripped into JBs pension pot.

Time for the super fans to earn their perks

With knowing how his jamboys operate and taking into account the reluctant one's 'transparency', it looks to me like a total clusterfuck into which the council has become embroiled.
The only 'winners' being the non investing developer and the self promoting, devious, janner superfans.

When will I ever be able to stomach watching Argyle again ?

GreenHart wrote:

Sorry for an 'i'm in the know' type post, but just back from a beer with someone, who on good authority, has said that the PCC loan was made on the basis that the FL were in agreement with the principle of the offer and that the PFA had recommended to their affected members that they accept that offer.

If true this is fantastic news for the club. It means PAFC has two more installments of £200K to pay and 800K plus interest over 5 years to clear the remaining 1.9m of old debt, possibly saving the club close to 700K. Of course, it's more than likely that some of the creditors will hold out but you'd expect with a PFA recommendation that many will settle.

As always the statements / reports etc, and reaction to it, doesn't make for clear reading but really struggling to understand the negativity around this. And lets be clear the PCC money is not being taken from the budget or given to Argyle rather than a needier cause. Council's will always have large revenue balances, quite often down to the timings of when they receive money and when expenditure falls due. SFD is spot on this is just an example of the many investments a Council will make.

Do people really think Argyle will struggle to pay 800K over 5 years?? Now a massively hiked rent on a Council built grandstand... that could be altogether riskier.

Thanks for the insight, GH. I'm not sure your average council tax payer may see it that way thought! As far as PCC funding a new grandstand, I thought SFD said (feel free to correct me here, SFD) that PCC would also be funding a new grandstand?

A Janner backlash is, in the immortal words of Brent & Co, imminent!!


W're in the shite, financially - I know, let's take out anther loan!! FFS, haven't we learnt anything since the bankers started feckin us over from 2008?

Motorservices wrote:

First id like to say i try not to post on you're main page, BUT

This doesnt look good, 35k interest ISNT a massive figure, esp over 5yrs, all harry has done is added 4 more year to paying the debt that should have been sorted with a ballon payment, ive always thought he was cash skint and this sums it up nicely.

Banter aside this is a really bad sign, the sooner you can get rid of Potter the better IMHO

This is ATD, not Pisspoti. You're welcome and free to post on what ever section of this site you like, but start banging on about Excretia City and you're fooking banned!

GreenHart wrote:

Sorry for an 'i'm in the know' type post, but just back from a beer with someone, who on good authority, has said that the PCC loan was made on the basis that the FL were in agreement with the principle of the offer and that the PFA had recommended to their affected members that they accept that offer.

If true this is fantastic news for the club. It means PAFC has two more installments of £200K to pay and 800K plus interest over 5 years to clear the remaining 1.9m of old debt, possibly saving the club close to 700K. Of course, it's more than likely that some of the creditors will hold out but you'd expect with a PFA recommendation that many will settle.

As always the statements / reports etc, and reaction to it, doesn't make for clear reading but really struggling to understand the negativity around this. And lets be clear the PCC money is not being taken from the budget or given to Argyle rather than a needier cause. Council's will always have large revenue balances, quite often down to the timings of when they receive money and when expenditure falls due. SFD is spot on this is just an example of the many investments a Council will make.

Do people really think Argyle will struggle to pay 800K over 5 years?? Now a massively hiked rent on a Council built grandstand... that could be altogether riskier.

My take on the financial situation for the club is similar to yours, I think it can only be a good thing for the club, as for the council they are covered by insuring the debt although I fear the ACTUAL value of the land wouldn't cover the value of the debt, that aside I'm sure the club will pay it. The real concern is that our owner is quite clearly out of his depth, he is and has been trying to bat above his average for a long time and is clearly not up to the job of Chairman, the sooner he is gone from our club the better.
I wont touch on the moral implications of this deal now because the actual question that we should be asking is this;
"In light of the latest news re. the loan from PCC, is James Brent fit for purpose as chairman of our football club?"

What happens if in a few months time brent try's to renegotiate the term's of the loan with pcc, will they just roll over as normal?

tagz wrote:

Found some more information. Of all the businesses Brent is involved in only 6 companies have a shareholders equity figure of above £0.00. The one for Plymouth Argyle Football Club Limited is -£1,192,750 and Akkeron Hotels Group Limited is -£5,175,992. The best one is Five Directions Limited currently £6,384,103.

This guy is packing more straw than Worzel Gummidge - this will not end well unless someone else relieves us of this lot, and quicktime!!

The Non action man is good at financial wheeler dealing with yokel councils who like to waste taxpayers money, but name one project he has ever completed? This is not a good deal for Plymouth or Argyle, just the former banker.

Wonder which former employee owed serious dosh will be 'lent' on ? Unleash the dogs !

sufferedsince 68 wrote:

Non action man runs rings around shit local council, shock horror. Coming together nicely.

Kind of says it all!

Strikes me that there are now enough concerns re Brent's non tansparent wheeling and dealing from inside and outside the club for the football league to consider an investigation into whether he is a fit and proper person to own a football league club.

Sell up Brent now!


AFT thats a good memo to send him

sufferedsince 68 wrote:

The Non action man is good at financial wheeler dealing with yokel councils who like to waste taxpayers money, but name one project he has ever completed? This is not a good deal for Plymouth or Argyle, just the former banker.

Has he ever even started one?

I wonder if THE chris webb will try and spin this debacle into another pro brent speech soon? Nool i am expecting one day minute now.

Meanwhile, people on very, very low incomes are being dragged through the courts for not paying 20% of their council tax (it was 25% last year) - and then getting a fine added to the amount they owe.

You really couldn't make it up.

Theres a very interesting suggestion on that other site which is asking, bearing in mind existing creditors are being asked to accept 50% of what is owed, whether Brent will accept 50% of the loans he may have made to the club?

Peggy wrote:

Meanwhile, people on very, very low incomes are being dragged through the courts for not paying 20% of their council tax (it was 25% last year) - and then getting a fine added to the amount they owe.

You really couldn't make it up.

No doubt PCC are cutting services to the elderly and the disabled, while at the same time lending money to a millionaire and his football club. I'm staggered this is allowed to happen! if Brent cant fund the football club, he should sell it to someone who can.

GreenHart wrote:

Sorry for an 'i'm in the know' type post, but just back from a beer with someone, who on good authority, has said that the PCC loan was made on the basis that the FL were in agreement with the principle of the offer and that the PFA had recommended to their affected members that they accept that offer.

If true this is fantastic news for the club. It means PAFC has two more installments of £200K to pay and 800K plus interest over 5 years to clear the remaining 1.9m of old debt, possibly saving the club close to 700K. Of course, it's more than likely that some of the creditors will hold out but you'd expect with a PFA recommendation that many will settle.

As always the statements / reports etc, and reaction to it, doesn't make for clear reading but really struggling to understand the negativity around this. And lets be clear the PCC money is not being taken from the budget or given to Argyle rather than a needier cause. Council's will always have large revenue balances, quite often down to the timings of when they receive money and when expenditure falls due. SFD is spot on this is just an example of the many investments a Council will make.

Do people really think Argyle will struggle to pay 800K over 5 years??

This for me. Argyle have paid all the monies due so far so I can't see this being a problem. As for JB - I think he would sell to a bidder who could provide the finances but thus far it appears there isn't one. Whats the jackpot tonight? As for ''fit and proper''. Well we know full well that to fail that test is nigh on impossible.

I can understand Peggy's stance on Council Tax (having just received a tax underpayment notice for £300 when large companies are avoiding millions) but everyone has their views on what councils should and should not cover. I think councils should stop running libraries, reduce allowances for members (over £1 million last year) and stop trying to make some roundabouts resemble a tropical rain forest (grass is good).

The figure of £800K is about 0.25% of total income.