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

Mrrapson wrote:

Why does everything get turned to Newell and Webb? Ffs chaps this is about a former board member nothing else.

If all you care about is how Chris or Ian react then you need help.

Symbiosis.

It's the fact they both refuse to have anything negative said or questioned regarding Brent m8

Mrrapson wrote:

Why does everything get turned to Newell and Webb? Ffs chaps this is about a former board member nothing else.

If all you care about is how Chris or Ian react then you need help.

The fact that one is a former AFT leader and personal friend to the owner and Club President as well as being a mouthpiece for Jim on most accessions and, the other is a personal friend and owner (allegedly) of the OS and uses the OS to promote Brent at every opportunity...may have something to do with it?

Tony wrathall is a Genuine, repeat Genuine life long argyle fan, i know him slightly through a mate of mine he is green through and through, what brent is up to who knows? but tw as lost a fortune supporting argyle and i know for a fact he has the best interests of the club at heart! Its a argyle fan in the boardroom, we need at least one genuine fan on the board i would say to keep an eye on the rest! he has my support for what its worth.

Mrrapson wrote:

Why does everything get turned to Newell and Webb? Ffs chaps this is about a former board member nothing else.

If all you care about is how Chris or Ian react then you need help.

And the fact that Chris Webb Aargyle President has chosen to speak out about this and not through the official channels is worthy of discussion is it not? Your statement makes you look like a right patsy, not for the first time. How about you try and post a response truly from your heart and not what you think will show you in a good light elsewhere?
Off to talk about the football FFS!

Even XIsle is starting to question his openess, honesty and integrity strap line FFS!

Rapson's right - if you focus on Webb/Newell, you're not looking at Wrathall. That's his point. How do you get on the board? You put in £100k. Newell hasn't got £100k so his influence (in all honesty) is minimal. Wrathall will have influence at a club that's still paying off what were (partly) his debts. It's morally shocking - fan or not.

The figure mentioned at SG today was apparently £400k.

And that James Brent has put in £1.6m-£2m in loans.

Existing directors were asked to put money in, and none did.

All based on 2nd hand reports from the meeting.

Tim

Given the Football League took a leap of faith in handing the club the golden share and are evidently watching like a hawk this can't help but draw their attention to Argyles finances.

Very candid remarks by Maryin Starnes. I'm very surprised by his candour and if I'm honest can't quite figure it out. Why give out that amount of information? Things ain't right.

It does seem that there's been quite a dramatic split in the boardroom and that all is not well, the next few weeks could be interesting, I would not be al all surprised to see one or two on their bikes.

Ps A couple of months ago anyone would of had Nikkkkk as a shoe in to stump up and join the board. Can't believe he wasn't one of the people Brent courted. He must have politely declined.

Tim Chown wrote:

The figure mentioned at SG today was apparently £400k.

And that James Brent has put in £1.6m-£2m in loans.

Existing directors were asked to put money in, and none did.

All based on 2nd hand reports from the meeting.

Tim

I can definitely believe the figure but suggest it must be a loan to the club, probably secured in some way, not a one-off payment for 5% of share equity to the owner of that 5%. The club's liabilities far outweigh its assets and a valuation of £8million is plainly absurd.

GOB wrote:

It does seem that there's been quite a dramatic split in the boardroom and that all is not well, the next few weeks could be interesting, I would not be al all surprised to see one or two on their bikes.

 
Really? How so? They voted unanimously for Wrathhall's wedge and return didn't they?

Hitch wrote:

Tim Chown wrote:

The figure mentioned at SG today was apparently £400k.

And that James Brent has put in £1.6m-£2m in loans.

Existing directors were asked to put money in, and none did.

All based on 2nd hand reports from the meeting.

Tim

I can definitely believe the figure but suggest it must be a loan to the club, probably secured in some way, not a one-off payment for 5% of share equity to the owner of that 5%. The club's liabilities far outweigh its assets and a valuation of £8million is plainly absurd.

Indeed - if the figure is 5% of course and not 10%. The offer to the AFT was 20%, so James Brent has some %age to play with, so to speak. Regardless the valuation seems high - it's based on potential.

Tim

Dougie wrote:

Ps A couple of months ago anyone would of had Nikkkkk as a shoe in to stump up and join the board.  Can't believe he wasn't one of the people Brent courted.  He must have politely declined.

Or Nikkkkkkkkk's skint.

Hitch wrote:

GOB wrote:

It does seem that there's been quite a dramatic split in the boardroom and that all is not well, the next few weeks could be interesting, I would not be al all surprised to see one or two on their bikes.

 
Really? How so? They voted unanimously for Wrathhall's wedge and return didn't they?

Between Brent and his directors?

Who do sit on the board and as a vote?

Starnes said that the other directors were asked - he did not say that they refused but that was infered when ye then said JB then asked 'anyone who was interested'.

At no point was a figure of £400,00 nor indeed any figure as the level of investment by Tony mentioned. The figures bandied around were purely rumour.

Starnes did mention that JB had loaned the club between £1.6 and £2 million.

Deffo a crumble going on, how ironic just as on the pitch a sleight move forward - whatever happens after this nothing will surprise me. Only thing I can hope for now is the arselicking fcukers are kicked into touch - obviously they will be on double arselicking duty!!

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

Starnes said that the other directors were asked - he did not say that they refused but that was infered when ye then said JB then asked 'anyone who was interested'.

At no point was a figure of £400,00 nor indeed any figure as the level of investment by Tony mentioned. The figures bandied around were purely rumour.

Starnes did mention that JB had loaned the club between £1.6 and £2 million.

If he really did care for the club and wasn't just in it to make more money for him and the wife then this wouldn't be loans it would simply be money invested in HIS football club.

Very worrying. One things that springs to mind is what is in this for Wrathall? He apparently lost a packet the first time round, and he must know that his re-introduction to the board room ain't going to go down well, so why is he getting involved? The 'deal' from his point of view doesn't seem that great, he's putting in (apparently) at least 100k, and only getting 5% of the club. If the club are that desperate for 100k, what terms is this deal being done under? It would strike me that the terms must be very favourable to Wrathall, otherwise why on earth would he be getting involved? That in turn suggests that the club are in deep financial trouble.

Also as we are coming into March, doesn't the financial year end in April? Could it be that we desperately need some cash before year end.

If Those directors refuse to contribute why are they there? its not like the sellout peter jones bring in money and i dont even remember the names of the others they are that well known for their work for the club.

So what was all this state of the art stadium stuff Webby was talking about on commentary the other day ?
Strange timing, just like the Stapleton poll on the official fans' forum, and it all seems very odd and doesn't quite add up. As usual the whispers of money figures and what it buys are just that, whispers.
It could all be planned, or it could be a real problem. Brent might have got cheesed off, although it was well trailed he was going to have to bankroll the club for at least the first season out of admin.. It could even be the start of a choreographed handover. I must say, it's a pretty poor show these other directors not wanting to put their hand in their pockets, especially Jones. Just what exactly do they bring to the table as there's been precious little experience on show ?  Still, Brent did say he didn't want walleted directors, so no surprise when they said no.
One thing is for sure though. Despite the openness and transparency promised, the fans will be the last to know, well, apart from the PASB.

Flat_Track_Bully wrote:

Very worrying. One things that springs to mind is what is in this for Wrathall? He apparently lost a packet the first time round, and he must know that his re-introduction to the board room ain't going to go down well, so why is he getting involved? The 'deal' from his point of view doesn't seem that great, he's putting in (apparently) at least 100k, and only getting 5% of the club. If the club are that desperate for 100k, what terms is this deal being done under? It would strike me that the terms must be very favourable to Wrathall, otherwise why on earth would he be getting involved? That in turn suggests that the club are in deep financial trouble.

Also as we are coming into March, doesn't the financial year end in April? Could it be that we desperately need some cash before year end.

Our old friends the inland revenue?

I'm just waiting for Jon B to announce what a wonderful day it has been for the Club.