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

Yea Man wrote:

Moist_Von_Lipwig wrote:

Chris Webb wrote:

Hi All
James Brent has been completely adament that no ex-director would be allowed onto the Board or as an investor whilst he is in charge. This remains the case.
Chris

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

So Brent is also a liar then?

There have been so many U-turns it's hard to keep up!

Webb will say whatever keeps him in his role as Pres. If he had the slightest morals he would tell JB to stick his presidency. Yet again the freaks and weirdoes prophecies are not so far off the mark whilst the REAL fans carry blindly on.

Should I get extra supplies of popcorn in for this weekend?   

Hitch wrote:

I could be hopelessly wide of the mark but I would imagine the deal is something along the lines of - Wrathall loans to the club some much needed working capital to enable it to meet its short/medium term financial obligations - in return for which Brent sells him 5% of a currently assetless and intrinsically worthless club for £1.

With this present clown in charge, it could be anything Hitch.
Who remembers long, long ago, the £300K from "Heaney and his backers", who were recorded at Stapleton's gaff. Beginning to smell as if the old guard were indeed involved... Someone needed to pay admin costs as Brent stated quite categorically he wasn't going to, and didn't.

My best guess ? I'm wondering if this whole thing IS SOME SORT OF UNOFFICIAL MEDIUM TERM ROLLING PRE-PACK !! For all we know, maybe the "negotiations" are a round about way of saying he hasn't actually handed over any money at all. It doesn't say money was handed over. I reckon Stapleton will be back within a year or so. Feckin outrageous. Outrageous.

Hitch wrote:

I have to say that, personally, I'm far more comfortable with a contrite, walleted and genuine green like Wrathhall on the board than a devious, divisive, main-chancing, what's-in-it-for-me, snake in the grass like Jones involved. Weird innit?

Couldn't agree more. My perception of Wrathall is that he was always the first to open his wallet for the club.

I await the response from the Trust with interest. But I am even more interested in what the PASB have to say. I would assume that they have not been consulted on this, so surely this is the sort of thing that they should be asking questions about? Actually its the sort of thing they should be feckin furious about - or are they just a bunch of stooges who are too scared to rock the boat? If they won't question this then what will they question?

Looks like Chris Webb was stitched up as well:

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

Winter Green wrote:

Hitch wrote:

I could be hopelessly wide of the mark but I would imagine the deal is something along the lines of - Wrathall loans to the club some much needed working capital to enable it to meet its short/medium term financial obligations - in return for which Brent sells him 5% of a currently assetless and intrinsically worthless club for £1.

With this present clown in charge, it could be anything Hitch.
Who remembers long, long ago, the £300K from "Heaney and his backers", who were recorded at Stapleton's gaff. Beginning to smell as if the old guard were indeed involved... Someone needed to pay admin costs as Brent stated quite categorically he wasn't going to, and didn't.

My best guess ?  I'm wondering if this whole thing IS SOME SORT OF UNOFFICIAL MEDIUM TERM ROLLING PRE-PACK  !! For all we know, maybe the "negotiations" are a round about way of saying he hasn't actually handed over any money at all. It doesn't say money was handed over. I reckon Stapleton will be back within a year or so. Feckin outrageous. Outrageous.

"Pre-pack" were words running through my mind, too.

a39er wrote:

Looks like Chris Webb was stitched up as well:

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

Fair play to him.

What it does say is that his "huge personal friend" never thought it might be nice to pick up the phone to Chris and ask for his views. Even now Chris is defending Brent by suggesting the board members have convinced him. Would that include Peter Jones?

It's not other board members with direct quotes on the baggo though, it's James Brent doing the forgiving.

Dick Trickle wrote:

What it does say is that his "huge personal friend" never thought it might be nice to pick up the phone to Chris and ask for his views. Even now Chris is defending Brent by suggesting the board members have convinced him. Would that include Peter Jones?

It's not other board members with direct quotes on the baggo though, it's James Brent doing the forgiving.

Noticed that. What's the betting a couple of the non-walleted, non-interested board members take one for the team and leave now?

Webb cannot do anything but defend his 'personal friend' otherwise he wouldn't be President, wouldn't be 'in the boardroom' Champagne Socialist, easily bought, now come on Chris, do the RIGHT thing, resign and take off the blinkers, maybe attack Brents 'fat cat' pension plan boosted by the Pavillions deal.......

If indeed that was a post by Webb on pastebook, i rather suspect not, oh the plot thickness lol

'After taking over the club, we very rapidly got to the bottom of what had gone on in the period leading up to administration. It became abundantly clear that Tony was in no way responsible for the meltdown.' (c) baggo

and this is surely a lie, how come it was said that panda were finding it difficult to unravel all the toings and froings leading up to admin?

bullshit, bullshit and more bullshit from the master of bullshit himself

Seen it. Only one thing he can do no isn't there. resign before he gets pushed. brenty boy dosnt like dissent in the ranks.

PatDunne wrote:

If indeed that was a post by Webb on pastebook, i rather suspect not, oh the plot thickness lol

No reason to think that it wasn't Chris's work.

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

Mapperley, darling wrote:

'After taking over the club, we very rapidly got to the bottom of what had gone on in the period leading up to administration. It became abundantly clear that Tony was in no way responsible for the meltdown.' (c) baggo

and this is surely a lie, how come it was said that panda were finding it difficult to unravel all the toings and froings leading up to admin?

bullshit, bullshit and more bullshit from the master of bullshit himself

A disgraceful lie from Brent. If it was true then why not mention it at the time.

yep, webb posted it on twitter and pastebin, not pasoti though (yet) i expect Brents PR team will 'advise' Webb as to what to say so he can remain President, if he has any moral fibre he will walk, let's see..........

Webby has released that statement, fine. But if he really is as annoyed about it as he says then he should resign.

There's still a fan left in Webb it seems he hasn't totally sold out merely 95% the remaining 5% is speaking now. I was expecting him to fully back it in truth but if he is posting that then i think the light bulb has come on and he is finally seeing what we have all been saying since Brent took over.

Agree Angry. Is this the 'we told you so' moment? And I don't mean it in a smug way either

Mapperley, darling wrote:

'After taking over the club, we very rapidly got to the bottom of what had gone on in the period leading up to administration. It became abundantly clear that Tony was in no way responsible for the meltdown.' (c) baggo

and this is surely a lie, how come it was said that panda were finding it difficult to unravel all the toings and froings leading up to admin?

bullshit, bullshit and more bullshit from the master of bullshit himself

So what the hell did he do during his whole time as a director? sit there quietly making the tea? i think not!!

he voted, he spoke, he backed board matters that caused the debt he was involved in causing the adminstration so please Brent dont piss on my head and tell me its raining.

If £100,000 for 5% is enough to "wipe the slate clean" then just how skint is the club now?

Han Solos Other Ship wrote:

Agree Angry. Is this the 'we told you so' moment? And I don't mean it in a smug way either

If he is speaking out now then it must have been the straw that broke the camels back.

Feck me the animals are revolting now, will the other deepthroaters stand shoulder to shoulder with Webby now? He should resign, just on the basis of Wrathall he should resign, he should also resign as the penny drops that he has backed the wrong horse in Brent.

Yea Man wrote:

Webby has released that statement, fine. But if he really is as annoyed about it as he says then he should resign.

Too much to lose, Yea man. Bang goes the commentary, perks, I'm a doughnut get me outta here, everything he has aimed for and got used to. He won't want to go back to the rank and file. His ego won't allow it. 
Like Newell, who "won't comment" on the matter  ... that's a first, he's sold himself to his best mate Jimmy. Neither of them are blaming Brent for this. Unbelievable. Just who runs PAFC then ?

Would Brent want him to resign though? I'm sure Webb knows a few things the lip trembler would rather us oiks didn't know