spowell's on fire, on the farm !

spowell92 wrote:

. The design of the stand as it currently is proposed isn't terrible  

Yes it is.  It's feckin horrible.  It's about as UGLY as ugly can be.  It is bad with a capital B!

You have a German style D day Normandie defence bunker in each corner that in no time at all will be covered in graffiti and bird shit, and will remain unpainted for years and years.  And the 'sight lines' if you are sat next to it are going to be horrible. I doubt you will be able to see the supporters behind the goal to the side of it.

It's also a stand without a supporters bar incorporated.

It's a stand design that any football club with any self respect whatsoever, would throw the plan straight into the garbage.

seadog wrote:

I wish I could remember who Elias is/ was before his 14th name change but he might have to join Hairy and Sensi on he naughty step.

14 ???   
FFS !!!!

I was lord aviva previously. think ive had 3 different user names. im sticking with elias.

Jethro wrote:

spowell92 wrote:

Elias wrote:

Spowell doesnt get it. God what a dumbass

Go on then, enlighten me before I put you back on ignore...

crack him back on ignore.

ignore away

Interesting info from Wilfredo in the farm, seems to be well in the know, says speccys tried to get the build price down for a 3rd time only to be rebuffed, hallelujah, let's all rejoice.

One hell of a beating    

  

Has the cash run dry again
we headed to admin and -20 points this time ?

Person Of Interest wrote:

GreenSam wrote:

Person Of Interest wrote:

By all accounts, I'm now hearing, due to the price of breeze-blocks and no-nails, JB's master plan has been further reduced to a 'nano'-stand - with a 'ledge', rather than a shelf.

News just in............ De-Lar say's it's about the right size for the club in it's effort to move forward whilst being sustainable for the future of PAFC.

Is that something you've seriously heard or a wind-up? I only ask as it could feasibly be either. It sounds too ghastly to be anything but a wind-up but you never know these days.

If the stand's capacity was reduced to the bare minimum as prescribed by the council then that'd take the stadium to an overall capacity of 16,300. Which, post-segregation, directors box and the like would effectively be 15,700 at best.

That is something that would be the absolute last straw for many people, including me. It would blow the capacity debate wide open again and would be the trigger for affirmative action in my view.

Come on, Sam. I thought you were sharper than that. No nails!!  

Too many late nights I put it down to

spowell92 wrote:

Partially agree with SFD, sure in the future we would hope that 20k won't be enough. Truth is, for at least the next 2 seasons, 17.5k probably will be enough and in the Championship 20k would be initially acceptable. The design of the stand as it currently is proposed isn't terrible - it just the lack of expansion opportunity that'll be the real killer of future club ability and a loss of ambition.

The inspirational power of a club clearly demonstrating ambition, through a new stadium or improvements and future realistic expansion ability, is well known. Look around at clubs that have got it right and their fanbases have responded.

Personally, I've always thought the reluctant one was bad news for Argyle. He's a taker. We'd be better off with a fans owned club. Obviously some wealthy fans will be more equal than others but at least they will be fans and can be controlled by the majority.

I think the Trust need to reach out to all fans and prepare now for the inevitable crisis on the horizon.

Tringreen wrote:

spowell92 wrote:

Partially agree with SFD, sure in the future we would hope that 20k won't be enough. Truth is, for at least the next 2 seasons, 17.5k probably will be enough and in the Championship 20k would be initially acceptable. The design of the stand as it currently is proposed isn't terrible - it just the lack of expansion opportunity that'll be the real killer of future club ability and a loss of ambition.

The inspirational power of a club clearly demonstrating ambition, through a new stadium or improvements and future realistic expansion ability, is well known. Look around at clubs that have got it right and their fanbases have responded.

Personally, I've always thought the reluctant one was bad news for Argyle. He's a taker. We'd be better off with a fans owned club. Obviously some wealthy fans will be more equal than others but at least they will be fans and can be controlled by the majority.

I think the Trust need to reach out to all fans and prepare now for the inevitable crisis on the horizon.

The highlighted I think is more important than anything else. To be fair Tring, this development as currently proposed, leaves the club in a situation where they'd have to build a new stadium - though it's ludicrous and illogical to force ourselves into that situation while it's entirely unnecessary.

You are right though, the opening of the KC saw Hull maintain an average of nearly 17k in Division 3!! Swansea similarly found their ground averaging 14k. These must be double if not treble their previous attendances.

Though if that is not a viable option for Argyle, then Home Park should be increased at a necessary pace. It shouldn't be restricted and expensive to do so though.

Meanwhile, in Peterborough..

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

Pafcintheplace wrote:

Meanwhile, in Peterborough..

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

By Jove!! Is that a dental surgery in the far corner   

spowell92 wrote:

Tringreen wrote:

spowell92 wrote:

Partially agree with SFD, sure in the future we would hope that 20k won't be enough. Truth is, for at least the next 2 seasons, 17.5k probably will be enough and in the Championship 20k would be initially acceptable. The design of the stand as it currently is proposed isn't terrible - it just the lack of expansion opportunity that'll be the real killer of future club ability and a loss of ambition.

The inspirational power of a club clearly demonstrating ambition, through a new stadium or improvements and future realistic expansion ability, is well known. Look around at clubs that have got it right and their fanbases have responded.

Personally, I've always thought the reluctant one was bad news for Argyle. He's a taker. We'd be better off with a fans owned club. Obviously some wealthy fans will be more equal than others but at least they will be fans and can be controlled by the majority.

I think the Trust need to reach out to all fans and prepare now for the inevitable crisis on the horizon.

The highlighted I think is more important than anything else. To be fair Tring, this development as currently proposed, leaves the club in a situation where they'd have to build a new stadium - though it's ludicrous and illogical to force ourselves into that situation while it's entirely unnecessary.


You are right though, the opening of the KC saw Hull maintain an average of nearly 17k in Division 3!! Swansea similarly found their ground averaging 14k. These must be double if not treble their previous attendances.

Though if that is not a viable option for Argyle, then Home Park should be increased at a necessary pace. It shouldn't be restricted and expensive to do so though.

Absolutely. The Trust should be taking this up with the current owner, the council and spreading the word to the wider fanbase. If it won't, who will and what is the point of the Trust ?

IMO this development/ loss of land, must be stopped dead in its tracks, to secure the long term potential of the club.
Someday, someone might come along with enough cash to work with the Trust/ fans/council and finish the ground with the all important 'wow' factor. That will be the day a few more potential fans will start to 'believe' and buy in, as they did at Swansea, Hull and other comparable city clubs.

Home Park has one of the most enviable locations in English football. What has been approved by the council is entirely unsuitable and restrictive for England's largest city club, never to have reached the top flight. Those of us who've watched this club miss opportunities for over 50 years, Know that Argyle in the top flight would pull in 30k easily and the resultant solid fanbase even in the lower leagues would follow that of clubs like Norwich, Southampton and now Hull, Swansea, Reading etc.

Tringreen wrote:

spowell92 wrote:

Tringreen wrote:

spowell92 wrote:

Partially agree with SFD, sure in the future we would hope that 20k won't be enough. Truth is, for at least the next 2 seasons, 17.5k probably will be enough and in the Championship 20k would be initially acceptable. The design of the stand as it currently is proposed isn't terrible - it just the lack of expansion opportunity that'll be the real killer of future club ability and a loss of ambition.

The inspirational power of a club clearly demonstrating ambition, through a new stadium or improvements and future realistic expansion ability, is well known. Look around at clubs that have got it right and their fanbases have responded.

Personally, I've always thought the reluctant one was bad news for Argyle. He's a taker. We'd be better off with a fans owned club. Obviously some wealthy fans will be more equal than others but at least they will be fans and can be controlled by the majority.

I think the Trust need to reach out to all fans and prepare now for the inevitable crisis on the horizon.

The highlighted I think is more important than anything else. To be fair Tring, this development as currently proposed, leaves the club in a situation where they'd have to build a new stadium - though it's ludicrous and illogical to force ourselves into that situation while it's entirely unnecessary.


You are right though, the opening of the KC saw Hull maintain an average of nearly 17k in Division 3!! Swansea similarly found their ground averaging 14k. These must be double if not treble their previous attendances.

Though if that is not a viable option for Argyle, then Home Park should be increased at a necessary pace. It shouldn't be restricted and expensive to do so though.

Absolutely. The Trust should be taking this up with the current owner, the council and spreading the word to the wider fanbase. If it won't, who will and what is the point of the Trust ?

IMO this development/ loss of land, must be stopped dead in its tracks, to secure the long term potential of the club.
Someday, someone might come along with enough cash to work with the Trust/ fans/council and finish the ground with the all important 'wow' factor. That will be the day a few more potential fans will start to 'believe' and buy in, as they did at Swansea, Hull and other comparable city clubs.

I don't disagree with you Tring, though I think this development has stopped itself. It's showing no sign of life and now probably isn't the time for that kind of awareness campaign. If it's not happening, then there's no reason for the AFT to go pissing Brent off.

Just because it's gone quiet, doesn't mean it is not going to happen, desperate times need desperate actions, keep watching this space!

I'll believe it when speccy fecks off up th A38 for the last time.

Why not ? He was cunning enough to enlist and reward the Windsor Boys, in return for the protection they provided through Pasoti and the bucket rattling Avivafests at the club.

Unless he is taken to task, he will look after his own interests only, without public warnings and condemnation.

Do you really think he'll do the right thing by the club if left unchallenged ?

Something needs to counter the unbalanced view portrayed in the SW1TV doc to be fair.

So if things do go tits up, will Wrathall lose his cash again?

Let's be honest it's why he's there Gob, what cost is vanity?

spowell92 wrote:

Elias wrote:

Spowell doesnt get it. God what a dumbass

Go on then, enlighten me before I put you back on ignore...

They goaded you into a reaction that would only end one way, you are now a poster who has been previously banned for attacking the mods (stretching the point i know but when required that mud will be thrown and you will be labelled until you prove 'useful').

Too many were very quick to embrace brent and his 'transparency', wasn't the quote he 'ouses transparency'? eh x-isle ? you too were VERY pro -brent even slating THIS site before joining.
Ironically green sam was another to worship at the altar of brent, now look at you all now !

Humble pie for you all.

all THOSE who worshiped him are no doubt now back tracking, they have destroyed any future argyle could have had with someone with the money to spend upfront not some bloke speaking fine words but buttering no parsnips.

THEY are responsible for the continued embarrassment that is PAFC.

BRENT OUT !
BRENT OUT !
BRENT OUT !

get me on ignore, probably for the best.

I once brought into Brent as a good owner- I never worshipped at his altar. You can (wrongly, as it turned out) think someone's right for something without that meaning you're bowing at their feet.

I was wrong; I made a mistake. I'm happy to admit that I made a mistake and misjudged Brent and God you'll never let me forget it. That's what humans do, get things wrong occasionally. Obviously you've never, ever been wrong in your opinions or predictions about anything and you won't let us forget THAT any time soon either.

Oh and btw I have NEVER been one to join in with anti-ATD sniping. Not even when I was fully pro-Brent. It's never been my style.

GreenSam wrote:

I once brought into Brent as a good owner- I never worshipped at his altar. You can (wrongly, as it turned out) think someone's right for something without that meaning you're bowing at their feet.

I was wrong; I made a mistake. I'm happy to admit that I made a mistake and misjudged Brent and God you'll never let me forget it. That's what humans do, get things wrong occasionally. Obviously you've never, ever been wrong in your opinions or predictions about anything and you won't let us forget THAT any time soon either.

Oh and btw I have NEVER been one to join in with anti-ATD sniping. Not even when I was fully pro-Brent. It's never been my style.

Highlighted: I have, but in fairness I was accused of not being a real person and many on here seemed a bunch of weirdos. I still stand by that, but then what does that make me?   freaks and weirdos, the lot of us - we're Argyle fans after all...

GreenSam wrote:

I once brought into Brent as a good owner- I never worshipped at his altar. You can (wrongly, as it turned out) think someone's right for something without that meaning you're bowing at their feet.

I was wrong; I made a mistake. I'm happy to admit that I made a mistake and misjudged Brent and God you'll never let me forget it. That's what humans do, get things wrong occasionally. Obviously you've never, ever been wrong in your opinions or predictions about anything and you won't let us forget THAT any time soon either.

Oh and btw I have NEVER been one to join in with anti-ATD sniping. Not even when I was fully pro-Brent. It's never been my style.

I am no sycophant to James Brent, but there are plenty of worse chairmen out there.

I think that Brent must have cried the day that Spowelly joined ATD, even he must have known his game was up.

So many young dissidents.Poor old Porky has lost his major sponsor and is now unable to control his farm. Looks like the Directors' Box Experience will be on full throttle, starting with the 'Essential for Avivas', pre season friendlies   

I am not 100% sure that Brent's money spinner is completely 100% tits up yet but it does seem to be the case.

I suppose next will be signs of his exit strategy and that should be pretty interesting because it will be amazingly complex.