Plymouth Argyle Talk - Democratic

The 'ONLY' Independent Internet Forum for Argyle Fans
 
HomeHome  RegisterRegister  Log inLog in  

 

 Plymouth Argyle made a loss

Go down 
+15
Rickler
Elias
zyph
Les Miserable
akagreengull
PatDunne
Graham Clark
RegGreen
green_genie
Sir Francis Drake
PlymptonPilgrim
Freathy
VillageGreen
sufferedsince 68
Tgwu
19 posters
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
AuthorMessage
Les Miserable

Les Miserable


Posts : 7473
Join date : 2014-03-30

Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptyFri Oct 28, 2016 9:35 am

Oh come now, in the name of all that is holy cut the man some slack, one did save us after all.
Back to top Go down
zyph

zyph


Posts : 13236
Join date : 2014-03-02
Age : 85

Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptyFri Oct 28, 2016 10:00 am

What comes to mind after all this waffle......mole hill... mountain.
Back to top Go down
sufferedsince 68

sufferedsince 68


Posts : 6420
Join date : 2014-06-01
Location : Brentocabin

Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptyFri Oct 28, 2016 5:52 pm

Over five years of the Brentmare and the club only owes five and a half million...In Jimmy we trust jocolor
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest




Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptyFri Oct 28, 2016 7:41 pm

charleymouse wrote:
The unpleasant, bitter irony of this: "They have also managed to call in payment from the debtors of £5,000". And how many p in the £ did the people & companies Argyle owed to get again. Disgusting.

Often gets forgotten when everyone goes on about what a benevolent guy he is
Back to top Go down
Elias

Elias


Posts : 6006
Join date : 2011-12-05
Location : brent out

Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptyFri Oct 28, 2016 9:48 pm

zyph wrote:
What comes to mind after all this waffle......mole hill... mountain.

Well whats four million quid eh bhey ? drunken
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest




Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptyFri Oct 28, 2016 11:07 pm

or even £5.6m laugh
Back to top Go down
zyph

zyph


Posts : 13236
Join date : 2014-03-02
Age : 85

Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptyFri Oct 28, 2016 11:17 pm

Any higher bids.
Back to top Go down
Rickler

Rickler


Posts : 6523
Join date : 2011-05-10
Location : Inside the mind...

Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptySat Oct 29, 2016 1:53 am

zyph wrote:
Any higher bids.

Let's go with Graham's just over 4 million evaluation - he's been right on the money about everything so far...

Doesn't it ring alarm bells with you, that despite all the years of Brent austerity - with nothing to show in actual 'reward' either on the pitch, or in Home Park itself, that the debt now is much larger than when Brent took over?
Back to top Go down
Les Miserable

Les Miserable


Posts : 7473
Join date : 2014-03-30

Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptySat Oct 29, 2016 2:18 am

Of course it doesn't bother him, nothing to see here, move along, just talk about the football raised eyebrow
Back to top Go down
Sir Francis Drake

Sir Francis Drake


Posts : 7461
Join date : 2011-12-03
Age : 32
Location : Nr Panama

Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptySun Oct 30, 2016 12:44 pm

Pafcintheplace wrote:
The figures are 'valid', don't think anyone is disputing that, they are a published set of financial statements that have been signed off and audited.

What amuses me is the smoke and mirrors talking about the small loss of -£118k hailing it as a triumph, and the relatively meaningless negative retained earnings of -£4m, letting the masses believe that is debt when its not.

The total liabilities of PAFC split between long and short term creditors is actually £5.6m!

I'd imagine that future liabilities are yet to be added to the historic debt so if there are liabilities in the next year or so of £1.6m (and there obviously is) let's not forget that there will be income to offset them in that time period too.

I'd also imagine that clubs might count players' wages as future liabilities so that £1.6m will reduce as the time remaining on various contracts does.
Back to top Go down
http://sicparvismagna.com
Guest
Guest




Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptySun Oct 30, 2016 1:12 pm

Sir Francis Drake wrote:
Pafcintheplace wrote:
The figures are 'valid', don't think anyone is disputing that, they are a published set of financial statements that have been signed off and audited.

What amuses me is the smoke and mirrors talking about the small loss of -£118k hailing it as a triumph, and the relatively meaningless negative retained earnings of -£4m, letting the masses believe that is debt when its not.

The total liabilities of PAFC split between long and short term creditors is actually £5.6m!

I'd imagine that future liabilities are yet to be added to the historic debt so if there are liabilities in the next year or so of £1.6m (and there obviously is) let's not forget that there will be income to offset them in that time period too.

I'd also imagine that clubs might count players' wages as future liabilities so that £1.6m will reduce as the time remaining on various contracts does.

I'd have thought player contracts would be treated as intangible assets, and amortised, so would not be classified as a non-current liability.

PAFC have £2,052k intangible assets y.e. 31/12/15.
Back to top Go down
Sir Francis Drake

Sir Francis Drake


Posts : 7461
Join date : 2011-12-03
Age : 32
Location : Nr Panama

Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptySun Oct 30, 2016 1:32 pm

Pafcintheplace wrote:
Sir Francis Drake wrote:
Pafcintheplace wrote:
The figures are 'valid', don't think anyone is disputing that, they are a published set of financial statements that have been signed off and audited.

What amuses me is the smoke and mirrors talking about the small loss of -£118k hailing it as a triumph, and the relatively meaningless negative retained earnings of -£4m, letting the masses believe that is debt when its not.

The total liabilities of PAFC split between long and short term creditors is actually £5.6m!

I'd imagine that future liabilities are yet to be added to the historic debt so if there are liabilities in the next year or so of £1.6m (and there obviously is) let's not forget that there will be income to offset them in that time period too.

I'd also imagine that clubs might count players' wages as future liabilities so that £1.6m will reduce as the time remaining on various contracts does.

I'd have thought player contracts would be treated as intangible assets, and amortised, so would not be classified as a non-current liability.

PAFC have £2,052k intangible assets y.e. 31/12/15.

You are probably right.

The players are both an asset but also a liability... Both lessen in value, converging to zero, as their contracts shorten.
Back to top Go down
http://sicparvismagna.com
Guest
Guest




Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptySun Oct 30, 2016 2:02 pm

The remaining value of the player contract to be paid (i.e. 'future liability') is captured as part of intangible assets value of £2.052m in the balance sheet.

The 'liability' element i.e. the amortisation of the player contract is charged to the P&L account as an expense, throughout the life of the player contract.
Interestingly the net book value of intangible assets has reduced from 2014 to 2015, could indicate a lower player wage bill, or indicative of Adams's preference for shorter term contracts.

The player contracts won't form part of the £5.6m total creditors. Reassuringly. £2.8m are long term, and likely not repayable for a long time. Nonetheless £5.6m is a lot of creditors, thought it would have been reduced substantially by now since admin was 5 years ago.

Easy to see why Starnes is happy for the £4m negative retained earnings figure to get confused as the debt figure.

31/12/2016 y.e. accounts should show a huge increase in tangible assets (HP purchase) which will net off against Share Capital, so no increase in creditors, assuming Jimmy's telling the truth that HP will be completely funded by issue of new shares to existing board members.


Last edited by Pafcintheplace on Sun Oct 30, 2016 3:05 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest




Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptySun Oct 30, 2016 2:36 pm

Rickler wrote:
zyph wrote:
Any higher bids.

Let's go with Graham's just over 4 million evaluation - he's been right on the money about everything so far...

Doesn't it ring alarm bells with you, that despite all the years of Brent austerity - with nothing to show in actual 'reward' either on the pitch, or in Home Park itself, that the debt now is much larger than when Brent took over?

Also taking into account that attendances have been pretty remarkably high and that the last two years have produced money spinning playoff occasions. The lower figure is worrying enough, but don't expect some people to acknowledge that there could be a problem at Brent's Argyle, let alone that there is one.
Back to top Go down
Sir Francis Drake

Sir Francis Drake


Posts : 7461
Join date : 2011-12-03
Age : 32
Location : Nr Panama

Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptySun Oct 30, 2016 2:46 pm

Must admit that I am no accountant but having a little looksee at the just published Natatomisam accounts and this popped out at me:

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

The asset in concern is The Pavillions.

Let's not forget that Mr Brent paid £1 for it (and was given £2m dowry as well) for an asset valued at the time at £4m, subsequently re-valued at £4.5m and now re-valued again at £5,513,501 making a cool £1.5m further profit - almost enough to buy Home Park.

Sweet.
Back to top Go down
http://sicparvismagna.com
Guest
Guest




Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptySun Oct 30, 2016 3:00 pm

Sir Francis Drake wrote:
Must admit that I am no accountant but having a little looksee at the just published Natatomisam accounts and this popped out at me:

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

The asset in concern is The Pavillions.

Let's not forget that Mr Brent paid £1 for it (and was given £2m dowry as well) for an asset valued at the time at £4m, subsequently re-valued at £4.5m and now re-valued again at £5,513,501 making a cool £1.5m further profit - almost enough to buy Home Park.

Sweet.

He now has asset valued at £5.5m he acquired for virtually nothing, plus £2m dowry.

There surely must have been some obligations to adhere to... and penalties if he didn't stick to them? If not the politicians must have been hypnotised by his silver tongue

Back to top Go down
Guest
Guest




Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptySun Oct 30, 2016 3:35 pm

Pafcintheplace wrote:
Sir Francis Drake wrote:
Must admit that I am no accountant but having a little looksee at the just published Natatomisam accounts and this popped out at me:

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

The asset in concern is The Pavillions.

Let's not forget that Mr Brent paid £1 for it (and was given £2m dowry as well) for an asset valued at the time at £4m, subsequently re-valued at £4.5m and now re-valued again at £5,513,501 making a cool £1.5m further profit - almost enough to buy Home Park.

Sweet.

He now has asset valued at £5.5m he acquired for virtually nothing, plus £2m dowry.

There surely must have been some obligations to adhere to... and penalties if he didn't stick to them? If not the politicians must have been hypnotised by his silver tongue

If there were no obligations accompanying the giveaway of a piece of real estate with immediate value and huge potential + dowry, then those responsible should face charges. There must be obligations.

As a reminder, an £83m investment was talked of. Brent spoke of 1500 construction jobs and 1000 permanent jobs. Not to mention the 1500 seater "international standard" (lol) ice rink to be built next to Home Park. And before the latter is built and operational, Brent has pledged to keep the Pavilions ice rink open, so we are a way off redevelopment of the Pavilions yet. What is going on? This was all announced nearly 4 and a half years ago now.

Not that there is any point restating the bleeding obvious, some people being clearly too thick/blinkered to take it on board, but this is why it is important to scrutinize and the progress of other projects (hence the relevance of Oldway). I think it is legitimate for people to want to know if their football club and/or city is being taken for a ride. Plenty of time has now passed since Brent was given a number of golden tickets across Plymouth - where the hell is the progress and the transparency?
Back to top Go down
PatDunne




Posts : 2614
Join date : 2013-11-21
Age : 63

Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptySun Oct 30, 2016 3:47 pm

Brent HAS to provide 'continuous ice' the only good thing Tudor did, he has to build a new ice rink 'somewhere' before he can close the one at Pavillions.
Back to top Go down
green_genie

green_genie


Posts : 1321
Join date : 2013-04-06

Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptySun Oct 30, 2016 5:26 pm

PatDunne wrote:
Brent HAS to provide 'continuous ice' the only good thing Tudor did, he has to build a new ice rink 'somewhere' before he can close the one at Pavillions.  

With 2020 being new World Cup that will be relaxed. No way HHP mk2 can be completed and allow time for Pavilions before then.
Back to top Go down
Rickler

Rickler


Posts : 6523
Join date : 2011-05-10
Location : Inside the mind...

Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptySun Oct 30, 2016 5:37 pm

Who honestly thinks that Argyle are going to get enough '2020 Mayflower' money to build a football stadium?  All for a possible one off Women's football match against the USA (has anybody asked the Americans yet)?

I doubt there's one person - not even Brent!
Back to top Go down
sufferedsince 68

sufferedsince 68


Posts : 6420
Join date : 2014-06-01
Location : Brentocabin

Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptySun Oct 30, 2016 5:46 pm

Rickler wrote:
Who honestly thinks that Argyle are going to get enough '2020 Mayflower' money to build a football stadium?  All for a possible one off Women's football match against the USA (has anybody asked the Americans yet)?

I doubt there's one person - not even Brent!
President Trump, says he's a regular reader of pasoti,now all the non believers have been banished and will deffo chip in a fist full of dollars to ensure the Magnificent new Grandstand gets built.
Back to top Go down
Les Miserable

Les Miserable


Posts : 7473
Join date : 2014-03-30

Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptySun Oct 30, 2016 6:14 pm

Very Happy
Back to top Go down
zyph

zyph


Posts : 13236
Join date : 2014-03-02
Age : 85

Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptyFri Nov 04, 2016 10:43 am

About time someone downloaded Ian King's new article off of the ..'twohundredpercent'....website about James Brent and his 'five year' plan.
Back to top Go down
Les Miserable

Les Miserable


Posts : 7473
Join date : 2014-03-30

Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptyFri Nov 04, 2016 10:50 am

Fire away zyph.
Back to top Go down
Rickler

Rickler


Posts : 6523
Join date : 2011-05-10
Location : Inside the mind...

Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 EmptyFri Nov 04, 2016 2:21 pm

Allow me.....

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


Plymouth Argyle: James Brent’s “Five Year Plan”
by Ian | Nov 3, 2016

Football club takeover and ownership tales often have common elements such as financial disarray, incompetent and/or egomaniacal former owners…and, all-too-often, Peter bloody Ridsdale. Plymouth Argyle came through all that. And yet… I last covered Plymouth in February 2014. Argyle had emerged from financial disaster, inflicted by a rogues gallery-and-a-half of “personalities,” very much including Ridsdale. However, uncertainty loomed over new owner, local “entrepreneur” and Harry Potter stunt-double James Brent, who “saved” them in October 2011. Questions lingered over the “saved” club’s true finances and Brent’s true motivation…everywhere except the local, Brent-loyal Plymouth Herald newspaper.

I re-read that article while researching this one. And way too much of it still applies. After five years in control, Brent still divides opinion. Supporters consider him above criticism because Argyle would be extinct without him. Critics doubt his financial wherewithal and cite his business problems elsewhere. However, this fan-base schizophrenia is understandable. Since Brent’s takeover, Argyle’s on-field fortunes have sensibly, gradually improved. They were as close to leaving League Two last May as they were in May 2013. But while 2016’s narrow play-off final defeat denied them a place in League One, favourable results elsewhere in 2013 “denied” them a place in the (“shameless-plug-for-my-main-workplace” alert) Non-League Paper. And Argyle currently top League Two, eleven points clear of the play-off places.

Yet only the blindly faithful have complete faith in Brent’s business acumen. In August 2013, the PCC approved plans for developing the “Higher Home Park” (HHP) area, including a new grandstand for Argyle’s Home Park stadium. Brent forecast a September 2014 completion date for the stand and a surprisingly important adjoining ice rink. Neither project has started. In February 2014, Wishbone Ash-loving CEO Martyn Starnes told the Herald: “Several investors (are) interested in financing the development but negotiations cannot be finalised until the build costs have been entirely agreed. Our objective (is) to be ready for the beginning of the 2015/16 season (but) it is impossible to be specific.”

Fans’ were unamused. Supporters club (PASC) chair Keith Bulley called it “disgusting that supporters heard nothing about the new proposed date until now.” Argyle Fans’ Trust (AFT) chair Andy Symons complained that the only fans consulted were “hand-picked supporters already close to” Brent. And even Ed Shillabeer, chair of the “hand-picked” Plymouth Argyle Supporters Board (PASB), was “disappointed and frustrated,” if not “entirely surprised.” Meanwhile, four of Brent’s hotel “groups” entered administration in early 2014, which he blamed on Lloyds Bank withdrawing from the regional hotels business, in a handily-timed “frank” interview with Herald political reporter Keith Rossiter on March 20th.

Brent’s “Akkeron Group (AG)” had other troubled projects; Plymouth’s Civic Centre redevelopment and the “Plymouth Pavilions” leisure and entertainment centre (with obligatory ice rink), which the council gave Brent, “along with a £2m dowry,” in 2012. Also, Paignton’s Oldway Mansions development was six months behind schedule. “The projects are sequentially phased,” Brent explained via psychobabble. The delays were in getting the “three stars to line up: construction costs, lettings and finance.” And aspects of HHP were “over-specified.” On-line comments revealed AG’s financial predicaments (“In the 15-months to 31 December 2012, it lost £4.1m”).

Brent undertook a close-season charm offensive, expressing “no regrets” while claiming, Ridsdale-style, to be “confident” Argyle was “moving in the right direction.” And in a Q&A session, Herald football editor Chris Errington asked supplementary questions on precisely none of Brent’s answers. Starnes’ declarations of “disappointment” at grandstand “build” delays were as regular as Brent’s PR-stunts. And in June, Argyle admitted “that the planned redevelopment will not begin before the end of September.” Cynical sneers included: “The £10m grandstand will not start…because there is no £10m.” A month later, Torbay councillors attempted to terminate AG’s Paignton project (“a fiscal disaster”), prompting a Herald commenter to request “a full independent inquiry into Brent, his business dealings and his relationship with…councillors.”

Detailed reasons for the HHP delays emerged from the AFT’s August meeting with council leader Tudor Evans. The HHP plan depended on “a percentage of the funding” coming from “PCC and Plymouth Community Health.” Yet Akkeron told neither organization. And Brent’s only “ice rink “obligation” was “to provide ‘continuous ice’.” (!) The AFT believed “supporters would appreciate the club clarifying the current position.” Instead, Argyle claimed AFT “minutes” of the meeting “contained a number of misunderstandings,” without specifying them. “There have always been hard questions…about this scheme. However, the Herald chooses to act as a PR company for Akkeron,” claimed a disgruntled fan, exhorting the paper to “get off its backside and (do) some real journalism.”

Brent supporters were diehards, though. In September, the Herald reported that Brent was no longer “preferred bidder” for the Civic Centre redevelopment, scuppering “ambitious plans” for “a £50m, 160-bedroom hotel.” Yet one fan still thanked him, defying critics to post “alternative ideas.” It then emerged that the PCC had loaned Argyle £800,000, at 4.8% interest over five years, to help settle a £3.64m legacy debt to Argyle’s “football creditors” from their spell in administration. The debt had been repaid in part by what Brent called “fortune income” (transfer income). And a final “balloon payment” (nope, me neither) of £1.64m was due last month. “Shareholders put up land they own as collateral.” it was reported. PCC finance chief, Mark Lowry, considered it “hugely important” to “get (Argyle) on a secure financial footing.” While one fan understood “how a non-football fan would be concerned” but “whether non-footie fans like it or not…it would be a disaster if Plymouth did not have a league club.”

“Footie” fans were “concerned” too. Some thought the land used as collateral was given to Brent by the PCC. “Don’t tell me this land freebie forms some or all of the collateral,” sighed one. It was bought by Brent and fellow director Richard Holliday’s Akkeron Leisure company for £425,000, in March 2012 but had hugely increased in value to be collateral for an £800,000 loan. Another fan “warned” that “speculation” about the loan “persuading” Brent to “not sue the council” after the Civic Centre decision was “totally without foundation, so don’t anyone do it, ok?” “What other doggy deals have Argyle and the council come up with?” asked another, slipping Freudianly on his keyboard. Oh…and the Herald considered the deal “a positive move” because of course they did…

In October, Argyle announced a £1.46m loss during 2013. Starnes suggested: “It wasn’t fully appreciated that we’d cut around 40% off the (losses from the) year before.” Yet Starnes hadn’t “fully appreciated” that the £2.42m loss from the “year before” was over 15 months, not 12. Argyle’s finances were improving. But the urge to spin proved irresistible. On October 25th, Brent “revealed” a grandstand “Plan B” with “greater flexibility” to increase the stadium capacity further than initially planned. It involved “working with another institution” with whom “discussions are pretty well-advanced.” But “until they are finalised we can’t go forward.” Fans’ group welcomes grandstand plan screamed the Daily Brent Herald headline. But AFT vice-chair Sam Down only “welcomed” Brent’s “announcement” as “a step in the right direction” and cautioned: “We still do not know details of the other party, capacity, design, footprint or cost to the club.” Blimey…is that all?

Brent insisted the grandstand was “critical” to Argyle. Cynics thought it more “critical” to Brent’s finances. And he undertook another charm offensive, telling the Western Morning News (in November AND January) that Argyle could “reach the Premier League.” However, his HHP plans had competition from “separate plans” for “an IMAX-style cinema at Bretonside, which have been welcomed by council chiefs.” In December, Argyle called Bretonside “materially damaging to the club and the city” as HHP “could not progress” if it was approved.” By March 2015, thanks in-part to the PCC’s £800k, the “balloon payment” was reduced to £500,000. But Argyle were still in talks with City Council over new grandstand…a March 11th headline the Herald could run on a loop.

“It’s disappointing that work hasn’t started,” Brent re-re-re-reiterated. “It’s disappointing the commercial scheme that would have funded it isn’t viable if Bretonside takes place,” he insisted. “(HHP) will only happen if Bretonside does not,” he warned. “(HHP) was given the green light in August 2013, the Bretonside plans were made public in March 2014,” noted one previously supportive Herald comments section regular, bemoaning Brent’s “dithering.” Bretonside was approved in April 2015. In the Herald in July, Brent claimed all his business interests were “in turnaround,” his hotel and retail interests were “faring well” and he was, still, in “active” talks with potential partners about the grandstand build. This reeked of PR-puffery. As did the Herald’s December 6th piece, Brent remains committed to a new grandstand. It was still “critical to the club.” Brent was still “as committed to delivering (it) as I ever have been.” And still nothing happened.

While that wasn’t going on, the AFT registered Home Park as an “asset of community value.” ACVs give community groups six weeks to express interest in bidding for a ground if it was put up for sale and six months to submit a bid. Argyle had quinquennial options to “buy-back” the council-owned stadium for twelve times the contemporary rent, the first exercisable last month. Starnes, personally, didn’t believe “the application was relevant,” as stadium ownership “makes little difference” because “we pride ourselves on being a community club.” It soon became “relevant.” Days after ACV status was granted in February, Brent revealed a “regular stream of interest” in buying Argyle.

AFT chair Bob Foale insisted the ACV campaign was “not anti-Brent,” adding: “It would be a big ask for supporters to fund a counter-bid.” But he stressed: “ACV status would make any potential sale far more transparent.” Fan polls offered enough different results for each day of the week. The AFT claimed “a clear mandate from a large percentage,” 80% of 800 respondents, “of lifelong fans” for Home Park to “remain in public hands.” Argyle cited the one poll with a buy-back majority, 50.72% of 1,135 respondents to their own annual fans survey, “independently-sourced”…although Argyle contributed “structure and content.”

The buy-back was clearly going to happen, regardless of polls. Brent had compiled a compliant board. In February 2014, he controversially reappointed ex-director Tony Wrathall. Wrathall reportedly “put over £1.5m into Argyle” during his previous directorship and was putting more in to cover Brent’s financial struggles. But his reappointment was reviled. As AFT ex-chair Graham Clark noted, he “was jointly, and severally, liable for (Argyle’s) fall into administration.” And last April, Simon Hallett, a US-based global investment manager, became a director to ludicrous fanfare, paying £500,000 for 29.2% of Argyle’s shares. Clichés poured forth, including the nonsense that 29.2% ownership was Hallett’s “boyhood dream.”

Both were genuine “lifelong fans.” But neither seemed likely to oppose Brent, given that he hand-picked them. So, surprise, Hallett was instantly optimistic Argyle can find grandstand solution. But by August, there was still no timescale for new grandstand. Brent’s “aspirations” were “undiminished.” But he couldn’t say “when we will deliver or in what form.” He hinted at a timetable in September, when declaring: “We need to be bright and shiny well before” the 400th anniversary celebrations of the Mayflower’s journey from Plymouth to America. In… 2020. At this rate, Brent could have promised the grandstand when the Mayflower set sail and it still wouldn’t be built. The council gave him planning permission in September 2013…and three years to start construction. He failed. Although you wouldn’t catch the Herald saying so.

He failed elsewhere, too. Oldway Mansions was news again on July 2nd. Brent’s Oldway Mansions Ltd claimed £8m damages from Torbay Council, for “breaches of the agreement.” But in August, they withdrew from the project. Both parties emerged as sheepishly as they could without going “Baaaaaa!” But it was the old story. Brent committed to hotel and housing development ran the Herald’s October 2014 headline. Twenty-one months later, neither hotel nor housing had developed a brick. Despite this execrable record, Argyle fans still backed Brent. Largely because Argyle’s finances appeared to improve, while the team certainly did. Those who lambasted Brent for the team’s struggles early in his tenure could hardly not credit him with its successes.

There was considerable debate on the buy-back. Argyle claimed the choice was “pay £1.7m now” (precisely the valuation put on the entire club by Hallett’s share purchase) “and own its stadium or pay £3.4m to £4.3m rent over the next 20 years and still not own the stadium.” Opposition fans’ groups, under the banner “Never Again” (NA), said “purchasing the freehold without a clear plan to directly link that to…improvements for the Football Club, has to be questioned.” The board suggested “reservations” were “because of a lack of information,” without apportioning the obvious blame. And they claimed “no supporters’ group has come out against the buy-back.” In a response to a…supporters’ group.

“Never Again” was a reference to the then-board borrowing hugely against the stadium in the four years before administration, and the belief that the former helped cause the latter. Brent suggested: “When the club went into administration it had a green pitch. It has a green pitch now. It doesn’t mean it’s likely to go into administration because it has a green pitch.” Yes, James. There were inevitable fears that Brent was “up to something” and would use the situation for personally profitable development. However, Argyle stressed that “the club, not Brent” had the buy-back option…albeit Brent’s club. And Brent said a “covenant” on the stadium stopped anybody who “wanted to build a Tesco there, for example.” Funding would come from an issue of “irredeemable” shares to current directors. NA said: “The board need to more clearly explain this in language the average supporter can understand and quantify.” And they asked a semantic but key question. If the buy-back was in the “interests of Plymouth Argyle Football Club” was it in the interests of the club?

Despite the protestations, the board inevitably unanimously decided in mid-September to buy-back Home Park for £1.7m (precisely the value put on the entire club by Hallett’s share purchase) and the ground is due to be Argyle’s again. A “new era,” for good or ill, dawns. Brent inadvertently exposed his predicament at an Argyle fans’ forum in September. Asked to “prove investing in the infrastructure will make a financial difference,” he declared: “I can’t prove I will get to work in my car each morning. But my evidence base tells me I’ve done it quite a few times.” Unfortunately, the “evidence base” of his recent development projects reveals a car crash.

He maintains fans’ support as Argyle’s “saviour” and because his “five-year plan” has improved the financial and football landscapes. However, he will be judged on his ability to reach the Championship place he frequently insists is Argyle’s realistic ambition…when he’s not indulging in “Argyle can reach the Premier League” PR-puffery. And if the stadium development is as “critical” to Argyle as he frequently insists, the “evidence base” of failed projects suggests exactly what Plymouth’s situation in 2014 suggested: “Uncertain times lie ahead.”

As I was finishing this article, I came across an excellent August 28th article by Roger Willis of “The Two Unfortunates” website, entitled “Are clouds beginning to gather once again at Home Park? I assure you all (Roger and any other “Unfortunates” especially) that I’d all-but-finished my article when I read Roger’s. Here’s Roger’s: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] I highly recommend it.
Back to top Go down
Sponsored content





Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty
PostSubject: Re: Plymouth Argyle made a loss    Plymouth Argyle made a loss  - Page 2 Empty

Back to top Go down
 
Plymouth Argyle made a loss
Back to top 
Page 2 of 4Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 Similar topics
-
» Argyle made a loss of close to £1.5 million in 2018/19
» Redundancies Already Made at Argyle?
» Strongest Team Argyle vs 8 Changes made Exeter
» Plymouth Argyle Remain A Work In Progress plymouth
»  Plymouth Argyle Supporters' Plymouth Branch A.G.M

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Plymouth Argyle Talk - Democratic :: Home Park :: The Mayflower-
Jump to: