Brent can't find right Chairman

Bogsider wrote:

I welcome and appreciate Damon's contribution here however Some re writing of history has Taken place. When we got promoted with record season ticket sales we bought a bunch of Scottish journeymen. Makel, Milne, Crawford. Swansea and Blackpool realised that you have you have to capitalise on momentum. We didn't.

Fwiw I don't believe the 'discussions' that took place, a group of provincial businessmen opt of their depth hoping that it would make them richBut All credit to Damon for engaging discussion here no one else has.

1. I was not on the Board that got promoted.

2. The discussions DID take place. I have no reason to lie about it now.

3. I never expected to get rich. When I was 1st asked to join Helen and I said it could cost us everything we had saved but what an experience to have.

4. I was possibly out of my depth, but honestly how many of you would have said no?

Why not get dunford back I know not everyone liked him but he seemed to do a good job.It all went tits up when he left.

Damon what was dunford like to work with.

Michael was an absolute professional who has more football knowledge in his little finger than the the whole board and CEO put together.

When Brent first went public with the headhunter thing I suggested that he speaks to Michael, who is currently working part time for the FA and still lives in Plymouth. I was told he should throw his hat in the ring with everyone else. Everyone else? What a total waste of time and money. Here is a man who has been CEO at Everton, Derby and Birmingham, as well as here, who knows the staff, is settled in the area and is available to start. Like mannah from the recruitment gods!

I havent spoken to Michael for a long time and have no idea if he ever threw his hat in, but the club could do a lot worse than Michael for CEO.

One would have thought, after Ridsdale thankfully wanted no part in the nonsense that was to follow, anyone wanting an experienced football man would have, if nothing else, employed temporarily such a local resource. But oh no, not this new owner. This just adds to the suspicion many of us fans have that even the CEO and chair position are to be included in the great new Big Society ... in fact, in a way, it's almost happening already... it could well quite easily just slide into yet another football first.
"Look at me James, I can do it ... me, me !". Dear oh dear

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

Michael was an absolute professional who has more football knowledge in his little finger than the the whole board and CEO put together.

When Brent first went public with the headhunter thing I suggested that he speaks to Michael, who is currently working part time for the FA and still lives in Plymouth. I was told he should throw his hat in the ring with everyone else. Everyone else? What a total waste of time and money. Here is a man who has been CEO at Everton, Derby and Birmingham, as well as here, who knows the staff, is settled in the area and is available to start. Like mannah from the recruitment gods!

I havent spoken to Michael for a long time and have no idea if he ever threw his hat in, but the club could do a lot worse than Michael for CEO.

He wouldnt get a look in now sadly with certain indivduals influencing brent behind the scenes. He would be ideal for the club at the moment and exactly what we need. I just hope he wont bring back the vote for the new home/away kit stunts again if he did.

Michael Dunford was determined to put the club on a professional footing, and was surprised, to say the least, to find how much was being run by fans. He said as much to AAR when we first met him. He also, if you recall, took the Far Post into being run directly by the club, which upset quite a lot of people at the time.

I can only imagine what he must be thinking now.

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

Michael was an absolute professional who has more football knowledge in his little finger than the the whole board and CEO put together.

When Brent first went public with the headhunter thing I suggested that he speaks to Michael, who is currently working part time for the FA and still lives in Plymouth. I was told he should throw his hat in the ring with everyone else. Everyone else? What a total waste of time and money. Here is a man who has been CEO at Everton, Derby and Birmingham, as well as here, who knows the staff, is settled in the area and is available to start. Like mannah from the recruitment gods!

I havent spoken to Michael for a long time and have no idea if he ever threw his hat in, but the club could do a lot worse than Michael for CEO.

The whole point of headhunting is that you identify who you want and go and get them, isnt it? The target of headhunters doesn't throw his hat into the ring. It just don't work like that.

Each day that passes, I feel and believe that it will all end in tears (again.) The reasons are:
*we have an owner who is clearly prioritising property development over realistic, footballing success.
*the ongoing saga of employing an inexperienced manager and assistant (what does Larieu do?) to mismanage a "bloated" aquad, who think they have discovered "passing" football. Not realising of course that every other manager in this poor quality league have sussed out ways of dealing with our new game style.
*appointing discredited (dumb) fans "representives" who think that replicting the "ultra" style of football support is good thing.
Continually not listening to the desires of the real fan base for moving the club forward positively and closing their eyes to the ongoing diminishing attendences.
I could go on but what is the point, one positive we will WIN today. Be seeing you!

.[/quote]

The whole point of headhunting is that you identify who you want and go and get them, isnt it? The target of headhunters doesn't throw his hat into the ring. It just don't work like that.[/quote]

Quiite right - not going to get hung up on the semantics between executive search and headhunting tho.

some time ago a despatches programme on C4 made reference to some far eastern investors who were offered a club to buy with the aim of closing it down to flog the land for real estate - sheff united were the club mentioned (possibly to imprive viewing figures), i think they got that wrong I believe it was plymouth argyle.
no mention of moving ground but closing it down............

[quote="Damon.Lenszner"]Michael was an absolute professional who has more football knowledge in his little finger than the the whole board and CEO put together.

When Brent first went public with the headhunter thing I suggested that he speaks to Michael, who is currently working part time for the FA and still lives in Plymouth. I was told he should throw his hat in the ring with everyone else. Everyone else? What a total waste of time and money. Here is a man who has been CEO at Everton, Derby and Birmingham, as well as here, who knows the staff, is settled in the area and is available to start. Like mannah from the recruitment gods!

I havent spoken to Michael for a long time and have no idea if he ever threw his hat in, but the club could do a lot worse than Michael for CEO.[/quote]


This just highlights the fact that the Stapes Board had reached (and surpassed) their level.

You cannot sustain a Tier 2 club on an upward path without having some real money and expertise behind the club. Any Board who accepts this, should be willing to stand aside for the long term good of the club.

While I respect DL for having the balls to get involved in the first place, his comments such as above, and about the Board not "needing" outside investment, sadly demonstrates that while the Stapes Board was happy to blame the public's "janner mentality" on the club's stagnation once in the CCC, the Board had their own "janner mentality" that restricted the growth of the club.

I would also point out that the Stapes Board certainly seemed to move the goalposts in respect of what being on the Board of your local football club meant. Prior to the Stapes Board era, Board members knew they were likely to lose money through their involvement and happily (they all volunteered for it) gave up their time as well. They certainly didn't calculate their money against the time they put in to the club to imply that they could have made more money elsewhere- that's exactly what politicians say when they vote themselves a pay rise!

Anyway, the club is now owned by a property developer, and until he takes his profits and runs (or gets bored of his new toy) any on-field success will be a bonus and more through luck than judgement

FFS Grovey, for the 3rd time WE KNEW WE NEEDED INVESTMENT. How much plainer can i make it.

I also just said that I was prepared tp lose my money.

I also worked over 30 hours a week on club business.

All the things you said should be done.

I am not going to be an apologist for Paul, Robert, Phil and Tony and the disastrous investors that eventually came to the club but you have to listen Grovey, WE KNEW WE NEEDED INVESTMENT AND ACTIVELY SOUGHT IT. Sorry for shouting but you seem to be ignoring what I have been saying.

What you REALLY couldn't get ANYONE to invest?

As I said, this must rank alongside "Brent was the only interested party"

Not ever the "Consortium"?

Well yes, but they wanted changes on the board so were rejected?

I seem to remember the Chairman at the time saying they would accept outside investment "provided it didn't disrupt the existing board"

Rather like saying "give us a few million but don't expect any say in we are going to spend it"

Another poster said something about "rewriting history"

My suspicion is that you're posting on here to do just that and position yourself for a post Brent "comeback"

Just like Peter Jones who started shouting about the City Council buying the stadium back about 18 months ago and now finds himself on the Board again.


I guess it's just that I don't trust most people.

You are absolutely right not to trust anyone - especially in football.

Posting on here certainly won't get me back among the 'in' crowd - i post here and on the other site because of my total opposition to the way this football club is being run.I have never raised any subject relating to my time on the board, only answered questions that have been put to me.

As for Stapes saying investment but no changes on the board, i cant recall him saying that and in talks i was involved in share transfers and seats on the board were on offer.

As for no-one being interested i tried to make the point that with the team improving and the finances sound the deal needed to be right. The consortium deal was never right. If they wanted me out then pick up the phone and make me an offer for my shares.Not once did any consortium member make contact with the three men they wanted out.It would have been common courtesy.

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

You are absolutely right not to trust anyone - especially in football.

Posting on here certainly won't get me back among the 'in' crowd - i post here and on the other site because of my total opposition to the way this football club is being run.I have never raised any subject relating to my time on the board, only answered questions that have been put to me.

As for Stapes saying investment but no changes on the board, i cant recall him saying that and in talks i was involved in share transfers and seats on the board were on offer.

As for no-one being interested i tried to make the point that with the team improving and the finances sound the deal needed to be right. The consortium deal was never right. If they wanted me out then pick up the phone and make me an offer for my shares.Not once did any consortium member make contact with the three men they wanted out.It would have been common courtesy.

If it didn't echo of the Stalinist measures allegedly employed by Pasoti, then the thread should be locked here and now.

It's difficult to see how Damon can be any more open and upfront about what motivated him as a board member of PAFC. Whether or not people agree with him is a moot point - it's refreshing to have the perspective.

My abiding memory of that period in our history is now sadness revolving around Ian Holloway leaving. In retrospect, I was so angry at the time because I knew he represented our best hope of making it to the promised land and I felt like by leaving he had blown it for us - and him, actually. It was like being dumped by a girlfriend you are crazy about for a bloke you know is a bastard.

So, whatever the rights and wrongs of the consortium approach and despite the fact the board were looking (according to Damon) for the requisite investment, the simple truth is that we needed more money to retain potentially the best manager we would ever have and certainly the most talented playing squad. Fans have to take some blame too....the crowds we were getting simply weren't good enough for how well we were doing.

But.....I'd love to have seen what might have happened if Holloway had stayed (and I think he has made clear he wished he had too, albeit after relegation with Leicester) - even if Norris, Ebanks-Blake etc had still left, as is likely.

One thing is sure - we have been on a downward path ever since his departure. I was at that game at Sheffield United after he left when we murdered them 1-0 to go 4th but even then, it felt like the horse had bolted.

It's been great to get some insight into what went on way back when. I believe the consortium would have been good for the club but equally why it would have been unfair to make the appropriate negotiation/payment for shares.

Of course recent events are more pertinent and how Stapleton, Wrathall and the other one were holding out for an enhanced value buyout of their shares by the Japanese which I think so muddied the water and the £ signs before there eyes obscured them seeing anything else.

As an aside I've oft wondered whether someone like Nic Warren would if push came to shove would have let the club die.

Damon - can you remember how much the Consortium were talking about putting in?

I saw some of the correspondence at the time and remember being stunned at the relatively small amount they were talking about - especially in light of the changes they wanted to make to the Board.

Damon.Lenszner wrote:

You are absolutely right not to trust anyone - especially in football.

Posting on here certainly won't get me back among the 'in' crowd - i post here and on the other site because of my total opposition to the way this football club is being run.I have never raised any subject relating to my time on the board, only answered questions that have been put to me.

As for Stapes saying investment but no changes on the board, i cant recall him saying that and in talks i was involved in share transfers and seats on the board were on offer.

As for no-one being interested i tried to make the point that with the team improving and the finances sound the deal needed to be right. The consortium deal was never right. If they wanted me out then pick up the phone and make me an offer for my shares.Not once did any consortium member make contact with the three men they wanted out.It would have been common courtesy.

It was widely quoted in the press at the time.

Selective amnesia?

And as for the Consortium contacting you direct, you know as well as I do that if they'd done that, they'd have been accused of underhand tactics and trying to split the board.


PS Did you put yourself forward to run the club instead of Ridsdale. Or "go public" on your unease about how the club was being run before it was too late.?

Grovey,no amnesia from me, The remarks were not widely reported, maybe widely rumoured on pasoti, but not reported.
The Consortium could have and should have contacted the 3 they wanted out once the initial offer was put to the chairman.
No i never put myself forward to run the club. I am a football fan and not a football professional. I do not have the experience of day to day management of a football club and our problems began when people without that experience were doing the job. Tony Campbell and Keith Todd both proved that. The only CEO I worked with was Michael Dunford and he was a superb, professional football man.
I have always had a big mouth. I didnt like Todd and Gardner and said so publicly on many occassions. I was constantly in the face of Ridsdale, Guilfoyle and Hinchcliffe - at some points literally on the face, standup arguments fighting for our football club. I understand the scepticism but i am proud of what i have done for Argyle -in the Boardroom where during my short time we were still enjoying financially secure success and since when I fought against what was happening.
A
And Peggy from memory i believe the initial cash input by way of loans was £2million.

Finally I have no agenda. I am just a fan who is still fighting for my club.

£2m is not a lot of money for a football club, especially one that went bust owing £17m. Would they have fed money into the club after getting on the board and more importantly did they have development aspirations in your opinion?

Iggy wrote:

£2m is not a lot of money for a football club, especially one that went bust owing £17m. Would they have fed money into the club after getting on the board and more importantly did they have development aspirations in your opinion?

Iggy dont forget this was six years ago now. The club did not owe £17million then - i believe the overdraft at the time was @£300,000 with the turnover around £7.5 million.

One of the major divisions between the strategy of the consortium and that of the then board was the purchase of the freehold, so i do not believe that development was a priority of the consortium, but you would have to ask them.