Cornish Pirates to groundshare HP if promoted

Just released...........

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

More of that unexpected windfall income to clear the debts, come on you Pirates .

Brilliant idea, can't see a problem myself if the conditions are met and Albion aren't objecting.

I just hope they put the pitch right after they play.

Good idea can see top flight rugby in plymouth

Does not mean i have to support the pirates as i will support everyone playing against them apart from the chiefs

X Isle wrote:

More of that unexpected windfall income to clear the debts, come on you Pirates .

How's that then Smiffo ? Brent is selling the ground to PCC. It is they who would get the income. Happy day bullshit from Ridsdale ?

X Isle wrote:

Just released...........

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

More of that unexpected windfall income to clear the debts, come on you Pirates .

Brilliant idea, can't see a problem myself if the conditions are met and Albion aren't objecting.

I think this was mooted 2-3 weeks ago and Graham Dawe was interviewed and seemed quite p*ssed off about it so I'm surprised Albion agreed.

Its a good way for getting extra (non-Argyle matchday) revenue though.

Have you ever met any of these egg chasing fans when they play at Albion?
They are a right bunch. Don't like football fans much.

can't see Albion being to happy with that.

penzancepirate wrote:

X Isle wrote:

More of that unexpected windfall income to clear the debts, come on you Pirates .

How's that then Smiffo ? Brent is selling the ground to PCC. It is they who would get the income. Happy day bullshit from Ridsdale ?

Its suggested on Pasoti that Argyle's rental agreement for the ground will allow Argyle to receive any revenue from it.

It will be a 'sublet' type deal surely?

No doubt we will spend what we make fixing up the pitch after its been ruined.

Show jumping anyone?

When do the pop concerts start up again?

penzancepirate wrote:

X Isle wrote:

More of that unexpected windfall income to clear the debts, come on you Pirates .

How's that then Smiffo ? Brent is selling the ground to PCC. It is they who would get the income. Happy day bullshit from Ridsdale ?

The Council will receive the agreed £135k a year rent. Anything else is the clubs to keep.

Can't see the Pirates going up anyway.

The Aviva boys will lose their minds if them bleddy egg chasers is allowed in ! Seems to work ok at places like Watford, Reading and Wycombe. It would only be temporary anyway.

They are different people. They can be allowed to consume alcohol in seating areas, don't have to be segregated and they don't do obscene chanting.
Sounds like a good family day out.

As my name would suggest I'm a life long fan of the Pirates, my first love before the Magpies and then Argyle. There will be a lot of upset people down West Penwith way.
However, if it is a TEMPORARY one off season, then that would be almost acceptable. Anyway, I too doubt if Penzance/Newlyn will go up.

penzancepirate wrote:

X Isle wrote:

More of that unexpected windfall income to clear the debts, come on you Pirates .

How's that then Smiffo ? Brent is selling the ground to PCC. It is they who would get the income. Happy day bullshit from Ridsdale ?

As already stated PCC will get a £135k rent irrespective how Argyle uses the ground and whatever the income they generate. That figure is fixed and proportionate.

This is distinct and fundamental reason I wanted PCC to have it back. With Heaney (or insert A.N.Other private landlord), next seasons rent would have gone up to take a share of added incomes thus we'd lose out, it'd be the same on promotions or 'fag packet mathmatics' after big gate games. Basically under PCC control we can maximise revenue and keep it while keeping the ground out of the hands of moneygrabbing barstewards like Heaney.

So sorry Penz, you're barking up completely the wrong tree there.

As for the ground the sum total of additional expense will be painting lines on the pitch. The holes were pre-drilled for rugby posts and the surface is the very best with it's elastic properties. If Swansea and Reading can still play atrractive flowing football after Ospreys and Irish respectively have used the pitches then i'm damn sure our particular brand of unattractive hoofball will be uneffected.

It's win, win all round. I know you won't let me down but I defy anyone to pick a LEGITIMATE pitfall in this.

Smiffy. That seems like good news for Argyle, IF the rental agreement with PCC goes back to something similar before the ground was purchased by Stapleton et al, I will be quite happy about that, and PCC's involvment was also my main reason for preferring Brent over any other published contenders.
To be honest, I'm more concerned from the Penzance/Newlyn side of things, as 50 to 100K pa is pretty irrelevant to Argyle. I trust that this 'arrangement' really is temporary and will only be valid if another stadium somewhere in Cornwall, and preferably West Cornwall, is found. A permanent home here would be nothing short of a franchise, and regardless of public utterances, the Albion constituency will not be happy..

penzancepirate wrote:

Smiffy. That seems like good news for Argyle, IF the rental agreement with PCC goes back to something similar before the ground was purchased by Stapleton et al, I will be quite happy about that, and PCC's involvment was also my main reason for preferring Brent over any other published contenders.
To be honest, I'm more concerned from the Penzance/Newlyn side of things, as 50 to 100K pa is pretty irrelevant to Argyle. I trust that this 'arrangement' really is temporary and will only be valid if another stadium somewhere in Cornwall, and preferably West Cornwall, is found. A permanent home here would be nothing short of a franchise, and regardless of public utterances, the Albion constituency will not be happy..

Would it only be a year though? Doesn't planning have to be approved (for the area outside Truro), and then the stadium built?

I hope Albion have screwed them over in terms of compensation.


Not that I have the slightest interest in rugby, let alone Cornish rugby.

Chemical Ali wrote:

penzancepirate wrote:

Smiffy. That seems like good news for Argyle, IF the rental agreement with PCC goes back to something similar before the ground was purchased by Stapleton et al, I will be quite happy about that, and PCC's involvment was also my main reason for preferring Brent over any other published contenders.
To be honest, I'm more concerned from the Penzance/Newlyn side of things, as 50 to 100K pa is pretty irrelevant to Argyle. I trust that this 'arrangement' really is temporary and will only be valid if another stadium somewhere in Cornwall, and preferably West Cornwall, is found. A permanent home here would be nothing short of a franchise, and regardless of public utterances, the Albion constituency will not be happy..

Would it only be a year though? Doesn't planning have to be approved (for the area outside Truro), and then the stadium built?

Who knows Ali. It could be a dodgy deal, and is of course designed to help put pressure on the planning departments concerned .... same old same old businessmen trying to push the community where they don't weant to go. I read it as this will only be accepted by the Rugby authorities IF a new stadium is under way. Trouble is, so much modern business behaviour is predicated on the sliding agenda.
In the end, the people want a cornish rugby team, not some franchised quick buck that would surely fail. Plymouth have Albion. It's Cornwall that hold the rugby constituency down here, not Plymouth, it's the exact opposite of the footie. The Pirates have tried to leave Penzance before and have gone back twice. It is where the club is, it's where the support is in the end.

X Isle wrote:

penzancepirate wrote:

X Isle wrote:

More of that unexpected windfall income to clear the debts, come on you Pirates .

How's that then Smiffo ? Brent is selling the ground to PCC. It is they who would get the income. Happy day bullshit from Ridsdale ?

As already stated PCC will get a £135k rent irrespective how Argyle uses the ground and whatever the income they generate. That figure is fixed and proportionate.

This is distinct and fundamental reason I wanted PCC to have it back. With Heaney (or insert A.N.Other private landlord), next seasons rent would have gone up to take a share of added incomes thus we'd lose out, it'd be the same on promotions or 'fag packet mathmatics' after big gate games. Basically under PCC control we can maximise revenue and keep it while keeping the ground out of the hands of moneygrabbing barstewards like Heaney.

So sorry Penz, you're barking up completely the wrong tree there.

As for the ground the sum total of additional expense will be painting lines on the pitch. The holes were pre-drilled for rugby posts and the surface is the very best with it's elastic properties. If Swansea and Reading can still play atrractive flowing football after Ospreys and Irish respectively have used the pitches then i'm damn sure our particular brand of unattractive hoofball will be uneffected.

It's win, win all round. I know you won't let me down but I defy anyone to pick a LEGITIMATE pitfall in this.

I feel a legimate pitfall is the shafting of the city's rugby team for this out of town (hell, out of county!) set up. Surley its not morally right for one city team to shit on another? FOr someone who claims to set great store in morals you disapoint me.

I agree Womble.

I know football and rugby don't go side by side, but how would we feel if Albion allowed Exeter City, whilst in a higher league, to play at Albion?

I know many could't give a toss about rugby, but this is our city we're talking about, Plymouth!

GOB wrote:

I agree Womble.

I know football and rugby don't go side by side, but how would we feel if Albion allowed Exeter City, whilst in a higher league, to play at Albion?

I know many could't give a toss about rugby, but this is our city we're talking about, Plymouth!

Bang on Gob, especially the Exeter comparison. That's why I hope Albion have been able to negotiate a good recompense, because even if they have, you know they're going to be mightily pissed off with the whole scenario.

What it does show though, is that Brent isn't particularly bothered about who he upsets, so long as it means extra wonga for Argyle - in other circumstances this perhaps may not be a such a bad thing.

Think it is a pretty shoddy deal for Albion and the Pirates, even if financially it works out for them both.

[quote="Czarcasm"]

GOB wrote:

IWhat it does show though, is that Brent isn't particularly bothered about who he upsets, so long as it means extra wonga for Argyle - in other circumstances this perhaps may not be a such a bad thing.

A very good point Sarky. While I believe this deal would have been more actively sought by Ridsdale, it certainly does put a horse and coaches through Brent's pfofessed community aspirations .... very poor indeed. It will come back to bite him if this actually happens.

[quote="penzancepirate"]

Czarcasm wrote:

GOB wrote:

IWhat it does show though, is that Brent isn't particularly bothered about who he upsets, so long as it means extra wonga for Argyle - in other circumstances this perhaps may not be a such a bad thing.

A very good point Sarky. While I believe this deal would have been more actively sought by Ridsdale, it certainly does put a horse and coaches through Brent's pfofessed community aspirations .... very poor indeed. It will come back to bite him if this actually happens.

I suspect this is Ridsdale at work, I pesonally reckon Brent is letting him run the show for now. This explains why despite, his 'bulging' contacts book we've only managed to secure two signings from Blackpool thus far, mainly due to the clubs links with Ollie. It also explains why names of players who we have no hope of signing are being dropped left right and centre.

Just my opinion though.

So, extra revenue for our club and you are all whinging?

Sorry, but have I stumbled into Pasoti by accident?

The deal is a fantastic one for Argyle. It is sorely needed revenue. As long as it is legitimate income, I have no problem with it at all. If Graham Dawe had approached Ridsdale for the same deal, I suppose the whingers would all be jumping for joy, but then moaning about the bomb craters in the pitch.

It works well at other higher football league clubs and there is no complaining about the state of the pitches, so why would it suddenly be a problem at HP? Also, if the Cornish Pirates want to play at the, let's face it, potentially excellent facilities we have then why not? To use a football analogy, Bristol City don't complain that Bristol Rovers also play in the same city do they? So why would Albion complain about Premiership Pirates playing in the city? It's a commercial market out there. Free market economy, competition is good.

I run a taxi company, I can't complain that other taxi companies work in the same area can I? I have to offer a better service and that is exactly what the complacency at the Brickfields has spawned. They've been caught napping. Compensation? Pah!

peter_dout wrote:

It also explains why names of players who we have no hope of signing are being dropped left right and centre.

Just my opinion though.

What players that we cannot sign are being dropped?

Do you mean that there are players out there that we cannot sign because they don't want to come to Plymouth (understandable) or free agents we cannot afford? Two very different things.

I'm a bit confused.