Distant i am not mouthing off about it and do understand how it works. I am not sitting hear preaching business crap to every tom, dick and harry.No one is interested in boring stats. They are bollocks, what is needed is change now in a manager. Another Sturrock situation arising. I have plenty of dealings in business that you may not think so, but all of us don't need a degree or proper education to be successful. Its hard work not just pushing a few buttons on a computer .. I was just saying it how it was and is now. Brent needs to put some money up for new players if he feels Fletcher is the correct man.. it seems only you and him thinkso?
notdistant you keep saying about the money Brent put in. Go on then I'll admit that I'm thick. What money is this that he has put in? How much is it and tell me if Brent is the owner of the club then who else would benefit from any other money put into it from whichever source? I thought Brent was PAFC Inc. You said yourself that there were 80 shares and Brent owned 80 shares. I keep asking the same question but don't somehow receive an answer. Where did the £1.7m go that the "Club" or "Brent" as it is otherwise known got from PCC?
Sensible, none of us know exactly what the deal was. I dare say if you could dig out all the articles published at the time and if you're lucky the court papers, you might be able to piece it together if you had a spare 2 weeks. But it doesn't matter, at least to me. What we do know for absolute certain is is that if a buyer hadn't come forward, Argyle would have gone out of existence. The £1.7m went somewhere in the rescue and that's fine by me. It didn't go into Brent's pocket. There were only two bidders and nobody wanted Heaney, rightly perhaps, so we got Brent. Both of them are property developers. If the worst comes to the worst, it's quite possible Brent will let the club go under once the property deals are secured. He's certainly not going to throw good money after bad trying to save it if the fans can't be bothered to turn up. Get real on this please and don't call me a Brent apologist: I'm one of the few who's recognising this rather unpleasant fact: most of the rest still seem to think he's in it for the football and will put bags of money in at some point. He won't and he's made that clear throughout. Don't give me that twaddle about the administrator didn't do his job: he's legally and professionally bound to get the best deal and his career and earnings depend on that. Also PLEASE PLEASE try to accept that a football club is worth nothing. It eats cash in good times & bad. Whether Brent put £1 in or £10m, one thing's for sure, it's gone, never to be seen again. It's merely a write-off against the property deals.
The administrator and brent are in it for what they can and could get.. What other reason is Brent there? not football or he would be putting money in and sacking Fletcher. Administrator was in it and stayed it out to screw the most he could. He should be struck off, but you have to back all them. Brent is in it for the deals around the town.. The new Todd
So Distant, let me get this straight - without Brent Argyle would have died a death because no one else wanted to buy yes?? So what exactly do you call this what is going on now? Is this not a slow and painful death? Wouldn't it have been better to have wound it all up at the time and start all over again from the depths of the crappiest pub team league? Paying good money to watch "football" at Argyle shouldn't be allowed under the trades discription act and you just KNOW that when the likes of sensible (who I used to consider a green tinted stalwart of the club) are turning away from Brent and Fletcher that it really is beyond repair as it stands now.
1) So Distant, let me get this straight - without Brent Argyle would have died a death because no one else wanted to buy yes?? That's highly likely, yes, of course it is. There was only Brent and Heaney's consortium, who'd have been the same or worse. And I keep banging on about it, "businesses" [if that's what football clubs are] that don't make profits and can't generate cash aren't worth anything. Nobody in their right mind would buy one. The money you pay for it is gone, you'll probably never see any of it again. Why would you? 2) So what exactly do you call this what is going on now? Is this not a slow and painful death? Only if the fans abandon the club..... 3) Wouldn't it have been better to have wound it all up at the time and start all over again from the depths of the crappiest pub team league? Don't be an idiot, You know that's total ********. 4) Paying good money to watch "football" at Argyle shouldn't be allowed under the trades discription act and you just KNOW that when the likes of sensible (who I used to consider a green tinted stalwart of the club) are turning away from Brent and Fletcher that it really is beyond repair as it stands now. See numbers 1), 2) and 3). Your choice.
Distant, you talk about the present set-up as if it's the only way - do or die, it doesn't have to be like that! Changing the manager and getting in a decent striker..or two should be enough to save us from this downward spiral.
You state that the money has gone notdistant. How do you know this if you have no idea where? Also, there you go again blaming the supporters. Where is YOUR cheque made out to PAFC? Not in the post I'll bet. Mine is already in the clubs coffers given for, as it turns out, not a lot in return.
Fair play Distant you don´t give up easily The pitchforks are out, torches lit, tar warmed, feathers plucked and noose tied.... "We´re having a lynching boys!!!" and logic has well and truely left the building.
Everyone knows the "logic" bit of all of this mexijan. We know we were in Admin. We know they weren't queing up at the door to buy a bargain. We know we have to be more prudent. We know Brent didn't promise the world. We know a lot of things and nobody is arguing against any of that as far as I can see. However, there are a number of things we don't know. Where the £1.7m went. Whether we can trust in Brent as we are being told to do. Whether Brent is that serious about where he sees Argyle's place. If the Admin was conducted on a level playing field by the people paid to carry it out. Whether Brent has merely put his name to the club without a penny changing hands from him. What we know also is that Fletcher isn't working. What I know and notdistant doesn't seem to get is that people don't pay for rubbish and carry on doing so blindly whatever the cause. I accept that notdistant has an opinion on this and it differs from mine. I have no problem with that. My beef would be that he seems to think that everyone else is thick and he is the only one with any knowledge about anything. That's just patronising. I may not be in business and never have been but I can add up and take away. I spent years dealing with figures and balancing books. I also know that adding up the outgoings and incomings equals either a profit or deficit when compared. You don't need a business degree to work it out. It isn't the job of the customer to do all of that though. It is the job of the customer to consider whether they are getting any value or being short changed. If the first then they will continue to be customers. If the later then chances are they eventually won't. That's another part of business sense. Knowing how to keep the customers you have and eventually increasing the numbers. Why is all the rest of it simple and yet that part considered rocket science.
I don't believe everything I'm told - 95% of what's in this forum for a start! I'm disappointed in you, I thought you were better than that, which is intended as a compliment. I understand fans are disappointed by current results - I am too. However, there has been progress, to repeat myself, we're now losing games we should have won whereas over the last couple of years it was just a question of how many we'd lose by. And I don't believe continually chopping & changing managers pays off, either financially or in a football sense. Continuity & squad development are at least as important as a disgruntled fans. What I object to is that we have a lot of young lads out there on the pitch. I don't care who the boo-boys say they're booing at, the mere fact of it is likely to intimidate them and produce exactly the kind of results people object to. Don't tell me for example that Luke Young hasn't taken some stick. When I've seen him play, he looks a very promising lad - but still a lad.
Young lads on the pitch maybe.........and what club has one of the youngest managers in the league........the young leading the young.....doesn't sound quite right to me........but the results back that up of course. The 5% you do agree on notDistant must be from yourself.
You state that the money has gone notdistant. How do you know this if you have no idea where? Very simple Sensible: part of the deal, enforced by the Football League, was that sufficient funds were available to keep the club running. Right or wrong? Otherwise, they couldn't have been sure the club would fulfil its fixtures. You will remember that agreement took an age to obtain, yes? We also know that Brent has had to inject more funds recently due to lower than budgeted gates. QED. Plymborn - At least I'm not in the conflicted position of having slagged off Deehan last year for merely sitting in the stand and contributing nothing whilst this year arguing that the recruitment of a Director of Football is necessary because Fletcher is inadequate... What a tangled web....
The lower gates are Brents fault .. for letting his manager serve up the PAYING public complete SH IT. Brent needs to get rid of the manager and put money in for some new players if we are to stay in the Football League. Otherwise he will have to fund the lower gates even more.
"Inject more cash". We know this do we? What cash? Some of the residue of the £1.7m left perhaps? Not money necessarily that wasn't PAFC in the first place ie. money from his own pocket on top of money in the club already. He said that which I son't deny but he didn't say where the money had actually come from did he. Politicians have announced new money deals for all sorts of things that have in the end been made of in part of money they had already earmarked. It's the way you tell em not the true meaning of what you say. Trouble is that people aren't that thick and are not ready to believe blindly anymore. I have watched many more games than you under Fletcher notdistant. It is more likely the lack of plan B or even a plan A sometimes that has led to poor results in my opinion. Also got news for you, Young shows potential. That is about as good as it gets I'm afraid because for every very good game he has he has several that aren't. Nothing to do with the boo boys as you call them and more to do with his ability. The best we have at the moment in my opinion is Cowan-Hall who actually has come on a long way. He is far more consistent and strangely hasn't been boo'd yet as far as I remember. The booing is directed at two people. Fletcher and Brent with the exception on one match. That one match was bloody awful from start to finish.
Brent and Fletcher need booing, as for Young i disagree with that, No matter what ability he has and his father is a friend of a long time. He has got ability, but may not play to it at all times. The 1.7 m went on other projects brent has purchased I think Distant is the new thunder balls
Not sure about the "thunderballs" tag joe. That was my point about Young though, he hasn't been boo'd and nor have the other player with the exception of one match. In that match they couldn't string one pass together let alone two and were all absolutely terrible. Young wasn't singled out it was the crowds way of saying to all of them that it was pants. The rest of the time it was clearly directed at Brent and Fletcher. Mainly Fletcher. I can't vouch for away games though. Also I don't think Brent has syphoned off any of the £1.7m for any other purpose. I think that is the money being used to subsidise the shortfall and it hasn't come from any personal stash Brent has. Notdistant has said that the money didn't go directly to Brent from the outset so if I am right then it is not "his" money that is being used by the same token. I do not believe Brent is one penny poorer for his acquisition of the club. He will be considerably richer when his other fires produce though. However we are not allowed to criticise that as it is to do with his "other" interests and nothing to do with Argyle..........yea right course it isn't because he would have had all these other deals without the football club wouldn't he......not.
