Guilfoyles £700.000 pus bill is becoming a problem. Brent has been trying to negotiate a deal with P and A over how much he should pay. Seeing that four months of it was wasted going nowhere with Heaney and his invisable consortium it sounds that there is surely room for negotiation over the matter. This could be one of the hold-ups stopping the Football League agreeing at present a deal with Brent. Another one must surely be Plymouth Council agreeing on buying the ground,this decision has been put back till next weeks meeting. The other hold up must be the Staff and Players all accepting Brents pay package to them........surely that is a no brainer for them to accept. Hopefully all the others to be paid are on track to being agreed shortly.
From what I understand Plymborn PandA are holding all the money that was ring-fenced for staff until their fees are sorted. Why Brent should pay for their balls up in chosing Heaney and BIL god only knows. If that is true then we could be in for another month of issues with this clown of a administrator.
It's all a shambles Plymborn...the longer it carries on the deeper Argyle will sink...you think the City Council could hold an emergency meeting...
It could mean P & A are in the driving seat over what Brent ends up paying............It sounds like a case of being held by the short and curlies............surely Guilfoyle woudn't cause an hiccup so late in the day........he must of seen enough of Plymouth by now.
My understanding is that the administrator answers to the court by which he's formally appointed, not to the buyer and not to the business that's in administration. Administrators' fees are a hated part of all such transactions: very often they hoover up almost everything that's left of value leaving nothing for the creditors - and don't forget in most cases the major creditors aren't the ex directors & shareholders as in this instance but other people who've traded with the failed business in good faith. Arrange "nothing", "hiding", "a", "to" and "on" into a well known saying.
I think the crook known as the administrator should pay the wages and all the money he took whilst trying to get his chums in the door, Heaney and Risdale should be paid to the staff. An enquiry should be held for all this sorry mess. It all stinks and now the Council are stumbling. suppose that witch Pengelley wants a bit more and she has been to the world cup at our expense, another sponger. Feel sorry for all the staff and other companies excluding the directors. I doubt the FL will care they are all in on corrupt things them selves. If this was another club it would have been sorted a long time ago. **** off Guilfool
I think it is widely acknowledged by the supporters certainly that the Administrators have not seemed to have the best interests of Argyle or the creditors at heart. This is an old argument in a way as we have aired our views on them time and time again. I find it difficult to comprehend why they persevered with the initial preferred bidder. Whilst not privvy to the paperwork or what they were showing the Administrators, it did seem pretty obvious to most of us that the money just was not there. What did the Administrator see that suggested it was is the simple question. Why allow deadlines to pass almost weekly with no apparant questioning. Why suggest there was no time for anyone else to come in when quite clearly there was. You have to ask what exactly have they done to justify the sort of fee they are demanding for this debacle. Put simply, if you hired somebody to do a job for you in your house and it was done as badly as this one appears to have been done then would you pay the over the top price being demanded. I doubt it. Why then should we pay them all of the money. There should be a way of having their dealings looked at and an enquiry into their handling of it all. The impression I got a little while ago was that even the Administration Company had a problem with Guilfoyle and he was conspicuously absent for a period. If that impression is a correct one then even they themselves must realise that they have not performed in a right and proper way. If the Administrators are appointed by the Courts then the Courts should be asked to look into this. I cannot see how they won't get their money at the outset but perhaps Brent, if of course he does complete, should consider suing them. In any event there should be some investigation.
It sounds as if things are turning nasty,Guilfoyle is threatening to pull the plug on PAFC. The reason is that he feels that Argyle Fans are putting to much pressure on P & A, and that he feels for his and his staffs safety. To actually threaten to resign and for P & A to withdraw from negotiations and then leave us to the Taxman to pull the plug and close PAFC down is totally despicable. Rumours have it that Guilfoyle yesterday tried to sell Curtis Nelson to Sunderland for £50.000 to raise money for P & A to be paid some money. This is during negotiations with James Brent over how much to pay P & A . It just gets more unbelievable as time goes on........and dangerously more worrying.
"I think the crook known as the administrator should pay the wages and all the money he took whilst trying to get his chums in the door" " suppose that witch Pengelley wants a bit more and she has been to the world cup at our expense, another sponger." "I doubt the FL will care they are all in on corrupt things them selves." " **** off Guilfool" Is anyone really surprised at the latest development?
Brendan Guilfoyle has serious questions to answer regarding his whole approach to how he has dealt with the administration process at PAFC. How did he come to the conclusion that the BIL consortium had proven that they had the funds to buy PAFC and allow them four months of del-boy activity. The whole of the Argyle fan base,simple morons that we are could have told Guilfoyle at anytime that chancer Heaney didn't have two pennies to rub together,and was already in debt with his Truro City dealings. If the administration bill had risen to about £700.000 then this four months of Heaney should be deducted............that equates to James Brent paying roughly three sevenths of that amount...........approximately £300.000...........the rest is down to appalling mis-management by Guilfoyle and should be paid by his firm P&A and thats the end of the matter.
I thought that £1 million was the price of exclusivity? Sooooo if £300K. Has neen paid, that leaves £700Kn which is the amount that P and A are charging - ergo - nope it could never be as simple as that - could it?
Plymborn They came to that conclusion because BIL provided proof of funds. That's a fairly standard procedure and it would have to be shown that Guilfoyle didn't follow a reasonable process before he can be criticised on that score. To my mind, it's very highly likely it was Ridsdale's presence that stopped the deal going through. The League "deferred" a decision right at the end. Just prior to that, Heaney stated that they'd pull out if the League didn't approve it right away. He clearly anticipated a problem which wasn't emanating from his part of the deal. Notably, Brent appears to have dropped him like a hot potato. How stupid would the League have looked if they'd allowed Ridsdale to take control of PAFC and then in 6 months he's convicted & maybe imprisoned for fraud? What price their fit & proper person tests then? With his football background, I might agree that Guilfoyle should have anticipated that as soon as Ridsdale was charged but I haven't seen any evidence that he incorrectly assessed the bids on financial grounds.
So if BIL provided proof of funding.......where the hell was the money..........that doesn't seem standard procedure to me ........clearly chancer/del-boy Heaney never had the money,and alarm bells where ringing back home already in Truro City FC. I would suggest that Heaney and his possible double ownership of two clubs was more obvious than Ridsdale's court case that was seen as a flimsy starter anyway.........eventually no evidence forthcoming. Peter Ridsdale is no saint.......but what is this fixation everyone has to blacken everything the fellow touches, it seems your guilty until proven innocent in his case........and then of course the evidence must be wrong. Brendan Guilfoyle has been blinkered ever since he gave exclusivity to Heaney and his non-existent consortium.........why....why couldn't he listen to what he was being told about Heaney and his fragile financial condition...........his track record was far worse than Ridsdale's and he had walked away from his Cornish property disaster owing millions. Guilfoyle and his methods need investigating and his financial draining of every penny from PAFC needs to be put right and compensation should be forthcoming, the mans judgement has been seriously challenged. ,
You're a fine one to talk about guilty until proved innocent when you're willing to condemn Guilfoyle on the basis of pure guesswork! What we do know is: 1) Proof of funds doesn't mean it's available to be called down to order, it merely means the buyer has the cash if he decides he wants to buy. It remains his cash. 2) The BIL deal was eventually blocked by the League when BIL were pressing for it to ahead in public, albeit after considerable delays. Presumably the money was available by that time. 3) It was clearly stated Heaney wouldn't be involved in the football club. There hasn't been a single authoritative indication [i.e. other than forum gossip & rumour] that that wasn't the case. In any event, the League must have powers to deal with any dual ownership as & when it crops up. 4) We do know for certain Ridsdale's up on a fraud charge. If you don't think that's what caused the League to block it then explain to me what the League were going to say if he's found guilty within months of them deeming him a fit & proper person. There's no way out of that for them. If you can come up with a convincing excuse, you are a PR genius!
Have I missed something......what fraud charge are you referring to regarding Ridsdale..........I thought we were talking Cardiff. Guilfoyle's written threat to pull the plug on PAFC and leave them to the taxman...........has the meaning of guess work change under this Government.........that didn't sound like guesswork.......that sounded like a man who has lost the plot.........and doesn't know what to do to recover all that money HE had wasted.
notdistant, you have to excuse the masses for their anger and suspicion regarding the conduct of the Administrators. In a pure business sense you are right of course. There is no official evidence to support what can only be rumour or guesswork on the part of the supporters. However,that said there is definately room for suspicion given the sketchy bits that have been released. There has been a number of press releases regarding quite a few subjects in the Argyle Administration. Deadlines, if this one doesn't do this then that will happen. This money will be paid and is agreed. Wages will be paid up to a certain amount. This is ringfenced and won't be used for that. When you add up all of those statements made, how many of them have actually happened. The most famous one of all is the "there is no time for another bidder to come in". Not an exact quote but it is the gist of what was said. Proof of money has been made????? What proof and how much money are we talking about. The simple fact that the money was not there it seems points to an Administrator simply believing what they were told or a piece of meaningless paper that turned out not to be worth anything. Deadlines that were meaningless. Promises of pay being meaningless. A process that has been dragged out and dragged out when all the time the company doing the dragging were amassing more and more income from it. These are all things that have proved to be true in the end despite the fact that they were nothing more than rumour and guesswork at the start. Excuse me for being slightly cynical here but where exactly has the competance of the Administrator been shown. Common folk who have no business accumen or knowledge can in my view be excused for thinking there is something crooked in all of this. Friends of people involved being hired to achieve guess what? Exactly what the person hiring them wanted out of all of this. The point that they are not going to end up getting it is not for the want of trying and manipulating. The list of suspicious activity goes on and on if you look at what is in the public domain. Are the Administrators appointees of the Court? It is my understanding from what has been said previously that they are. If so they are acting on behalf of those who appointed them in the first place and there should be scrutiny of the way they have conducted all of this. Not some private viewing of evidence but put into the public domain on whose behalf the Courts are suposed to work. Do I think it will happen? Well no I don't as these things tend to get swept under a carpet somehow. There will not be a cat in hell's chance of you persuading the masses that all of this was nothing short of criminal. That may be wrong but people will still belive it in the absence of real evidence for them to make an informed judgement. Whilst I have stopped short of calling this crooked, you could be foregiven for thinking it was on what is known. People's theories often have a basis of reality whether there are lible laws or not.
Firstly Plymborn I owe you an apology, looks like the case against Ridsdale was dropped. I'd missed that. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...ud-charges-dropped-Cardiff-ticket-scheme.html Still, that doesn't altogether undermine the argument about the League as they decided not to approve the BIL deal a month before that story appeared. And he hasn't lost the plot at all, Guilfoyle was appointed by the court and is paid by the court out of whatever is left over, so he's has little to worry about. He's been operating under the supervision of the court so making a case for maladministration would be a mountain to climb. Sensible, you still don't seem to get it that Guilfoyle was trying to sell something which had no value - in fact needed cash just to keep going - i.e. the football club - to people who didn't really want it, being only interested in the property deal. What leverage do you think Guilfoyle actually had? He's tried to talk the talk but in the end he's powerless. Be realistic. Not a word of what you say administrators is untrue - the same is true of lawyers after all who extract obscene amounts of cash from the legal process. But it's not just Guilfoyle, it's all of them! And who administers the process? Judges. And what are they? Ex lawyers.
He was hardly trying to sell something. What he was trying or should have been trying to do was to get somebody,anybody onboard who was prepared to pay off creditors and fund the running costs of the club. He did not have to stay with BIL for the length of time he did considering none of their promises were apparently kept. I do get it honestly I do but it is what appears on face value that leads to the opinions you get which is my point. You cannot blame people for making these accusations even if they are not well founded. Appearance is everything to the supporter when facts are in short supply. You yourself are making inuendo regarding the fairness of Judges if you read back your comments when you don't have privvy to anything they do or don't do. It is human nature. I don't disagree with your opinion of them may I add. To the layman this whole fiasco stinks. If there is justice in a judicial system then it should be open for scrutiny. Without openess then it leads to all manner of conspiracy theories.
