I've just been scanning the Herald website and came across the story that PCC are to loan Brent £800k. I can't do linking so you would have to go to the site to find the whole story yourselves if interested. The purpose of this loan is so that Brent can offer the football creditors from the Admin 50p in the £1 now rather than the whole lot over the next 2 years. This is in effect a way of getting rid of the balloon payment still hanging over the club. I have to say I have mixed feelings about this. As a Council Tax payer in the City I am not sure, when cuts are being made everywhere, that loans should be being dished out to anyone. This seems to hold little or no risk to PCC in repaying the debt and will make it some profit over 5 years but to me that isn't the point. Once again Brent is looking to slide out of paying the whole of what is owed to others which is not a tick on the credit sheet of the club in the eyes of others. Another cheap option in a line of many cheap options. Good business for the club and especially Brent of course but this sort of thing sticks in my craw. The more I see of Brent and his failures to complete anything or pay anything out of his pocket the more I dislike the man. This for me is just another signal that he doesn't have any cash to splash even if he wanted to and points to the fact he never will. I still maintain he got the club for nothing at the outset using the money the Council paid to repurchase the ground initially and not even all of it at that. Now it is the Council or rather the Citizens of this City who are again bailing him out and he will pay nothing himself again. When he comes to sell the club on, and there will be a day when this happens, will he walk away with no gain or will he be looking to make as much from the sale as he can and pass the debt on as well? I think he will be looking for the cash. I realise why I would never be rich, it's because I have morals and couldn't sleep at night if shafting others was the only way to make it.
To me it just means moving the goal posts......the debt is still to be paid.....but now the required balloon payment is down 50%......so this helps to take some pressure off the 2016 deadline for payment.....the £800,000 borrowed from PCC is payable over a longer period.....my question is..... who is responsible for paying the loan from PCC....is it Brent or PAFC.....some will say that Brent is moving the debt from himself onto PAFC.......where is notDistant when you need him.....to me it is just different levels of fog....I'm sure notDistant could explain it to us mere morons.
You don't need Notdistant to explain what type of man Brent is .... He can "talk the talk" but has anyone ever seen him do the "walk the walk" ! P.S. Thought I read somewhere that PCC were going to fund the finishing of the stadium .... Rent increase on the way ? Good Morning Sensible ... the council are taking out insurance to cover non payment of the loan !
Hey.... calm down Jools.......sounds like you got out of the bed on the wrong side this morning.....reducing the balloon payment for 2016 can only be a good thing.......my question is who is paying back this 50% reduction in the final payment.......Brent or PAFC.....an important question........Brent needs to start showing that he is either paying it because it is his debt as owner....or is he moving the debt onto PAFC.....many would question his motives......certainly jools you obviously don't trust him.....I just hope your wrong....if your not then it is very disappointing.
I don't really see a down side to this. From the start JB came into the club as a 'money' man i.e. as a banker. Whilst he clearly has some personal money invested in the club, his area of expertise is in brokering financial deals using 3rd parties and this is a perfect example of that. The money is presumably from the council's reserves which would currently be earning little interest so as it is a loan, the council will make a profit out of the deal. Importantly, the creditors need to agree to accepting 50% of the debt (though not such whether this is on an individual or collective basis) and for some this may still represent good value-certainly better than the 0.7 p in the pound that the other creditors got post administration. As far as who is responsible for the repayments Plym I dont know for sure but would be extremely surprised if JB had much personal liability-although he may be the 'owner' in broad terms, I am fairly sure that the risk for all the club finances would be spread as widely as possible and either 'PAFC Ltd' or another Akkeron organisation are ultimately liable. This shouldnt be seen as anything underhand by JB but just normal business practice- whether you think it is morally correct or not. Whatever JB has failed to deliver in terms of bricks and mortar across the city it is clear that his talent lies in financial restructuring and that is after all what he came into the club to do. If it can turned into a financially viable business then he will have done a good job; the only two alternatives being that it ceases to exist, or a buyer can be found who has enough spare cash to be able to support a business that makes a loss every year. You, I or anyone else may not like it, but it is simply the way things work in a capitalist society.
Its a disgrace as the 800K could be put to better resources in the community, looking after complex children and other people who need the support, Not wasting it on Brent .. thought he had money? Toatal waste of Council money in my view, even tho it will supposedly be paid back... cra p..
We have had discussions before on Bankers (nearly a spelling mistake but I did mean to type a B) and no I don't like what they stand for or how they conduct business. A lot is immoral in my book as you know even if I do accept it is the way it is done. Of course it's a win situation for Brent and Argyle but I don't have to like it. We all know the answer to the question who will be liable for the new debt and it sure won't be Brent will it. It never ever is. What I don't like about this is that the very people who could have killed this club stone dead and worked without wages for so long are being shafted into accepting half of what they are due. They don't have to accept it I know but I think most if not all have been sounded out already before this announcement. PCC are not taking out Insurance Mrs jools in the sense of a policy. If I read it correctly they have agreed to the land being collateral which is valued at more than the loan. This is the land that Brent and a few of his buddies bought for around £400k to include in the ground re-build. You know the bit that had to be handed over or the ground could not be developed. Amazingly bought for that sum but is now suposedly worth more than twice as much. I agree with you Joe. I realise that this amount of money is in the reserve kitty and will make more as a loan than sitting in a Bank Account. But, if it can go out of the reserve for up to 5 years then it could also be used to subsidise some of the Council spending when it comes to cuts in services like care homes and children's services. There is strong talk of them also helping with the building of the grandstand. Again, this is not an essential service even if it is desirable. There are bigger and better things it should spend it's money on or rather my money on.
I know the money could be much better spent of more worthy things but am not sure that PCC are legally able to. I have a feeling (based on nothing at all) that they have to keep a certain amount in reserve i.e cant just spend it on 'services'. Providing a loan wouldn't be seen as spending the money as it will still appear on the balance sheet as an asset (on the assumption of course that they will get the cash back at some point in the future).
I agree with you lyndhurst that they probably can't just spend it. I did work there but not in the Financial side of it to know those sort of rules for sure. It won't appear that way to the Electorate though and especially people like Joe who rely on a service which is likely to get at least a partial chop if not cut out altogether. If as seems likely they get involved in the building of the grandstand as well that will seem even worse. I can't see the many who are not followers of the club being in love with their money going into that even if they re-coup it through increased rent over a period of time. Most people aren't that interested in a profit over 30 years rightly or wrongly. They are interested in what is available in their lifetime and bollox to the generations to come. It's called human nature even if short sighted. If you are a genuine poster huey then welcome. I say that because the last half dozen have been trolling and there is a suspicion now of anyone who arrives out of the blue. I think most people believe Brent has no chance of building his mini stand anymore which is where the Council come in. You probably know the rumours already. If anyone does build it then it won't be Brent but I do think it will get built sooner rather than later.
At present there is no need for a 20k Stadium or new stand if Brent can't afford to spend to build it. Well he is here there will be no going forward all he wants is a mid table league 2 side.. he has no ambition. Just look at it! As for the spending on services by the council, that does not get done often enough. The money for Brent and a stand is not essential but the money in the community should be. I am totally against it.. He has the club he should support it, instead of making out he has the money to do so.. Looks like another dodgy deal with the council for him.. Welcome aboard Huey.. if you are real.. time will tell.. Sensible has explained why we get a bit defensive on new ones!! Don't up set Mrs Jools!!
No 20k plus is what the club should be aspiring to, add a manager with a bit of class and an owner with vision and bang the bums will return to the seats. Give em reason to believe and they will come. Anyone post on Pasoti these days?
We might aspire to a 20k plus stadium and it should be at least that but then again we could not get close to filling it apart from a blue moon fixture. Joe is right when he says we don't need it now. Brent is not going to fund a rise to the top and we do need somebody who can and would do that. Football these days is expensive both for owner and fan. I'd like to see the ground finished but not at any price and it could wait rather than make it small and be stuck with it. Never been a member of pasoti but now I'm banned for being a master criminal from "that other place" I do look at pasoti now and again for rumours and updated info. I'd probably get banned from pasoti anyway given I don't always agree with the popular view. This is the only island of sanity in a sea of internet warriors. At least you can disagree here without getting insulted or bullied.
Too late Huey I'd read what you had written .... To clarify your post even though you have now changed it .... People do get banned on this site either by site admin or on the request of the Argyle forum .... If you are genuine welcome aboard although after reading your post I'm not sure that you are, however I will give you the benefit of the doubt for now. We do not tolerate trolls or anti Argyle posters, but we do welcome differing opinions and you wont be banned for that !
I feel for people like Joe who rely on services provided by the council, I work with people with learning disabilities/complex needs and they are slashing the funding big time .... As an Argyle fan I welcome the £800K loan however seeing what the reduced services are doing to people in the city I am totally against it !
Well there are a lot of people in need of the services and not just for children.. but we know a stand is needed to tidy the place up at least.. but why build it now? Brent needs to fund it as he will be the only winner in the end. He does not care what happens in my view. As for Huey we will have to wait and see what he really is.. a Troll or not? jury will be out a while.. i have my thoughts!!
