Reid did get thirty minutes against Bideford, so he is getting the necessary fitness training.......hope he hasn't come back too quickly.
3 - 3 with Bath tonight. Were 3 - 1 up and obviously lost it in the second half. Story goes the defence plus keeper were full of mistakes tonight. We shone in defence last term so that doesn't bode well does it. Still, better to cock up now and put it right than cock up in the league proper. I guess the Manager learns something from a game like this.
3-0 up in thirty minutes and nearly lose it.....gone the defending that got us in the play-offs.....looks more like we'll score one more than you style.
Derek Adams is after three loanees that will strengthen his squad......he is aiming to start with Premier clubs and see how things go.....and will only then move on to Championship teams if necessary......he says, that he has got a good relationship with many Premiership clubs and hopes he can find players that will fit into his style of play.
To my way of thinking the new Manager is starting off very well..new signings to contract and now possible loan players.. Playing to his systems and scoring goals..I know its against lower teams but the Lads are getting a good workout.. I know I don't pay to watch them play but I do envy you that do.. Thanks Plym for your updates..
My pleasure....not everyone can be bothered to look things up.....some think that because they know everyone else does as well.....in your case you are on the fringes of the known world....glancing over your shoulder making sure that that pesky bear isn't stalking you down without you knowing.
I don't have any worries about the Manager it's the supposed owner I worry about as is probably obvious by now. It does look as if the budget is down this time despite the reporting that Argyle made a profit last term. Not only did that happen but presumably they reduced the debt payments on the club also so logic tells me that there should have been a bigger budget rather than smaller one. The reason I came to the smaller conclusion was the lesser numbers we have available even if you include the 3 loanees he is after. Our squad is paper thin and if we had a spate of injuries or suspensions then I can see us in trouble. I still don't see Brent as Argyle's saviour in any shape or form. The Manager is ok for now because we haven't started anything in anger yet and he needs to get to know the players he has still.
Sweeping assumptions there Sensible: you don't know how much he's had to pay to bring in the ones we've signed (which appears to have happened quickly and easily) or what it will cost to bring in loanees from the top 2 divisions. The other factor is of course the absence of income for the new stand. I think the published predictions for that were heroic (not a good thing in a financial plan) but whatever was in the plan is nowhere near being delivered.
I don't think it's sweeping assumptions at all notdistant and I've explained my reasoning for what I've said. I think it is generally the rule that premier loanees cost very little if anything due to the top clubs wanting their youngsters to gain playing experience in the man's world rather than half meaningless youth games. Hence they don't expect to get paid for it as well. As for the absence of income for the "new stand" I don't see that as a factor. We didn't have it last season and don't have it this season so one sort of cancels the other logically. We have a number less players this time and less loans on the cards. I do not believe for one moment that the new players cost more that the old ones we have lost. They came from clubs with relatively small support bases and their budgets would not have been that great in comparison. I do not see how assuming the budget has been cut is not a logical conclusion to all of that whether we know for sure or not. One thing for sure is it ain't gone up.
An Argyle Development XI went to Tavistock yesterday and won 8-0......the team was a mixture of pros and youngsters. Reuben Reid got 75 minutes and scored a hatrick, Louis Rooney also scored three.one from Ben Steer and also a penalty from Ryan Lane completed the scoring. All the pros who didn't get a game at Bath started against Tavistock and Paul Wotton was satisfied with the performance of the players and the extra time that they got into their legs only 24 hrs after the Bath game.
I think the budget is fine sensible- the last season or two demonstrated that when the manager went to the Chairman for more money and was able to justify why an additional player was necessary JB always stumped up. I suspect that this season's budget is as competitive as last but with a new manager and coaching staff that dont know the club and dont really know what standard they need for L2 it makes sense to spend some early on and then IF the team needs strengthening they can bring some loanees in or even permanent signings in the second half of the season. Seems a perfectly sensible approach to me, why blow a load of cash until you have had chance to assess in competitive matches what we have already got?
That's the slightly green view in my opinion lyndhurst. There is still every indication that the budget is lower as far as I can see. I take your point about not putting all your eggs in the first basket that comes along but our squad is paper thin and whilst prudence is commendable at times I'm not convinced that any manager would want to risk things from the start. Getting a player in is not as simple as waving a wand and one appears. Also, take this latest loanee announced today. He's a kid. There is not a chance he is on big wages and I doubt at his age he gets as much as our biggest earner. This is not going to stretch a budget far. Most of these loanees will be the same sort of age group. I don't believe they cost us much if anything. With another 2 of them we still wouldn't have close to the staff we had previously. I simply refuse to "trust in .........." again. We did that before with a group who were considered to be fans as well as owners. Look what happened there. I don't think Brent is a fan or anything like one and like the rest of his business interests, he would cast it off at the blink of an eye if it suited and was better for him. He isn't finished with it yet as he hasn't maybe exacted his pound of flesh. When he has and there isn't anything else to wring out.........(fill in the blanks yourself).
Exactly my point- we got screwed by the 'other' lot by spending money we didn't have which in turn virtually bankrupted the club whilst they walked away. As far as I can tell, it is the manager who prefers working with a small permanent squad and a few loanees and the board haven't said 'no' to any requests to purchase more players. JB's whole philosophy for the club is for it to be self sustainable for the period it is under his tenure and this extends to the player budget. If there was a suitable purchaser, AND he could get back what he has put into the club I am sure he would sell (he hasn't wrung anything out of it-quite the opposite), but to claim he isn't a fan is a bit disingenuous. Why else would he go to virtually every home and away match?. There are plenty of examples of stay away owners who are not fans but JB ain't one of them. Am sure we will continue to disagree about JB's motives and benefit (or otherwise) to the club and I can accept that you have an irrational distrust of him, but not sure what he has done , or not done, on the footballing side of the club to so upset a small portion of the fanbase.
Being a very very long time exile .....I am more of an observer than a hands on supporter......I take onboard a lot of what sensible says ....and we have common ground regarding most of what happens at Home Park and some of the people on the periphery of the club....we differ regarding James Brent and I can understand how sensible feels regarding him......I on the otherhand give Brent more leeway and understand him more as a businessman running a football team.....Argyle was never his first love so he is head before heart in many of his decisions.....nothing wrong with that with a post-admin situation. Lindy... it is good to hear your views....you are nearer the action and can observe things that I and others on here can only guess about......so... in a way I'm selfishly glad that you didn't get the PAFC job.... because it would have become awkward for you to idlely chat about Argyle....with you being on the inside.....on the otherhand if you had got the job I would have been pleased for you. One comment to make about James Brent......please put me right Lindy if I am wrong........any monies that have come from him are only loans.... and will have to be repaid one day with possible interest.....that upsets many people and rings as nothing more than a business transaction not as someone who is a pilgrims fan.......a topping up of his pension fund eventually.....how do you see that..... sensible/Lindy.
Only a little bit closer Plym, but I guess I do have the privilege of spending more time 'behind the scenes' than the majority of fans. That said, I don't pretend to know the details of JBs financial transactions with the club other than what I researched in the publicly available club accounts. My understanding is that they are as you say loans, but am not convinced that is particularly unusual. To my mind all football club owners fall into one of four categories:-. 1. The truly altruistic-i.e those fans who somehow end up with enough loot to pump into their favorite club and don't care if they loose it all and will 'happily' walk away without recouping their investment (the Bristows at Torquay are a good example). 2. Very wealthy businessmen who buy football clubs as status symbols (Chelsea)- they have so much money that it doesn't really matter if the club makes a profit or not and they may or may not end up becoming genuine 'fans'. 3. Hard nosed businessmen who will invest in a club and if success doesn't come who cut their losses and run, whatever the consequences for the club. (perhaps the new world consortium). 4. Businessmen who can see an investment opportunity and are wiling to risk a certain amount of money, providing they have a reasonable chance of recouping their investment - hopefully making a profit in the process. I see JB as very much in this category-he certainly doesn't appear to have loads of money to waste and will want to get his money back, but equally if the club can be self sustaining-i.e income equals outgoings or better, he believes there is a real opportunity to make some money AND have a successful football club. Contrary to some opinions I don't see how success on the pitch and an owner making money should upset some people - they should certainly not be mutually exclusive. The bottom line is that JB was a reluctant investor who like many has now become a real fan. Whether he can afford/wants to continue to prop up the club and lose money remains to be seen, but as it stands the club is (apparently) almost now self sustaining so it would be natural to want to recoup some of his investment. The precarious nature of football means that it is a high risk business and over investment is no guarantee of success hence the prudent approach. A long winded answer to a short question but why any investor recouping their investment (with interest) would upset anyone I have no idea.
Lets just step outside the football club for a moment shall we. I do not take exception to any of the loans thing or that he might make a profit in the end bit either. If Argyle are successful and it generates a return for Brent then I have no problem with that. I don't think you can research the club's accounts much either. The amount of info that is in the public domain gives you is small indeed. They tell the World very little and even that is dragged out screaming. Going back to the step outside the club bit. This is my theory and there is nothing I can produce to give it any flesh on the bones so I don't put it out there as fact. Brent is a business man and sees Argyle as an opportunity. Not that the football club will necessarily make him a packet although I suspect he will come out of it at the very worst evens. What Argyle has done is open doors and opportunities elsewhere within the City. Brent has received a number of opportunities for deals in other matters other that football within Plymouth and has sat hand in glove with PCC who would not want to see the football club fail. By taking it on in the first place, I still say at no cost, PCC have given him other work and his "pension fund" has benefited from that. Without Argyle he would not have been considered. I acknowledge the above could be totally barking but I personally don't think so. I am also still convinced, regardless of the other arguments put forward, that the budget is less now than before. I do not believe the incoming get more in wages than those that went and infact quite the opposite. I think we shed higher wages. I don't think Brent has one ounce of affinity to Argyle or even football in general whether he attends or doesn't. I think it benefits him to be seen there like a celebrity doing their "charity" stuff whilst the camera rolls so us mere mortals know how wonderful they are and how grateful we should be. I came to this conclusion all by myself without influence. I distrust him and have to say I probably always will. It's his failure to deliver anything of note but still expect the faithful to remain faithful irrespective of that.
Just to answer your points sensible, -the accounts are available through company house - you have to register and it costs £1 to download the detail- they aren't comprehensive but were good enough to satisfy the auditors and also show who else has lent the club money recently (Tony Wrathall) . There is as much detail available as there is for the vast majority of firms. Incidentally if I owned the club I wouldn't put everything in the public domain either-the problem is whatever the Chairman might say in good faith is taken as gospel, and then used to beat him up with later e.g the proposed/hoped time frame for HHP. Once bitten twice shy springs to mind. I care not a jot about activities outside the football club. You may well be correct about it opening other doors but there are numerous elected/self appointed people with influence/power in the city and in PCC that are supposed to carry out 'due diligence' . I doubt they have been hoodwinked and I doubt he would have blagged a position at the top of N Devon NHS trust if he was no good. I happen to think a lot of business is done in the city for mutual benefit but I guess that is sadly the way of the world. Still don't understand what the issue is about the budget- does the manager want a player and has been told we cant afford him? if not, there is no problem with the budget. With respect, I think that the rest of your third paragraph is a conspiracy theory/fantasy too far. Roll on the start of the season- we might then have something important to discuss! Two home shirts and tickets for Saturday + the Gillingham match bought this morning-i suppose that is another £100 in JBs pocket-actually I don't care where the money ends up providing we get some decent football this season.
Firstly I never said Brent publishes lesser accounts than anyone else and I never said I blame him for doing so. I just pointed out what you did that they say nothing of any importance so are of little use in understanding the business that is Argyle. I pointed out the outside interests as a means of showing a motive for getting involved in the first place rather than him having any interest in Argyle or football. You should care a jot if he is just using the club for this purpose. I don't care if he gets other interests fullfilled as long as he does right by the club and gives it as much attention as his pension fund gets if that is what is filling it. He is an experienced business person so he should know better than come out with a statement which he has no possibility of fullfilling. If he gets beaten with it later then it's his own fault for misleading people. Football fans may be simple folk but a good many are not understanding challenged and know what he said he would do. He hasn't and by the look of it never had much of a chance to fullfill the promise. I repeat, I got blinded by faith previously by not questioning the motives of the Board. I have no intention of just accepting everything without question again. I didn't believe the Administrator when he said there was no plan B or posiblity of one and I didn't accept Brent's assertions that there wasn't one for the improvements. Both of those doubts proved to be true. You may know more about Brent than me having met him on a personal level. You may even like the bloke and I might if I met him but I don't have to trust him blindly because he's "a jolly nice chap".
I think we are in danger of agreeing on many aspects of this. However, on the one hand people want openness and transparency which i think he tried to give in good faith in the early days-clearly he was wrong in what he said about completion of HHP (and admits this) but I still think he thought he could deliver his plan. He has been berated about this ever since so it is not surprising that he no longer commits to much, resulting in complaints that the detail of the financial aspects of the club are not public. Damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. As it happens, having met him a few times I do like him but don't know him well enough to judge how good he is at 'business'(obviously good enough to make a load of money). All I can judge him on is the relative success of the football club (in financial terms)- that will do for me- If a multi millionaire came along with cash to waste I would be the first to welcome him, but in the meantime I am reasonably content with the financial stability of the club and I don't really care (and certainly don't worry) about the inner machinations of the club or JB's other ventures/dealings.
