A Statement

[Daz]

I've said all the way through that James Brent is a man that I feel can be totally trusted. It was ironic to note that several of the less salubrious of characters on this site started questioning the motives of the man just after the 'brent honeymoon' came to a shuddering halt. Suddenly there was a hidden agenda, why would a man who has no interest in football buy a football club?
Yes he probably did see it as an investment opportunity, but like me and many others argyle grows on you and it becomes addictive, even in the god awful times.
I think we should trust the judgement of this man, he has not set us wrong yet and the club has progressed amazingly so since the dark days. People talk about potential owners to come, Simon Hallett seems a pretty decent person and astute businessman, I would say Brent did well there. The future is always a lottery, but I would say we have a pretty good hand with James Brent in charge. The man is highly rated in the business world, let him get on with it.
Btw, I heard that it was the aft not turning up at meetings with Brent not that he wouldn't meet with them. Could we have some clarification on that from the higher echelons of the aft?

How on earth is six seasons of League Two football "the club progressing amazingly"?

Has Pompey progressed amazingly too, with their successive seasons of failure to get promoted, and successive seasons of avoiding the wrath of HMRC. Interesting that what they consider outright failure, we consider 'amazing progression'.

Also the contracts fiasco of last season has cost us severely. We are mid table at best with this season's squad and that will likely take some time to repair.

I hope our friend that likes to screenshot posts like this is on the ball tonight because I'll take a wager on mid table at best. :thumbup:

I will be very surprised if we make the playoffs. I would dearly love to be proved wrong but I don't think we have recruited a promotion chasing pack in the summer additions.

From an indifferent start we have kicked in which is encouraging. Seem to have a bit of fight about us which is also good. Sorry to go off topic. :scarf:

 

[Knibbsworth]

I've said all the way through that James Brent is a man that I feel can be totally trusted. It was ironic to note that several of the less salubrious of characters on this site started questioning the motives of the man just after the 'brent honeymoon' came to a shuddering halt. Suddenly there was a hidden agenda, why would a man who has no interest in football buy a football club?
Yes he probably did see it as an investment opportunity, but like me and many others argyle grows on you and it becomes addictive, even in the god awful times.
I think we should trust the judgement of this man, he has not set us wrong yet and the club has progressed amazingly so since the dark days. People talk about potential owners to come, Simon Hallett seems a pretty decent person and astute businessman, I would say Brent did well there. The future is always a lottery, but I would say we have a pretty good hand with James Brent in charge. The man is highly rated in the business world, let him get on with it.
Btw, I heard that it was the aft not turning up at meetings with Brent not that he wouldn't meet with them. Could we have some clarification on that from the higher echelons of the aft?

How on earth is six seasons of League Two football "the club progressing amazingly"?

Has Pompey progressed amazingly too, with their successive seasons of failure to get promoted, and successive seasons of avoiding the wrath of HMRC. Interesting that what they consider outright failure, we consider 'amazing progression'.

Also the contracts fiasco of last season has cost us severely. We are mid table at best with this season's squad and that will likely take some time to repair.

I hope our friend that likes to screenshot posts like this is on the ball tonight because I'll take a wager on mid table at best. :thumbup:

I will be very surprised if we make the playoffs. I would dearly love to be proved wrong but I don't think we have recruited a promotion chasing pack in the summer additions.

From an indifferent start we have kicked in which is encouraging. Seem to have a bit of fight about us which is also good. Sorry to go off topic. :scarf:

I bow down to your opinion if you go to games, because currently I am abroad and haven't seen a single ball kicked this season. Spencer seems to be a link up player, and not a particularly dominant one in the mould of Trigger. So having lost Reuben, and without Brunt (who many fans never seemed to understand was a top target man at League Two level) we are pretty down in the up front stakes. Having spoken to a Celtic fan from Aberdeen recently, he told me about how good Goodwillie used to be, but how at Aberdeen Goodwillie had evidently lost whatever he had. I replied that it was interesting that he has lot his place in Argyle's team already, and that is after a few games. Many fans say he doesn't look fit, others say he is not interested.

The crosses and set pieces strategy is alright for nicking tight games but it's hard to get promotion nicking one nils hoping Bulvitis or Bradley head in a cross, and the opposition don't.

Against Notts County and Blackpool we won, but the opponents carved us open. You can see in the highlights how unlucky both were not to score. We are benefiting from a bit of luck at the moment but that can soon desert you.

We dominated for a spell v Mansfield - my confidence will grow once I set a few more of those performances, and not games where we nicked a goal from a set piece and they didn't. It feels like we are becoming terribly Tony Pulis all of a sudden.

 

[Argylegames]

That's brilliant. Thank for the info.

So all the ACV does is hold up the sale for six months.

I've read something as well about planning permission. Now obviously this is to stop pubs being turned into flats, but under the ACV if we we were looking to build a new Grandstand (miracles can happen) and a rival fan were to object saying the current Grandstand was part of ACV, would that screw things up and if so how much?

Replacing the grandstand isn't selling HP!

I can't see anyone building a new grandstand if they won't end up owning it.

 

[justanotherfan]

This strikes me as being a tad incestuous, if the owner of the ground, Plymouth City Council, wishes to sell said ground then they must inform the authority, i.e. Plymouth City Council, also, the owner of the ground, Plymouth City Council, has a right to a review of this decision by, yes that`s right, Plymouth City Council - conflict of interest anyone.

 

[Argylegames]

This strikes me as being a tad incestuous, if the owner of the ground, Plymouth City Council, wishes to sell said ground then they must inform the authority, i.e. Plymouth City Council, also, the owner of the ground, Plymouth City Council, has a right to a review of this decision by, yes that`s right, Plymouth City Council - conflict of interest anyone.

The borough council doesn't have a right to review any decisions made by the owner (except in this case they ARE the owner). The ACV listing just stops the owner from selling for six months to give a group of local people the chance to raise the money to attempt to buy the ACV. (Edit to add: If a local group does not declare its interest within a month of the ACV being put up for sale, then the listing lapses and the sale can go ahead immediately. Local groups have a month to get organised and six months to raise the dosh.)

Like I said, I was surprised that PCC listed one of its own assets. My (admittedly limited) experience suggests that listings are only done if the ACV is thought to be under threat. I can't see it being under threat whilst owned by PCC. As I also said earlier once an ACV is sold, the listing is automatically cancelled as the owner has changed. (as happened with one of my local pubs and another pub and a shop in the area)

 

[Quizmike]

That's brilliant. Thank for the info.

So all the ACV does is hold up the sale for six months.

I've read something as well about planning permission. Now obviously this is to stop pubs being turned into flats, but under the ACV if we we were looking to build a new Grandstand (miracles can happen) and a rival fan were to object saying the current Grandstand was part of ACV, would that screw things up and if so how much?

Replacing the grandstand isn't selling HP!

I can't see anyone building a new grandstand if they won't end up owning it.

I meant if an ACV is put in place when the ground is sold (assuming both things happen). Is there not something about planning objections being given serious consideration?

 

[Argylegames]

I think a number of people would formally object if JB bought the freehold and the AFT pulled that stunt again.

I missed this one earlier.

It make no difference if people object. If an application to list HP as an ACV were made again, PCC would decide from the regulations if it should be listed.

 

[Argylegames]

I meant if an ACV is put in place when the ground is sold (assuming both things happen). Is there not something about planning objections being given serious consideration?

I am not sure where you are coming from. Planning applications have nothing to do with ACVs. ANYBODY can put in a planning application for anything on any piece of ground. If I decide to put in an application to build a housing estate on HP I can quite legally do so. Provided I pay the requisite fees to PCC and provide them with minimal plans they should accept the application as valid for consideration under planning law/regulations. They are most likely to refuse to grant planning permission for the application on the grounds that the site is covenanted for sport and recreation, and possibly because they have their housing allocation sorted out for the next 20 years and so the development would be unnecessary. They could NOT reject the application on the grounds that they own the land and not me.

In the case of an ACV, if the local group wishing to retain the asset for the current use end up owning it, then they might want to make a change and would need planning permission to do so. If the local group fails to take over, the new owner can put in an application for the housing, and PCC would decide that application under planning regs.

If a pub is listed and the local group succeed in the purchase, then you would expect the pub to continue as a pub, but it might even be extended by the new owners. If the developer who wanted it for housing ended up owning it, then the planning application would be put forward and would be decided by the borough council.


(In case you are wondering, PCC have the right to grant themselves planning permission for developments on land they own. If such a development was contentious then the minister at the Department for Communities and Local Government {DCLG} would be likely to "call in the application" and it would be decided at government level)

 

[justanotherfan]

This strikes me as being a tad incestuous, if the owner of the ground, Plymouth City Council, wishes to sell said ground then they must inform the authority, i.e. Plymouth City Council, also, the owner of the ground, Plymouth City Council, has a right to a review of this decision by, yes that`s right, Plymouth City Council - conflict of interest anyone.

The borough council doesn't have a right to review any decisions made by the owner (except in this casownere they ARE the owner ). The ACV listing just stops the owner from selling for six months to give a group of local people the chance to raise the money to attempt to buy the ACV. (Edit to add: If a local group does not declare its interest within a month of the ACV being put up for sale, then the listing lapses and the sale can go ahead immediately. Local groups have a month to get organised and six months to raise the dosh.)

Like I said, I was surprised that PCC listed one of its own assets. My (admittedly limited) experience suggests that listings are only done if the ACV is thought to be under threat. I can't see it being under threat whilst owned by PCC. As I also said earlier once an ACV is sold, the listing is automatically cancelled as the owner has changed. (as happened with one of my local pubs and another pub and a shop in the area)

This is the point I was making/

 

[Quizmike]

I meant if an ACV is put in place when the ground is sold (assuming both things happen). Is there not something about planning objections being given serious consideration?

I am not sure where you are coming from. Planning applications have nothing to do with ACVs. ANYBODY can put in a planning application for anything on any piece of ground. If I decide to put in an application to build a housing estate on HP I can quite legally do so. Provided I pay the requisite fees to PCC and provide them with minimal plans they should accept the application as valid for consideration under planning law/regulations. They are most likely to refuse to grant planning permission for the application on the grounds that the site is covenanted for sport and recreation, and possibly because they have their housing allocation sorted out for the next 20 years and so the development would be unnecessary. They could NOT reject the application on the grounds that they own the land and not me.

In the case of an ACV, if the local group wishing to retain the asset for the current use end up owning it, then they might want to make a change and would need planning permission to do so. If the local group fails to take over, the new owner can put in an application for the housing, and PCC would decide that application under planning regs.

If a pub is listed and the local group succeed in the purchase, then you would expect the pub to continue as a pub, but it might even be extended by the new owners. If the developer who wanted it for housing ended up owning it, then the planning application would be put forward and would be decided by the borough council.


(In case you are wondering, PCC have the right to grant themselves planning permission for developments on land they own. If such a development was contentious then the minister at the Department for Communities and Local Government {DCLG} would be likely to "call in the application" and it would be decided at government level)

Got it. I was going by section 2.20 here

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... rities.pdf

but I see that's for change of use. But if for instance we wanted to change the club shop into catering unit, as that would be a change of use, could there be any problems there?

 

[Argylegames]

I wouldn't have thought so as the asset is HP, not specific bits of it. The listing is on HP as a sports ground.