AFT statement on HHP development and **new update 19th Sept*

[esmer]

Can I safely assume that JB and the Board realise that the views of the AFT are those of a very small minority of Argyle fans?

Well I never heard of the AFT until today and I don't support the development either.

But what I would say is that Argyle fans (like myself) form a small minority of Plymouth residents. Its their city too !

There's a way forward to keep everyone happy- this scheme isn't the one I don't think. Let Brent come back with something more reasonable.

The area where the hotel and offices are proposed has nothing whatsoever to do with the football club and never has. If you wish to object to the development fair enough but there are proper channels and Pasoti isn't one of them.

 

[Abbotts Ann Green]

If we ever reach the Premiership ( which I don't expect to see in my lifetime) I was under the impression that an extra level could be put all around the ground to increase capacity, rather than just expanding the grandstand.

As I have said before, with the conferencing facilities a close hotel will be a huge benefit to the club. Plymouth is certainly not endowed with many good hotels (and I've stayed in plenty of them over the years, and they are all pretty bad) and a new hotel on the doorstep will help sell the conference space.

 

[SteelCannon]

Ian the title of my post was Chairman's UPDATE....I did not call it an update of the first post.

Secondly, you appear to have missed out the bit of the screenshot where I actually praised JB for his openness and honesty? Include the whole story please, not just the parts you want people to see. Be fair. And what members of my family post and where are entirely their choice and are NOTHING to do with me.

This is NOTHING personal against JB and we have not made our final submission yet. Furthermore, I have not said we will be challenging ALL aspects of the planning application. This will be decided over the next few days and I will be telling JB about each step as a courtesy as he has always been open and honest with me, so I will be with him. But I will tell him alone and not those associated with him, followed closely in any Comms to the members.

 

[Baby Face Johnson]

Well, hopefully I'm not a usual name but with solely my Argyle fan hat on, I cannot see how anything on the HHP land will benefit Argyle in any way. In fact, it will hem in any future grandstand development, as many have already pointed out. I can see a benefit in the hotel making the conferencing more of an attractive option but the rest, no, not really.

As the grandstand refurb is already funded and not dependant upon any of the rest of the development, I cannot see why any Argyle fan would be in favour of the HHP development, at all, when all this could go elsewhere in the City (is additional office space even needed?), especially as it could put back the start of the refurb, either costing Argyle more or resulting in further cost reducton exercises on the scheme.

That may be a tad selfish, as there is an argument for Mr Brent to be able to generate a bit of profit on all the time he has invested in the club but from solely a selfish Argyle point of view, I just can't accept it all.

Well i dont look at it from purely an argyle point of view. I support plymouth argyle.
Thats the club and the city. Credit for using the word selfish. I can understand in a way.
We all want whats best for the club. But central park should benefit all the people of plymouth
not just us lucky few who follow argyle.
As for the stand well we must be doubling the width or more in the refurb so i dont see why that
extra width couldnt harbour a 2/3 tier stand.
The previous development would have hemmed us in for sure. Not so much now and the demport could
be expanded also.
Of course mr oligarch might want to relocate us elsewhere like ernesettle. Hmm. Perhaps not.

Some fair points there. To clarify. I have no real problem with development in Plymouth, or in general, just not so close to the stand! Shift it all elsewhere and I'd have no real issues. Secondly, I hadn't considered that the grandstand refurb was significantly increasing the existing footprint. If it is then not so much of a problem but it doesn't look much different to me (certainly nowhere near doubling, as far as I can see).

*Oh and apart from the issue of the hybrid application putting a spanner in the works.

Fair enough im only guessing from memory tbh. I am including the terracing width
in front as well as the extension to come aprox in width at the back as the doubling.
Next game i will have a closer look. Need to see and not guess.
As for the hybrid messing up argyle i would hope and expect the board/chairman at some point to act to prevent.
The 6 month highway england delay is not what it seems as i posted earlier.

Fair one. I hadn't considered the existing footprint of the terracing at all, so maybe not such an issue. Would still like it all a bit further away though.

 

[Baby Face Johnson]

If we ever reach the Premiership ( which I don't expect to see in my lifetime) I was under the impression that an extra level could be put all around the ground to increase capacity, rather than just expanding the grandstand.

As I have said before, with the conferencing facilities a close hotel will be a huge benefit to the club. Plymouth is certainly not endowed with many good hotels (and I've stayed in plenty of them over the years, and they are all pretty bad) and a new hotel on the doorstep will help sell the conference space.

No. This was a commonly held belief but I don't think it can be - hence the hastily produced 'few rows of seats crammed in at the top with restricted views' option proposed as a future expansion alternative, to appease the dissenters, in the last set of proposals.

 

[Quizmike]

Ian the title of my post was Chairman's UPDATE....I did not call it an update of the first post.

Secondly, you appear to have missed out the bit of the screenshot where I actually praised JB for his openness and honesty? Include the whole story please, not just the parts you want people to see. Be fair. And what members of my family post and where are entirely their choice and are NOTHING to do with me.

This is NOTHING personal against JB and we have not made our final submission yet. Furthermore, I have not said we will be challenging ALL aspects of the planning application. This will be decided over the next few days and I will be telling JB about each step as a courtesy as he has always been open and honest with me, so I will be with him. But I will tell him alone and not those associated with him, followed closely in any Comms to the members.

Tony,

I asked some questions of you last night about what mandate you have to campaign to block the development. You have yert to reply.

I repeat

How many emails have you received asking you the AFT to act on this matter?

Will the minutes of the meeting that decided the AFT should act on this be published? Will you provide a link?

We any of the emails received from members of the Never Again group?

I worry if you are progressing with this without a mandate from supporters or even your own members, then the AFT may be seen as not working for its members interests but once again for its own, and would therefore be unfit for purpose.

 

[Quizmike]

If we ever reach the Premiership ( which I don't expect to see in my lifetime) I was under the impression that an extra level could be put all around the ground to increase capacity, rather than just expanding the grandstand.

As I have said before, with the conferencing facilities a close hotel will be a huge benefit to the club. Plymouth is certainly not endowed with many good hotels (and I've stayed in plenty of them over the years, and they are all pretty bad) and a new hotel on the doorstep will help sell the conference space.

No. This was a commonly held belief but I don't think it can be - hence the hastily produced 'few rows of seats crammed in at the top with restricted views' option proposed as a future expansion alternative, to appease the dissenters, in the last set of proposals.

Q37 here - an extra 2000 CAN be added

https://www.pafc.co.uk/news/2013/june/grandstand-qa/

 

[Baby Face Johnson]

If we ever reach the Premiership ( which I don't expect to see in my lifetime) I was under the impression that an extra level could be put all around the ground to increase capacity, rather than just expanding the grandstand.

As I have said before, with the conferencing facilities a close hotel will be a huge benefit to the club. Plymouth is certainly not endowed with many good hotels (and I've stayed in plenty of them over the years, and they are all pretty bad) and a new hotel on the doorstep will help sell the conference space.

No. This was a commonly held belief but I don't think it can be - hence the hastily produced 'few rows of seats crammed in at the top with restricted views' option proposed as a future expansion alternative, to appease the dissenters, in the last set of proposals.

Q37 here - an extra 2000 CAN be added

https://www.pafc.co.uk/news/2013/june/grandstand-qa/

This is what I was referring to Mike. It was a bit half-arsed to say the least and not the mythical additional tier, all-round, that we all originally thought could be added on if required.

 

[Chancellor]

Wouldn't it have been more beneficial if the AFT had spoken to JB or the football club first before issuing the latest statement and already stating its position. ..

Wouldnt it have been more beneficial if Mr Brent had spoken to the AFT or other fan groups before submitting a totally unnecessary hybrid plan on the back of a fully funded project to refurb the grandstand?

He did at the Fans Forum...
Come and See

As for Tony Hopwood, it probably is the same person, as you well know, and by selling the Pavilions he did a good job because the Pavilions was costing Plymouth City Council £1.5m a year to operate and with a £30 million shortfall in its budget it was a good move for the people of Plymouth.
All operating costs transferred to Akkeron.

I didnt know that to be fair, suspected it may be. But why was my post asking this removed?

 

[Quizmike]

If we ever reach the Premiership ( which I don't expect to see in my lifetime) I was under the impression that an extra level could be put all around the ground to increase capacity, rather than just expanding the grandstand.

As I have said before, with the conferencing facilities a close hotel will be a huge benefit to the club. Plymouth is certainly not endowed with many good hotels (and I've stayed in plenty of them over the years, and they are all pretty bad) and a new hotel on the doorstep will help sell the conference space.

No. This was a commonly held belief but I don't think it can be - hence the hastily produced 'few rows of seats crammed in at the top with restricted views' option proposed as a future expansion alternative, to appease the dissenters, in the last set of proposals.

Q37 here - an extra 2000 CAN be added

https://www.pafc.co.uk/news/2013/june/grandstand-qa/

This is what I was referring to Mike. It was a bit half-arsed to say the least and not the mythical additional tier, all-round, that we all originally thought could be added on if required.

Apologies, I misread your post

 

[IJN]

But why was my post asking this removed?

I'll be kind here! You are 'mistaken'.

I've been in the ModLog and NOTHING of yours has been removed, deleted or anything else for that matter.

 

[PL2 3DQ]

The only time the AFT has asked its membership about the ACV was in a standalone survey conducted in December 2013 with the results published a month later.

658 people took part in the survey and the question about ACV had a pre-fix to it which would have influenced the way people answered.

The question set by the AFT was misleading and implied Home Park might be in jeopardy if someone other than JB bought Home Park and an ACV would protect the stadium should that happen.
Also the option for JB to buy Home Park from PCC was legally binding and couldn't be removed from the lease.
As it transpired PAFC bought the freehold with the help of the directors and majority shareholders. The freehold belongs to the club.

AFT survey question: "If the option for James Brent/Akkeron to buy Home Park is removed from the Lease with the Council, do you think the Trust should explore registering Home Park as an Asset of Community Value?"
92% said yes, 8% said no.

On that basis the AFT went ahead and applied for the ACV anyway with no further specific canvassing or consultation of its members.

How different would people have voted if the question was: With the football club as owner of the freehold do you think the Trust should explore registering Home Park as an Asset of Community Value?

 

[Quizmike]

Wouldn't it have been more beneficial if the AFT had spoken to JB or the football club first before issuing the latest statement and already stating its position. ..

Wouldnt it have been more beneficial if Mr Brent had spoken to the AFT or other fan groups before submitting a totally unnecessary hybrid plan on the back of a fully funded project to refurb the grandstand?

He did at the Fans Forum...
Come and See

As for Tony Hopwood, it probably is the same person, as you well know, and by selling the Pavilions he did a good job because the Pavilions was costing Plymouth City Council £1.5m a year to operate and with a £30 million shortfall in its budget it was a good move for the people of Plymouth.
All operating costs transferred to Akkeron.

I didnt know that to be fair, suspected it may be. But why was my post asking this removed?

It's at the bottom of page 2

 

[IJN]

I'll repeat and repeat again (as it seems to be the norm these days). The people behind the AFT decide what the AFT does, not the majority of the members.

Look at the names of most of the objectors, they're all there, the usual names.

 

[Chancellor]

But why was my post asking this removed?

I'll be kind here! You are 'mistaken'.

I've been in the ModLog and NOTHING of yours has been removed, deleted or anything else for that matter.

Thank you, my apologies.