Do you want James Brent to continue as Chairman/Owner?

[Quizmike]

Any chance the same poll could be asked of the chairman?

Dont suppose so.

Did it help then?

Thank you and yes it has helped. Its astonishing that even on this website, which is pretty much solid Brent supporting territory, that nearly 30% have voted No. Another site, which we are not allowed to talk about, suggests 97% No, so I would guess the true figure is somewhere between the two, and probably a majority.

So somehow in your head you are turning a three quarters majority 'yes' into a majority 'no'? I don't think anyone will fall for that piece of spin, no matter how blinkered they may be.

Back to the drawing board eh? But good try though.

Perhaps you should learn to read. I mentioned another poll on another site that has 97% saying no. Thats not spin, thats facts however unpleasant they are to you. Or perhaps you believe that some votes shouldnt be counted?

I can read. (For instance I know what apostrophes are). I can see one poll. Could you link to the other poll, cause I for one am not happy to "guess" statistics?

So out of interest, who do you have lined up as the next chairperson?

 

[Quizmike]

The original question is a poor one because of course in the absence of anyone else its a Yes everytime otherwise we have no club.

Perhaps it would have been better to ask "If there were other interested parties, would you want James Brent to continue as Chairman/Owner?"

You asked for the question, but because it doesn't give the answer you wanted, you now claim the question is wrong?

 

[Ollieargyle9]

The original question is a poor one because of course in the absence of anyone else its a Yes everytime otherwise we have no club.

Perhaps it would have been better to ask "If there were other interested parties, would you want James Brent to continue as Chairman/Owner?"

Read my post, I'd still want JB out for the reasons given.

Out of interest, what sort of chairperson are we looking at in your scenario? If we're dreaming big maybe a billionaire Argyle fan?

How about rather than quoting stats from an anti-Brent clique you give some actual reasons to support your view. So far the grandstand debacle stands out as the only real "failure" people have quoted here but even that is debatable as a failure until the plans are canned, not to mention the fact that it's not cost Argyle a penny really, a nice idea potentially missed perhaps but not a loss per se.

 

[Connor Clarke]

'anti-Brent clique'

:lol:

 

[IJN]

'anti-Brent clique'

:lol:

:funny:

I think he probably meant anti Argyle clique to be fair.

 

[crownhill pilgrim]

I think most Argyle fans are realists (who wouldn't be?) and accept that it's our lot to bounce up and down the bottom division for a few years. That's not to say, there's a JB love-fest but after McCauley, Stapleton and Gardner, Chairmen have never been our strong suit,

 

[PL2 3DQ]

Any chance the same poll could be asked of the chairman?

Dont suppose so.

Did it help then?

Thank you and yes it has helped. Its astonishing that even on this website, which is pretty much solid Brent supporting territory, that nearly 30% have voted No. Another site, which we are not allowed to talk about, suggests 97% No, so I would guess the true figure is somewhere between the two, and probably a majority.

Quite laughable. You ask for a poll and then because you're not happy with the result you guess at a true figure and moan about the wording of the question that you asked for!

 

[Ollieargyle9]

'anti-Brent clique'

:lol:

That'll be a no to the request of some actual arguments then :lol:

 

[Green Matt]

Yes. What's the alternative? And actually the manager has been funded pretty well I would have thought. My opinion will only change if it looks like we are standing still (in this wretched league) or going backwards off the field. The fact that the grandstand scheme didn't go ahead is satisfying for me as I felt it unambitious for the football club and overweening in its commercial intrusion into a valuable public space. I'd like to see more seats and fewer unnecessary additions such as cinemas, which surely have to go somewhere in town or where the city needs regeneration (which is screamingly obviously Millbay/Union St).

 

[IJN]

It surprised me that 3% (by my reckoning that's one person) voted for him. :greensmile:

 

[Connor Clarke]

'anti-Brent clique'

:lol:

That'll be a no to the request of some actual arguments then :lol:

I don't care that much for arguing the positives and negatives of Mr Brent's tenure because we'd be here all day, but I'm interested in how it's an anti-Brent 'clique'? Is everyone who is anti-Brent in this clique? Is there a pro-Brent 'clique'? Confused.

 

[IJN]

Here's one for you Connor. Does not the 97% 'poll' suggest that it isn't?

 

[L G]

The club will owe James Brent a lot of money if and when he decides to go.

It is hard to see anyone with that sort of money appearing anytime soon.

I believe The AFT are in discussions with the club regarding off the field matters, I look forward to reading the minutes of their recent meeting when they are released.

when was that meeting Phil?

I don't know exactly but expect that GreenSam could give us a brief update on the work that The Trust is doing (assuming he can give details and is happy to do so of course)?

I believe they were planning to meet Mr Starnes during January.

I see.
Thanks Phil.

 

[Carlo]

Who else is there?

 

[Cult Of Personality]

Brent is at fault for our recent form that he has not yet sacked Sherrydian but apart from that Brent has kept the club alive and has even looked at signing a player for money .

Brent may not have millons but the club is alive and the only reason we the fans are peed off is the action on the field not off it