-
This site is sponsored by Lang & Potter.
James Brent at PACSA Meeting 25th September
- Thread starter Green Rhino
- Start date
Q&A:
Q: With the Bretonside development, it might appear that the City Council is working against you.
JB: Bretonside is a challenge, Plymouth does not need three multiplexes – the bottom line is that he does not want conflict between PAFC and PCC.
Q: It appears that the Grandstand is drifting, that the scale of HHP development is now acting as an impediment to Grandstand progress in some ways. Are there ways to stop the “drift”, e.g. through new partnerships, better use of existing ones (esp. with PCC), and if any changes in these arrangements are made, can this give the opportunity for making the Grandstand design better?
JB: We are very much looking to simplify the Grandstand process – this is our Plan B. Investors remain very keen to fund leisure development (esp. as the bottom has fallen out of retail), so it isn’t a matter of needing to attract additional funds for the capital but of filling spaces. Simplifying the Grandstand process (and relatively fast tracking it) is the aim and it may well allow for some elements of the design to be improved. JB further noted that it is the cinema which drives the development finance.
This initially caught my eye, so IF the Bretonside development goes ahead, including the multi-plex, that would leave the HHP project high and dry??
Q: With the Bretonside development, it might appear that the City Council is working against you.
JB: Bretonside is a challenge, Plymouth does not need three multiplexes – the bottom line is that he does not want conflict between PAFC and PCC.
Q: It appears that the Grandstand is drifting, that the scale of HHP development is now acting as an impediment to Grandstand progress in some ways. Are there ways to stop the “drift”, e.g. through new partnerships, better use of existing ones (esp. with PCC), and if any changes in these arrangements are made, can this give the opportunity for making the Grandstand design better?
JB: We are very much looking to simplify the Grandstand process – this is our Plan B. Investors remain very keen to fund leisure development (esp. as the bottom has fallen out of retail), so it isn’t a matter of needing to attract additional funds for the capital but of filling spaces. Simplifying the Grandstand process (and relatively fast tracking it) is the aim and it may well allow for some elements of the design to be improved. JB further noted that it is the cinema which drives the development finance.
This initially caught my eye, so IF the Bretonside development goes ahead, including the multi-plex, that would leave the HHP project high and dry??
IJN":1u4coayg said:
To be fair, I think the board did very well under the chairmanship of Paul Stapleton. Didn't the club improve its league position year-on-year for nearly a decade ? I think the finances were under control during this period as well. It was under the chairmanship of Roy Gardner when the damage was done. To my understanding, that was an entirely different board with the control being shifted away from the local directors. The mistake of the Stapleton board was to sell to the wrong people. At least that's how I see it- there have been various threads about this with strong opinions expressed so we won't go there.
Your second point about seeing people face-to-face, I agree with. But I just hope that Brent means what he says and isn't merely telling fans what they want to hear. The club are at a very low point in their history and have potential well above league two. Some of us need to be convinced about the benefits of the grandstand development as well. The proof is in the pudding, and I hope we are not being fed false promises.
S
steveinspain
Guest
The HP development doesn't sound right to me. We haven't got the money, we have the balloon payment coming up and a team to finance. I don't feel comfortable with investors after what happened last time. All this is a distraction, like the world cup.
For me it's not the right time, I would rather we concentrate on the team, trying to get back into the Championship, increasing the crowds and then think about this again when we are better off financially.
For me it's not the right time, I would rather we concentrate on the team, trying to get back into the Championship, increasing the crowds and then think about this again when we are better off financially.
Green Rhino":zlrp7col said:
Thanks GR for providing such a quick account of the evening! Sounds like a good'un and overall I'd say JB comes across well. Appreciate someone raising this question, although I'm still disappointed by the club's stance and actions regarding the sale. If the club got every penny they wanted then they still undervalued him massively, reassuring to hear that there are significant add ons however - so hopefully the lost capital of a weak sale can be made up there.
From the sounds of it, these next couple of months could be a busy and important time for Argyle off the field. Hopefully for the best.
Said no to any offer under Sheridan's recommended valuation. Perhaps they got every penny Barnsley were willing to table, but it was still short of his valuation. I have enough confidence in Conor's professionalism and attitude to believe that if he was told we weren't prepared to let him go for the wrong price that he would have, perhaps begrudgingly, come around to performing for us as expected. If that meant he went on a free next summer, so be it - I truly believe that with him we're certainties for promotion and that is worth a heck of a lot more than what we received for him. To be honest, I feel he should have been tied into an extension in January or sooner.
Was Argyle's ambition truly explained to him, or did he feel underwhelmed by the direction of the club? It doesn't make a particularly great reading for us fans when the players don't believe in the club. It was only Barnsley and they're currently in the bottom six of League One, has he really bettered himself that greatly? I think the board undervalued him tremendously if 200k was every penny they wanted.
Was Argyle's ambition truly explained to him, or did he feel underwhelmed by the direction of the club? It doesn't make a particularly great reading for us fans when the players don't believe in the club. It was only Barnsley and they're currently in the bottom six of League One, has he really bettered himself that greatly? I think the board undervalued him tremendously if 200k was every penny they wanted.
That's the problem Sam, no one can argue with any of that but you're assuming that what you have read is true.
Do you not think that the Board asked JS what he thought what CH's value as? Do you not think that the Board wanted to extend CH's contract way before Barnskey come in?
Do you not think that the Board were royally peed off when it became obvious that CH no longer wanted to ply his trade with PAFC?
It's always worth remembering what you read in the Herald may be misleading in so much as certain quotes can be taken out of context or the time line of what was said has been skewed.
I know that nothing would have kept Connor at PAFC, not money but geography and ambition to move up the football ladder came into it.
Whilst we might not think Barnsley might not be Man Utd, do you not think that an ambitious lad like Connor could work out that you're far more likely to be noticed in Yorkshire with what, 20 massive clubs within 80 miles than Devon?
Do you not think that the Board asked JS what he thought what CH's value as? Do you not think that the Board wanted to extend CH's contract way before Barnskey come in?
Do you not think that the Board were royally peed off when it became obvious that CH no longer wanted to ply his trade with PAFC?
It's always worth remembering what you read in the Herald may be misleading in so much as certain quotes can be taken out of context or the time line of what was said has been skewed.
I know that nothing would have kept Connor at PAFC, not money but geography and ambition to move up the football ladder came into it.
Whilst we might not think Barnsley might not be Man Utd, do you not think that an ambitious lad like Connor could work out that you're far more likely to be noticed in Yorkshire with what, 20 massive clubs within 80 miles than Devon?
Is it untrue that Sheridan valued Conor at 400-500k? Is it untrue that the board accept a bid of 200k, knowing that the club would only receive c.80k? I do believe that Conor has made a good career move and I wish him the best for the future, but I'm disappointed to see Argyle looked at as a hindrance rather than a good place to build a career.
You say he had ambition to move up the football ladder, why couldn't Argyle share that ambition?
Also while the Geography argument is a valid downside to our club developments in technology also have made the ability to track and watch players incredibly easy, at the click of a button you can watch several matches that feature them. It shouldn't be as big an issue today as it was perhaps as recent as 5 years ago.
You say he had ambition to move up the football ladder, why couldn't Argyle share that ambition?
Also while the Geography argument is a valid downside to our club developments in technology also have made the ability to track and watch players incredibly easy, at the click of a button you can watch several matches that feature them. It shouldn't be as big an issue today as it was perhaps as recent as 5 years ago.
Thanks for the synopsis GR, all sounds fairly promising and it is good to hear from the chairman for a change.
I'm pleased to hear that the club is still pressing on with grandstand plan, despite by the sounds of it a standstill on the retail side of things. Hopefully the news over the coming month or so will be good on that front. Also interesting to hear that there will be news on the balloon payment, hopefully some reassuring news is to come in that department as well to put the fans' minds at ease so that we may focus on whatever this season brings on the field.
Fingers crossed the news is good :scarf:
I'm pleased to hear that the club is still pressing on with grandstand plan, despite by the sounds of it a standstill on the retail side of things. Hopefully the news over the coming month or so will be good on that front. Also interesting to hear that there will be news on the balloon payment, hopefully some reassuring news is to come in that department as well to put the fans' minds at ease so that we may focus on whatever this season brings on the field.
Fingers crossed the news is good :scarf:
Sam you are being extremely naïve about the way the football industry works. He wanted to go that's obvious and there's not really a lot a club can do in that situation other than get the best price they can whether it is a down payment with future add ons or whatever. The fact that half the money went to the balloon payment is nothing to do with it really.
jerryatricjanner":2s8v5d86 said:
Agreed. Also the legacy of debt can be blamed on the previous regime.
What we need is for Hourihane to stay fit and play in every game and either for Barnsley to be promoted while he's with them or for Barnsley to sell him.
I would hazard a guess that Sheridan's valuation of Hourihane was taken out of context and reported in a bad light.
