WMN interview with James Brent (23rd November) | Page 9 | PASOTI
  • This site is sponsored by Lang & Potter.

WMN interview with James Brent (23rd November)

Biggs

Administrator
Staff member
✅ Evergreen
🎫 S.T. Donor 🎫
✨Pasoti Donor✨
🌟Sparksy Mural🌟
Feb 14, 2010
12,821
6,421
Plymouth/London
Also, London is made up of millions of immigrants, people from other parts of the UK, temporary workers and high flying career types who aren't interested in football. To compare it to proud provincial cities and regions like Newcastle, Norwich, Liverpool and (we'd like to think) Plymouth/Devon and Cornwall isn't fair. There's far more of a sense of pride and excitement in these places when things are going well with the football clubs.

The city of Nottingham has won twice as many European Cups as London, remember.
 
Oct 24, 2010
4,594
10
I believe Plymouth is a football city, at least as much a football city as Southampton, Portsmouth, Brighton, Cardiff, Norwich, Swansea etc. and as Biggs alluded to demographics are very relevant.
 

Biggs

Administrator
Staff member
✅ Evergreen
🎫 S.T. Donor 🎫
✨Pasoti Donor✨
🌟Sparksy Mural🌟
Feb 14, 2010
12,821
6,421
Plymouth/London
And of course, prior to 2007, Hull and Plymouth were the two biggest cities never to have hosted top flight football.
 

IJN

Site Owner
Nov 29, 2012
9,700
24,006
Graham Clark":1ascmxhk said:
I have read the suggested comparatives with interest. Very few have mentioned the most obvious and substantive comparative which is Hull City. Plymouth is often described as a 'northern city on the south coast'. Some of the parallels between Hull and Plymouth are most interesting apart from the obvious of them both sharing a waterside and dockland setting.

Hull's population is just under 250,000. Plymouth is just over. Both cities are the main regional centre in their respective counties of West Riding and Devon. Both have unitary responsibility separate from the county they are within.

The nearest Football League teams in Yorkshire to Hull are Doncaster and York, both around 45 miles from Hull - about the same distance Plymouth is from Exeter. (Scunthorpe is nearer to Hull but across the Humber and geographically very separate). The combined catchment of the East and West Riding of Yorkshire is around 2.2m. Devon, Cornwall and Plymouth is just less than 2m. Both cities have indoor arenas that can accommodate around 4,000 people but the Hull Arena has a full size ice rink and ice hockey team.

The KC Stadium was built with public money, by the Council, at the same time (approximately) as Phase 1 was complete in 2002. Both Councils own their respective stadiums. The KC also has a major sport and recreation centre alongside it and is set in a parkland setting very much like Home Park. The capacity of the KC is just over 25,000 with two tiers on three sides and a third tier on the West Stand. The stadium is of course shared with rugby.

During the two years in the Championship prior to their promotion into the Premiership their attendances were averaging 18,000. In their first year in the Premiership they were 24,000 although they have slipped a little this season.

For discussion purposes it would appear that by using the strikingly similar parallel of Hull City, the needs of Argyle could be met with a sub 20,000 capacity stadium but a sustained stay in the Premiership would demand an additional capacity of around 5,000. Perhaps this should be borne in mind when the club discuss its grandstand plans with the Council. It would appear imperative that there should be no impediment to the ability to increase the capacity of the stadium by at least 5,000 in the future.

Graham, we've all heard the rumours about PCC funding the Grandstand, have you heard any more.

The silence is deafening and if it isn't going to happen and with the apparent demise of the HHP scheme, I'm edging towards worry again.

I do hope the council isn't going to shaft us. :facepalm:
 

IJN

Site Owner
Nov 29, 2012
9,700
24,006
Zactly what I'm thinking.

I have a baaaaad feeling about this.
 
Jun 16, 2006
879
0
The announcement in October was covered by the death of HHP as a whole project and new stand first with "partner" to be confirmed.

The "partner" is probably feeling a bit twitchy until next May at least.
 
Feb 21, 2008
8,616
0
30
Plymouth
I'd be far more worried (from the point of view of the club's security) if the council reneged on the balloon payment loan more so than if they decided they weren't going to build a grandstand.

Quite bluntly the way I see it is we've managed 60 odd years with the battered old Mayflower so another 3/4 until the next developer comes along wouldn't be the end of the world. What could be the end of the world is if the club can't make the balloon payment. If that was the case, we could be heading back into admin.

I'd feel a lot more secure with the pressing debt cleared and the stand unbuilt than I would vice-versa. Despite whatever talk may have been said about the stand securing unbudgeted income, it seems quite clear now that the stand will not be the salvation of the club simply because it most certainly won't be built in time to secure the balloon payment even if the builders moved in tomorrow.

Therefore, if we can reasonably establish that debt repayment/club salvation is an entirely different thing to grandstand redevelopment then it comes down to a question of which would you be most worried about not happening? I'd probably take number 2 not happening if it ensured number one happened.


Just food for thought.
 
Oct 24, 2010
4,594
10
I agree the balloon payment is a far more pressing issue. The beauty of the stand now is that capacity can easily and economically be increased to 20,000
 

Tugboat

Cream First
🇰🇪 Welicar Donor
✅ Evergreen
✨Pasoti Donor✨
🌟Sparksy Mural🌟
Feb 24, 2007
18,870
5,606
Anyone care to briefly summarise where we stand today reference the ground development?

My brain just won't engage long enough to read through the 11 previous pages!
 
Jun 16, 2006
879
0
GreenSam":2jwmnmpj said:
I'd be far more worried (from the point of view of the club's security) if the council reneged on the balloon payment loan more so than if they decided they weren't going to build a grandstand.

Quite bluntly the way I see it is we've managed 60 odd years with the battered old Mayflower so another 3/4 until the next developer comes along wouldn't be the end of the world. What could be the end of the world is if the club can't make the balloon payment. If that was the case, we could be heading back into admin.

I'd feel a lot more secure with the pressing debt cleared and the stand unbuilt than I would vice-versa. Despite whatever talk may have been said about the stand securing unbudgeted income, it seems quite clear now that the stand will not be the salvation of the club simply because it most certainly won't be built in time to secure the balloon payment even if the builders moved in tomorrow.

Therefore, if we can reasonably establish that debt repayment/club salvation is an entirely different thing to grandstand redevelopment then it comes down to a question of which would you be most worried about not happening? I'd probably take number 2 not happening if it ensured number one happened.


Just food for thought.

Very good point Sam.

The club may end up having to ask PCC for a larger loan if the creditors don't take up the 50% option. Martyn Starnes' talk of struggling to contact the creditors at the Board Q&A didn't sound encouraging a month after the loan was announced, given that JB's team had the 300+(IIRC) creditors to the CVA signed up in under a week.