PAFC+
I have no problems about peoples opinions etc....

I was wondering though how you and BT got out of that statement that he was rattled?

It seemed like a perfectly good statement from him but i could not begin to access his state of mind from it...whether he was calm, rattled, happy, sad..... If I attempted to then in my opinion I would be attepting to make something from nothing.

As I said, you and BT are truely remarkable.

I've answered that above. Perhaps you're just remarkable in not seeing what other people see.

Im not sure that you did really.... You gave your insights into his statement but how did you come to the conclusion he was rattled? There was a definite air of putting a few things right as to what Buttivant had said but rattled?? You really are a remarkable person and should think about marketing what you have..... As I am writing this I feel happy with things in my life...did you get that out of this?

This is a serious question that needs a serious answer;

Is there any realistic alternative to the "Irish"/Gibralter/Heaney bid? Yes or no?

If Heaney is involved in the consortium, the Football League will throw out the bid. They are not our saviours.

This is a serious question that needs a serious answer;

Is there any realistic alternative to the "Irish"/Gibralter/Heaney bid? Yes or no?

Not "I prefer so & so" or "Mr X says he'll do this that and the other" but a sensible cash backed bid that doesn't rely on a third party buying the ground or someone else saying they might "write off" part of what they are owed or might in the future, get involved in some way.

If there is no other offer, I suggest everyone stops f***ing moaning and starts to accept the situation as it is.

Which is that the new owners have no wish to be involved in running the football club. From that the next question is "who can run the football club?" The obvious answer to that is "the guy who's running it now"

Are there any alternatives to the guy who's running it now? Not really as no one else seems to have put their name forward, the fans groups are so fragmented and openly hostile to the new owners, that it's extremely unlikely they could or would be involved, and the only public utterances from previous custodians of the club (not the tainted 7) are as hostile to the new owners as the fans are.


So that leaves us where we are now, which if anyone thinks about it is in not too bad a place.

The club will soon be bought by a group who will clear all the debts that have to be cleared and separate the football side of things from the property side.

So we will have a basically debt free football club in the fourth tier that will have a long term tenancy on the ground they play at (with the likelyhood that said ground will be upgraded. I think this takes us back to where we were before Stapes and Co. got involved-minus the debt to McCauley of course)

Considering the situation 6 months ago, I don't understand why everyone is so wound up about things.

The long term future is looking better as well. If Ridsdale wants to make a profit, he can realistically only do so by selling the club and given that it's only the football club(not the property) that he can sell, it's not impossible that the football club could once again be in the control of locally based people with the best interests of PAFC at heart.

sh1te, now I can sleep at night - it's not really as bad as I thought!!

This is a serious question that needs a serious answer;

Is there any realistic alternative to the ""Irish""/Gibralter/Heaney bid? Yes or no?

If Heaney is involved in the consortium, the Football League will throw out the bid. They are not our saviours.

So what's the alternative? Is there one?

PS I've yet to see anything that would give the FL grounds to throw out the bid. "Someone says Heaney's involved" does not constitute evidence-certainly not evidence of Heaney being involved in running the two clubs. I believe SRG ran a power company, that doesn't mean that every club who bought power off his business was "controlled" by SRG

PAFC+
I have no problems about peoples opinions etc....

I was wondering though how you and BT got out of that statement that he was rattled?

It seemed like a perfectly good statement from him but i could not begin to access his state of mind from it...whether he was calm, rattled, happy, sad..... If I attempted to then in my opinion I would be attepting to make something from nothing.

As I said, you and BT are truely remarkable.

I've answered that above. Perhaps you're just remarkable in not seeing what other people see.

Im not sure that you did really.... You gave your insights into his statement but how did you come to the conclusion he was rattled? There was a definite air of putting a few things right as to what Buttivant had said but rattled?? You really are a remarkable person and should think about marketing what you have..... As I am writing this I feel happy with things in my life...did you get that out of this?

I take it as a compliment that you regard me as remarkable, altough I know that is not how it was intended. For the record I find you quite unremarkable. And yes I'm happy with things in my life too. What any of that has to do with this discussion I have no idea.

In my opinion he is rattled because he has reacted very defensively with a personal attack against Buttivant, using the club's website simply because Buttivant dared to question his role in the process. In my experience such reactions are the sign of someone rattled. I might be wrong. Does it really matter whether I'm right or wrong? It's just my opinion. Do I have to have unquestionable scientific evidence to justify my opinion.

This is a serious question that needs a serious answer;

Is there any realistic alternative to the """Irish"""/Gibralter/Heaney bid? Yes or no?

If Heaney is involved in the consortium, the Football League will throw out the bid. They are not our saviours.

So what's the alternative? Is there one?

PS I've yet to see anything that would give the FL grounds to throw out the bid. "Someone says Heaney's involved" does not constitute evidence-certainly not evidence of Heaney being involved in running the two clubs. I believe SRG ran a power company, that doesn't mean that every club who bought power off his business was "controlled" by SRG

I also don't think the Irish/Gib group want to be our "saviours" The real problem is that no one else does either.

At least they'll keep the club going, improve the ground a bit and create a football club that could be returned to more "local" ownership in the future.

I think Storming has a very valid point. Its not whether there is an alternative buyer available but whether the current bidders are acceptable to the Football League.

Mr Heaney already has one football club, so, if he is the financial clout behind the bid wouldn't that exclude the preferred bidder? As there seems to be no current fall back position for the sale of the club,then liquidation has to be seen as a distinct possibility.

The Football League aren't necessarily known for their intense scrutiny of this type of thing, but a couple of points spring to mind that will surely come up:
If Mr Ridsdale isn't providing the money for him to take over ownership the football club, who is?

If the answer to that is Bishop International, who according to the Herald are an offshore company whose shareholders and directors remain anonymous due to Gibraltarian law, then the only person who's known to be connected to them is the chairman of another football club who claims to be their 'adviser'.

Surely the League would want to find out at least the names of some other shareholders or directors of Bishop International, i.e. some fairly concrete evidence that Kevin Heaney is no more than an 'adviser' to the consortium?

Exactly Drew.

But maybe Heaney is about to sell his stake in Truro? Is that impossible?

Interesting the Herald piece talks of full repayment of football debts, if slowly.

BTW I think grovehill's pragmatic view is important. It is where we are, like it or not.

The Football League aren't necessarily known for their intense scrutiny of this type of thing, but a couple of points spring to mind that will surely come up:
If Mr Ridsdale isn't providing the money for him to take over ownership the football club, who is?

If the answer to that is Bishop International, who according to the Herald are an offshore company whose shareholders and directors remain anonymous due to Gibraltarian law, then the only person who's known to be connected to them is the chairman of another football club who claims to be their 'adviser'.

Surely the League would want to find out at least the names of some other shareholders or directors of Bishop International, i.e. some fairly concrete evidence that Kevin Heaney is no more than an 'adviser' to the consortium?

Could this be the reason why Ridsdale is taking the control of the club, a trick to keep The Football League happy on ownership, putting them off from looking deeper into the real ownership, Has he as stated they (Mr Heaney) could buy the club back in a year time for the same £1. Why?

What will Mr Ridsdale get out of this; He would be well rewarded by them and given a good position on the board.

The football league would ok Ridsdale being owner but reject the deal because they still wouldn't know who is giving him the money to run the club. He has also said, he won't sell the club back for £1.

The Football League aren't necessarily known for their intense scrutiny of this type of thing, but a couple of points spring to mind that will surely come up:
If Mr Ridsdale isn't providing the money for him to take over ownership the football club, who is?

If the answer to that is Bishop International, who according to the Herald are an offshore company whose shareholders and directors remain anonymous due to Gibraltarian law, then the only person who's known to be connected to them is the chairman of another football club who claims to be their 'adviser'.

Surely the League would want to find out at least the names of some other shareholders or directors of Bishop International, i.e. some fairly concrete evidence that Kevin Heaney is no more than an 'adviser' to the consortium?

Could this be the reason why Ridsdale is taking the control of the club, a trick to keep The Football League happy on ownership, putting them off from looking deeper into the real ownership, Has he as stated they (Mr Heaney) could buy the club back in a year time for the same £1. Why?

What will Mr Ridsdale get out of this; He would be well rewarded by them and given a good position on the board.

The football league would ok Ridsdale being owner but reject the deal because they still wouldn't know who is giving him the money to run the club. He has also said, he won't sell the club back for £1.

That could well be the first statement that guy has come out with I believe!!

The Football League aren't necessarily known for their intense scrutiny of this type of thing, but a couple of points spring to mind that will surely come up:
If Mr Ridsdale isn't providing the money for him to take over ownership the football club, who is?

If the answer to that is Bishop International, who according to the Herald are an offshore company whose shareholders and directors remain anonymous due to Gibraltarian law, then the only person who's known to be connected to them is the chairman of another football club who claims to be their 'adviser'.

Surely the League would want to find out at least the names of some other shareholders or directors of Bishop International, i.e. some fairly concrete evidence that Kevin Heaney is no more than an 'adviser' to the consortium?

I think you're right. I've posted a similar argument on page 4 of this thread. But I also opened up the speculation that some of the previous directors could be involved with Bishop International Limted and if this was to be the case would this be acceptable to the league?

I fully understand Grovehill's pragmatism but I think supporters should remain aware that the currently perferred bid had not only limped to its current stage slowly and unconvincingly but also lacks a clarity in terms of its funding source and persons involved. But, for those who want to keep Argyle as is, I can see that the absence of any realistic alternative bid makes the perferred bidder a less bitter pill to swallow than extinction.

A rock and a hard place indeed.

Cactus

PAFC+
I have no problems about peoples opinions etc....

I was wondering though how you and BT got out of that statement that he was rattled?

It seemed like a perfectly good statement from him but i could not begin to access his state of mind from it...whether he was calm, rattled, happy, sad..... If I attempted to then in my opinion I would be attepting to make something from nothing.

As I said, you and BT are truely remarkable.

Done to death Marin(er) and we should leave it and healthily agree we're on the same side with differing viewpoints. I cannot (I know you're thinking, hang on, he said leave it but now he's giving his opinion - you're not the first!) anyway I cannot believe that with all the secrecy around Heaney this week and the stalling of payments that Ridsdale is releasing a statement about a guy who is not even in the running..... for someone so competent at handling the media it seems strange, but I understand you will feel differently.

Time to call a truce and hope all is well in the long run eh?

We all want to be supporting Argyle next year as we always have done. Thats the awful thing about this... Yes we have all disagreed whether Duguid is good or bad at rb, we have argued over fallons value to the team etc.. etc... But this is different, it really is splitting the fans.. Hey BT, truce for now but lets not rule out debating with each other...only good can come out of debating and good is all we want for Argyle hey?