Page 5 of 10

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 12:05 01 Aug 2011
by N.I_Green
FordGreen wrote: :iagree:
PAFC+ wrote: It's a disgrace, pure and simple.

I now want Plan B to become more militant - a rival bid and not a back up plan. I know that would depend on Brent's willingness, but maybe he can see that every day that passes with this charade is destroying what little remains of our club. Enough is enough. We need saving from the Leeds mafia. Step up the pressure and take our club back.

Absolutely! Enough is Enough!!!! :twisted:


+1. Had it with these lying, cheating bar stewards!! :twisted:

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 12:07 01 Aug 2011
by Quinny
Unless we know the exact wording of any proof presented by Heaney, we can't determine whether something is legal or not. The only thing we do know is that it satisfied Brenda. It could well be that any transaction Heaney's bid was based on was more or less certain to complete (but then I've had a house sale fall through a day before contracts were due to be exchanged) and that Brenda was satisfied with the figures being presented; it could be a deliberate miscommunication from the solicitors; or it could be down to a momumentous cock-up on Brenda's part. The fact is we'll never know.

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 12:11 01 Aug 2011
by N.I_Green
Quinny wrote: Unless we know the exact wording of any proof presented by Heaney, we can't determine whether something is legal or not. The only thing we do know is that it satisfied Brenda. It could well be that any transaction Heaney's bid was based on was more or less certain to complete (but then I've had a house sale fall through a day before contracts were due to be exchanged) and that Brenda was satisfied with the figures being presented; it could be a deliberate miscommunication from the solicitors; or it could be down to a momumentous cock-up on Brenda's part. The fact is we'll never know.


I'll admit, i know nothing of these types of things...but is this information something that could be requested under the FoI act? I'll also admit that i'm clutching at straws here..

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 12:14 01 Aug 2011
by Quinny
N.I_Green wrote: I'll admit, i know nothing of these types of things...but is this information something that could be requested under the FoI act? I'll also admit that i'm clutching at straws here..


I thought the FoI Act only covered the public sector? Anyway there are caveats as to what you can and can't request: there would be as much chance of obtaining confidential information from a solicitor as there would be me obtaining your medical records from your local hospital.

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 12:15 01 Aug 2011
by cheshiregreen
Quinny wrote:
N.I_Green wrote: I'll admit, i know nothing of these types of things...but is this information something that could be requested under the FoI act? I'll also admit that i'm clutching at straws here..


I thought the FoI Act only covered the public sector? Anyway there are caveats as to what you can and can't request: there would be as much chance of obtaining confidential information from a solicitor as there would be me obtaining your medical records from your local hospital.



Correct.

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 12:15 01 Aug 2011
by FordGreen
Unfortunately, I believe you are. FOI doesn't cover this sort of stuff. More's the bleddy pity! :mad:

BTW, still not a peep from esmer, marin(er) and grovehill. :whistle:

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 12:33 01 Aug 2011
by Norwich Green
FordGreen wrote: BTW, still not a peep from esmer, marin(er) and grovehill. :whistle:


No, thats odd isnt it as they are are usually on straight away coming to the defence of the PB's, PR's & BG's etc aren't they :whistle:

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 12:37 01 Aug 2011
by TimHarris
Norwich Green wrote:
FordGreen wrote: BTW, still not a peep from esmer, marin(er) and grovehill. :whistle:


No, thats odd isnt it as they are are usually on straight away coming to the defence of the PB's, PR's & BG's etc aren't they :whistle:


I believe that at least one of them might be on a family holiday.

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 12:39 01 Aug 2011
by Norwich Green
TimHarris wrote:
Norwich Green wrote:
FordGreen wrote: BTW, still not a peep from esmer, marin(er) and grovehill. :whistle:


No, thats odd isnt it as they are are usually on straight away coming to the defence of the PB's, PR's & BG's etc aren't they :whistle:


I believe that at least one of them might be on a family holiday.


Would that be a walking holiday by any chance ;)

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 12:46 01 Aug 2011
by Ed_Blackburn
Are there any creditors who are Argyle fans? Can they not petition or extract a copy of the proof of funds. P&A is a business like any other, the self-appointed PCC like quango that self monitors can surely be bypassed with a formal complaint directly to 'The Court' what ever that is?

Is it worth contacting Vince Cable and Ken Clarke preferably in the form of a written question from Oliver Colville MP and Alison Seabeck MP. Perhaps the Trust could organise a template letter highlighting our concerns and perceived grievances with the process, so we can petition our MPs, or the minsters with directly?

This may irk P&A but I think it's become clear that whether this process is legal or not it is jeopardising the survival of Plymouth Argyle FC, could and should have been dealt with better to an extent that people are suggesting a experienced Chartered Accountant of being corrupt.

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 12:48 01 Aug 2011
by marin(er)
Any amount of digging and assumption making is not going to change anything. Whatever way the deal is being funded it is enough to satisfy BG and despite all the hatred and wild accusations aimed at him and Heaney and Ridsdale all we really knows that we have a pb that is progressing toward completing a deal.
Give yourselves a break and get behind the team for saturday

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 12:48 01 Aug 2011
by DuncMcRae
Having just skim-read this thread, the first thought that comes to mind is: this ridiculous deal could well be the end of Argyle. Not only fiddling while Rome burns, but actually written into the contract that they can continue to mess around indefinitely and not talk to anyone else.

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 12:50 01 Aug 2011
by Glynn
Heaney definitely doesnt have the money, i heard that he was due to get some funds in by the 30th June but dont think that happened.

Think the only option going forward would be plan B! There is still plenty of time from what i am led to believe as the club can still be in administration and continue with the 20 man squad but they just dont get the golden share back.

This season was always ever gonna be about steadying the ship and starting again so another 1-2 months whilst plan b took shape would not ruin anything.