Page 7 of 10

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 13:59 01 Aug 2011
by cheshiregreen
On-line link to story in OP

But The Herald has learned that a deal unrelated to the club must be completed to generate the £5million-plus needed for the takeover.

Mr Heaney's lawyers have written to administrators saying completion of that is "imminent".

But the figures at the centre of the takeover have already taken steps towards extending their deadline, in case that should become necessary.

The Herald understands Mr Heaney is working on a lucrative deal linked to an expanding development firm.

Lead administrator Brendan Guilfoyle admitted: "We're told there is a deal he's completing at the moment that requires completion to complete our deal."

But he stressed: "Nothing he says causes me any concern.

"We continue to look him in the eyes and we continue to ask him whether he'll complete.

"He is quite calm about it so we are just pushing forward. All I'm told is there is an enabling deal still to complete; he's got something coming to the table which enables him to move on to this."

Mr Heaney's solicitors have confirmed in writing that alternative funding avenues remain open, Mr Ridsdale added.

"He's got a deal going on that is nothing to do with Argyle and we've been given assurances it should be completed in a week or so," he said. "That's how he'd prefer to fund it but, if not, he has other routes to which he can fund to the level required.

"In all the conversations we've had, we've had no indication that the preferred funding route is the only funding route.

"I'm relaxed about it. You don't get to this stage, put in all this work and then not complete."

The council has strict guidelines on what is allowed to be developed in Central Park.

The Herald revealed in March how Mr Heaney was in talks with cinema operator Cineworld, which will not comment.

He was previously considering student accommodation, since ruled out, but is now exploring potential catering opportunities.

Mr Heaney has been unavailable for comment, but both Mr Ridsdale and Mr Guilfoyle are confident the takeover will be completed by the end of the month.

A sale and purchase agreement giving Bishop International exclusivity with administrators expires on August 12 – but contains a clause allowing all parties to extend the deadline if completion is close.

As part of the deal the company, whose owners are concealed behind nominees, must complete a deal over secured £2.1million debts with mortgage lender Lombard.

They will then give Mr Ridsdale enough cash to settle Argyle's £3.2million football creditor debts and cover this season's predicted shortfall of around £1million.

Football League regulations ban financial interests in more than one club – and the governing body has the power to block any takeover that breaches them.

But Mr Ridsdale added: "It will be up to me, as chairman, how I manage the club with that money.

"[Bishop International Limited] won't have financial influence because they can't dictate how that money is used."

Meanwhile, Devon entrepreneur James Brent was due for a third 'Rescue Plan' meeting with supporters' groups today.

The package has been launched amid fears failure to complete the current bid could drive the Pilgrims out of business.

Mr Guilfoyle has already provided financial information to the group in case help is needed.

But he said: "We told the fans group that – if it's a rescue bid and if the current preferred bidder doesn't complete – they have to be ready with funding."



Oh joy! :roll:

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 14:17 01 Aug 2011
by USAGreen
cheshiregreen wrote: On-line link to story in OP

But The Herald has learned that a deal unrelated to the club must be completed to generate the £5million-plus needed for the takeover.

Mr Heaney's lawyers have written to administrators saying completion of that is "imminent".

But the figures at the centre of the takeover have already taken steps towards extending their deadline, in case that should become necessary.

The Herald understands Mr Heaney is working on a lucrative deal linked to an expanding development firm.

Lead administrator Brendan Guilfoyle admitted: "We're told there is a deal he's completing at the moment that requires completion to complete our deal."

But he stressed: "Nothing he says causes me any concern.

"We continue to look him in the eyes and we continue to ask him whether he'll complete.

"He is quite calm about it so we are just pushing forward. All I'm told is there is an enabling deal still to complete; he's got something coming to the table which enables him to move on to this."

Mr Heaney's solicitors have confirmed in writing that alternative funding avenues remain open, Mr Ridsdale added.

"He's got a deal going on that is nothing to do with Argyle and we've been given assurances it should be completed in a week or so," he said. "That's how he'd prefer to fund it but, if not, he has other routes to which he can fund to the level required.


"In all the conversations we've had, we've had no indication that the preferred funding route is the only funding route.

"I'm relaxed about it. You don't get to this stage, put in all this work and then not complete."

The council has strict guidelines on what is allowed to be developed in Central Park.

The Herald revealed in March how Mr Heaney was in talks with cinema operator Cineworld, which will not comment.

He was previously considering student accommodation, since ruled out, but is now exploring potential catering opportunities.

Mr Heaney has been unavailable for comment, but both Mr Ridsdale and Mr Guilfoyle are confident the takeover will be completed by the end of the month.

A sale and purchase agreement giving Bishop International exclusivity with administrators expires on August 12 – but contains a clause allowing all parties to extend the deadline if completion is close.

As part of the deal the company, whose owners are concealed behind nominees, must complete a deal over secured £2.1million debts with mortgage lender Lombard.

They will then give Mr Ridsdale enough cash to settle Argyle's £3.2million football creditor debts and cover this season's predicted shortfall of around £1million.

Football League regulations ban financial interests in more than one club – and the governing body has the power to block any takeover that breaches them.

But Mr Ridsdale added: "It will be up to me, as chairman, how I manage the club with that money.

"[Bishop International Limited] won't have financial influence because they can't dictate how that money is used."

Meanwhile, Devon entrepreneur James Brent was due for a third 'Rescue Plan' meeting with supporters' groups today.

The package has been launched amid fears failure to complete the current bid could drive the Pilgrims out of business.

Mr Guilfoyle has already provided financial information to the group in case help is needed.

But he said: "We told the fans group that – if it's a rescue bid and if the current preferred bidder doesn't complete – they have to be ready with funding."



So then why can't these "other" funds be put in place, say several weeks ago when this whole charade started? Where's the FL in all of this?

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 14:18 01 Aug 2011
by PAFC+
'completion of that is imminent' ...oh great, THAT frickin word again! Argyle's version of 'dreckly'

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 14:18 01 Aug 2011
by Paul_Roberts
Mr Heaney's lawyers have written to administrators saying completion of that is "imminent".


That should be our new club motto.

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 14:19 01 Aug 2011
by bandwagon
cheshiregreen wrote: On-line link to story in OP

But The Herald has learned that a deal unrelated to the club must be completed to generate the £5million-plus needed for the takeover.

Mr Heaney's lawyers have written to administrators saying completion of that is "imminent".

But the figures at the centre of the takeover have already taken steps towards extending their deadline, in case that should become necessary.

The Herald understands Mr Heaney is working on a lucrative deal linked to an expanding development firm.

Lead administrator Brendan Guilfoyle admitted: "We're told there is a deal he's completing at the moment that requires completion to complete our deal."

But he stressed: "Nothing he says causes me any concern.

"We continue to look him in the eyes and we continue to ask him whether he'll complete.

"He is quite calm about it so we are just pushing forward. All I'm told is there is an enabling deal still to complete; he's got something coming to the table which enables him to move on to this."

Mr Heaney's solicitors have confirmed in writing that alternative funding avenues remain open, Mr Ridsdale added.

"He's got a deal going on that is nothing to do with Argyle and we've been given assurances it should be completed in a week or so," he said. "That's how he'd prefer to fund it but, if not, he has other routes to which he can fund to the level required.

"In all the conversations we've had, we've had no indication that the preferred funding route is the only funding route.

"I'm relaxed about it. You don't get to this stage, put in all this work and then not complete."

The council has strict guidelines on what is allowed to be developed in Central Park.

The Herald revealed in March how Mr Heaney was in talks with cinema operator Cineworld, which will not comment.

He was previously considering student accommodation, since ruled out, but is now exploring potential catering opportunities.

Mr Heaney has been unavailable for comment, but both Mr Ridsdale and Mr Guilfoyle are confident the takeover will be completed by the end of the month.

A sale and purchase agreement giving Bishop International exclusivity with administrators expires on August 12 – but contains a clause allowing all parties to extend the deadline if completion is close.

As part of the deal the company, whose owners are concealed behind nominees, must complete a deal over secured £2.1million debts with mortgage lender Lombard.

They will then give Mr Ridsdale enough cash to settle Argyle's £3.2million football creditor debts and cover this season's predicted shortfall of around £1million.

Football League regulations ban financial interests in more than one club – and the governing body has the power to block any takeover that breaches them.

But Mr Ridsdale added: "It will be up to me, as chairman, how I manage the club with that money.

"[Bishop International Limited] won't have financial influence because they can't dictate how that money is used."

Meanwhile, Devon entrepreneur James Brent was due for a third 'Rescue Plan' meeting with supporters' groups today.

The package has been launched amid fears failure to complete the current bid could drive the Pilgrims out of business.

Mr Guilfoyle has already provided financial information to the group in case help is needed.

But he said: "We told the fans group that – if it's a rescue bid and if the current preferred bidder doesn't complete – they have to be ready with funding."



Oh joy! :roll:


Total and utter farce - this won't end well I fear!!

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 14:23 01 Aug 2011
by LSGreen
X Isle wrote:
Hattrick13 wrote: Heaney definitely doesnt have the money, i
Semantics LS, he's talking about Abe and that's pretty much open knowledge now as you well know. When up against a wall don't address the issue, pick at the words used, that's the first law of a weak debating position.

I have a question for you though. What, with every lapsed payment, weasle excuse and slipped deadline, is giving you the blind faith that this deal WILL happen?.

Genuinely interested to know because it flies in the face of observable developments.


X Isle - Now you're working under the assumption that I have faith this deal will happen, seems like you're trying to start a debate wherever possible.

I personally do not have enough knowledge of concrete facts to know whats likely to occur over the coming weeks (months?) and also I wouldn't even dare try and second-guess the unique administration process currently on-going at Home Park.

I don't think the current PB's approach to purchasing the club is very respectable, but thats not uncommon place in the murky world of business and it also doesn't mean the purchase won't happen.

And as a final moot point, not trying to defend anyone here but I feel Ridsdale is being given a bit of a rough ride being chucked in with Heaney and Guilfoyle, he's not responsible for locating funds or enforcing that deadlines for funds are met. Granted he's probably not squeaky clean but i've not read anything thus far to suggest major foul play on his part.

(Before this post gets ripped to pieces just like to re-emphasise i'm not clued up on all the shennanigans going on but thought it would be rude not to reply to a post directed at me)

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 14:31 01 Aug 2011
by oggyale
Are the Football League aware of this new development regarding Heaney and co,as they are due to give their ''yes,or no'' verdict sometime this week,or will that be delayed also..

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 14:39 01 Aug 2011
by richy2704
oggyale wrote: Are the Football League aware of this new development regarding Heaney and co,as they are due to give their ''yes,or no'' verdict sometime this week,or will that be delayed also..


They will make there decision imminently. :oops:

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 14:41 01 Aug 2011
by The Nightfly
John Petrie wrote:
But he said: "We told the fans group that – if it's a rescue bid and if the current preferred bidder doesn't complete – they have to be ready with funding."



I assume that means that Heaney has had to provide funding whilst he gets the cash together to complete the deal.

If not, why not?

If not, why should any other bidder have to provide Mr. Guilfoyle with funding?

It would certainly be good for the press to ask these questions, and put the answers in the public domain even if the answer is 'no comment'.


Interesting that.

Looks as though their PB gets weeks, months, endless extensions in order to get his still invisible ducks in a row and safely delivered. Whereas Guilfoyle will demand that the alternative team gets its cash together and cleared in 24 hours flat. "One rule for one......"

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 14:58 01 Aug 2011
by northroadwest1
LSGreen wrote:
X Isle wrote:
Hattrick13 wrote: Heaney definitely doesnt have the money, i
Semantics LS, he's talking about Abe and that's pretty much open knowledge now as you well know. When up against a wall don't address the issue, pick at the words used, that's the first law of a weak debating position.

I have a question for you though. What, with every lapsed payment, weasle excuse and slipped deadline, is giving you the blind faith that this deal WILL happen?.

Genuinely interested to know because it flies in the face of observable developments.


X Isle - Now you're working under the assumption that I have faith this deal will happen, seems like you're trying to start a debate wherever possible.

I personally do not have enough knowledge of concrete facts to know whats likely to occur over the coming weeks (months?) and also I wouldn't even dare try and second-guess the unique administration process currently on-going at Home Park.

I don't think the current PB's approach to purchasing the club is very respectable, but thats not uncommon place in the murky world of business and it also doesn't mean the purchase won't happen.

And as a final moot point, not trying to defend anyone here but I feel Ridsdale is being given a bit of a rough ride being chucked in with Heaney and Guilfoyle, he's not responsible for locating funds or enforcing that deadlines for funds are met. Granted he's probably not squeaky clean but i've not read anything thus far to suggest major foul play on his part.

(Before this post gets ripped to pieces just like to re-emphasise i'm not clued up on all the shennanigans going on but thought it would be rude not to reply to a post directed at me)



AAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!! its like banging my head against a wall. RIDDLER APPOINTED BRENDA!!!!!!!!!!

why? did they meet on a walking holiday? no, because this has all been orchestrated from day 1

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 15:08 01 Aug 2011
by LSGreen
Ok so Ridsdale appointed Guilfoyle, I accept that but that doesn't take away from the point that it's not Ridsdales responsibility to provide the money (apart from his pound) or enforce the deadlines for the payments.

As for this all being orchestrated again I don't know if it has been or not but didn't Ridsdale say at the London meeting his personal preferred bidder was Brent, which would (if he was telling the truth) blow that theory out the water?

It's become increasingly difficult on this site to accurately distinguish concrete facts from opinion disguised as facts.

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 15:12 01 Aug 2011
by X Isle
FordGreen wrote: There's never a handbag smiley available when you need it, is there? :lol:


My thoughts entirely.........

Image

"oooooOOOOOOooooh"

Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!

Posted: 15:16 01 Aug 2011
by X Isle
.........oh, and genuine thanks LS for the reply earlier. My bad, I though you were speaking with confidence on the completion.

No-one can have much confidence the deal will be completed beyond the dellusional individuals involved. I mean if you asked Heaney if he was the Queen he'd reply "that's are you the queen of England your majesty" :roll:.