And you said the same about you not going because of Heaney!!

Hey, how do you think people feel about x isles posts....and yours come to that?

I said I would think twice about going because of Heaney. I also won't be buying a merchandise etc. However my primary reason for this is that I have no money. If I did I would probably be paying on the day, therefore reserving the opportunity to withdraw my support if the club is not run well. I still hope to attend 8-12 home matches this season.

Rallying against a contingency plan like you are just makes no sense. To give an example...

I recently went caving, a torch amongst other things is a requirement. I packed my favourite torch with the intention of it being the one I was to use. I also had another torch, It wasn't
my favourite as I personally don't think it is as powerful, and it doesn't attach to my head like the other one. However I took it anyway, as a contingency, just in case. I never did need the contingency torch, but there was no harm in taking it.

Why do you think there is any harm in having a contingency bid?

You obviously are certain it won't be needed, yet you still feel sure it would fail and be impracticable anyway, and feel the need to consistently put it down. I ask you what is the harm in trying to have a contingency?

Even if it is needed and does turn out to be impractical(something I doubt), then we haven't lost anything by trying. If the PB falls through(If... I'm not saying it will or won't). Then
without a contingency we have one option... liquidation. With a contingency we at least have something to try before liquidation. The end result might be the same either way, but at least with a contingency there is a chance if the worst should happen.

I can understand someone not feeling that a contingency will be needed. But your stance doesn't make an iota of sense. Why not just ignore it safely in the knowledge that it will never be needed?

Here is the big misconception. I am not anti contingency plan, I am not anti Heaney, I am certainly not anti argyle.

I originally took umbrage to the fact that people were moaning about Heaney making profit. Why the hell shouldnt they? What say do we have on something that isn't ours etc. etc.
I have stuck to my guns throughout, unlike some. And as x isle would say, it's principles...

I actually wish Brent got in there first then there might not have been all this in fighting, he didn't though and here we are.

There are some big short comings with Heaney for sure but there are, in my opinion, with Brent also.

I take particular issue with the ground though and that's it. It's not ours, let them do what needs to be done as long as it saves our club. I don't see it as fair that all this started because of what greedy, short, Ginger Heaney was going to make.... I don't care!! But people who asked that should also ask that about Brent but they don't.

Here's what Brent said (which falls in with Chris Webb's answer to you about their being no development plans)

Through his Akkeron Group, the North Devon-based investor and former Plymouth City Development Company chairman said he was ready to pump enough cash into Argyle to stabilise the club.

Increased use of Home Park for non-football events could provide a cash boost without the immediate need for development, he said, while any "modest profits" would go straight back into the football club.

Source

http://www.thisisplymouth.co.uk/REVEALE ... story.html

This may be a question that only Guilfoyle himself can answer, but here goes.

Did the PB's sign a contract saying they would pay £1 million for the exclusivity agreement and should they drop out (or get rejected) would they not be contractually obliged to fulfil this amount in its entirety?

Don't take offence LT. Tony has a hatred of anything connected to our club so, with your words of support,you are fair game in his eyes.

[Much nonsense has been spouted in this thread, but that one's right up there. Tony Cholwell hates Argyle? You and I both know Tony, Woz, and you and I both know that what you've said here is absolute nonsense, and I'm surprised you posted that. Does you no favours.

Thank you for pointing that out Andy. I meant to type Trust instead of club. Sorry for any offence Tony I have now edited the post.

This thread has hurt my head But it also made up my mind to join the Trust and be amongst other right minded peoples

You were right first time Woz.

TC told me one night that he had warm feeling for Bristol City.

Tony's a Turnip (in more ways than one).

I have been reading some of Joey Barton's apparent Tweets and they have reached a surprisingly high level.

He quotes George Washington in saying ' If the freedom of speech is taken away then the dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter'.

I think Mariner could learn from this quote in view of his prolonged campaign to hush dissenters/critics of the PB's extended apparent acquisition process, lest those anonymous investors walk away from the deal. Everybody is entitled to an opinion and this web-site allows opinions from all quarters not just a propaganda platform for the PB camp.

Should the club be liquidated where does Guilfoyle stand in terms of his fees? Is he ahead of the FC's?

Not quite sure what the assets are, assuming that ST funds are truly ring-fenced. So, liquidation will give creditors a big fat zero or worse (as someone will have to clear up the mess as Capt Mainwaring said of his stint in the Army in 1919).

Hence a contingency plan - to have a better than zero position for the Administrator, should the need arise.

The club isn't going to be liquidated.

The club isn't going to be liquidated.

That's the spirit we need we may have our different views on the current situation, but this club will not die.
Argyle Forevvvvvver

The club isn't going to be liquidated.

That's the spirit we need we may have our different views on the current situation, but this club will not die.
Argyle Forevvvvvver

The club isn't going to be liquidated.

That's the spirit we need we may have our different views on the current situation, but this club will not die.
Argyle Forevvvvvver

I assme legally Brenda is oblidged to maximise return for the secured creditors?

If he can legally get a better return to his company by liquidating us than selling to Brent, we're in deep poo.

I assme legally Brenda is oblidged to maximise return for the secured creditors?

If he can legally get a better return to his company by liquidating us than selling to Brent, we're in deep poo.

If it comes to liquidation, it will mean he got it wrong with the PB's - he'll never work in this industry again, and so it should be!!