Hi Ian / J V and the rest

JV has a point about the Trust being independent. I saw the reason for Chris leaving the chair post was because he was too close to the new owner to be effective as a questioning voice.

We have been saved for that we are all truly thankful, but unlike the 'jump, how high' comment I disagree.

The trust can and should raise questions (when necessary), they should be a link between the common fan and the owners, after all we learnt what Argyle mean to so many people and so many people have also done their bit to save our club.

I definitely don't have an issue with a meeting tomorrow between the trust and JB, in fact its vital that such meetings take place. JB needs fans to get behind the club as much as possible and the people like Ian and co are just the type of fan that can galvanise our support, learn and understand how we can actively support our club.

JV is right to use this thread to air his fear about how the trust will function, that is a big part of what these boards are all about after all. But at the same time I feel we will all benefit from such a meeting.

Just my musings, ignore as you see fit.

Apart from the first paragraph that's a decent post.

To try and claim in stood down because I was too close to James Brent is a joke.

Firstly I have clearly set out why I stood down. Don't remember that reason anywhere in my post?

Secondly if you knew the pressure that the likes myself/Ian and others had put on JB throughout the process you would realise what a ridiculous comment that is.

James Brent is now the owner of Argyle and should be scrutinised like anyone else. This meeting offers us the chance to look at how to effectively do that in the short term prior to the Club stabilising.

Chris

Will you be at the meeting Chris?

Can't quite make out if you will be or not in your original post. Just wondered if you will still be involved in this despite stepping down from the trust.

In attendance will be the core members of the CP committee. Given that I have now stepped down from the Trust, Gareth Nicholson will be there tomorrow as Warren was unavailable.

Looking forward to seeing what this new role JB has in mind for you.

Hope your enjoying a less stressful week! (with Argyle related things anyway)

Why is there such an objection to the meeting from some individuals...

JB wants to discuss the short term policies with the people that got his bid re-started, as Ian and Chris have stated it's to discuss short term measures whilst the Trust is restructuring after some big departures...

I suspect the Trust just needs some help from "the old crowd" in it's transition period and then it will act independantly in the longer term which is why there will be both representation from the CP and the Trust...

It also gives both the CP and Trust another chance to heap further praise and gratitude upon Mr James Brent

Hi Ian / J V and the rest

JV has a point about the Trust being independent. I saw the reason for Chris leaving the chair post was because he was too close to the new owner to be effective as a questioning voice.

We have been saved for that we are all truly thankful, but unlike the 'jump, how high' comment I disagree.

The trust can and should raise questions (when necessary), they should be a link between the common fan and the owners, after all we learnt what Argyle mean to so many people and so many people have also done their bit to save our club.

I definitely don't have an issue with a meeting tomorrow between the trust and JB, in fact its vital that such meetings take place. JB needs fans to get behind the club as much as possible and the people like Ian and co are just the type of fan that can galvanise our support, learn and understand how we can actively support our club.

JV is right to use this thread to air his fear about how the trust will function, that is a big part of what these boards are all about after all. But at the same time I feel we will all benefit from such a meeting.

Just my musings, ignore as you see fit.

Apart from the first paragraph that's a decent post.

To try and claim in stood down because I was too close to James Brent is a joke.

Firstly I have clearly set out why I stood down. Don't remember that reason anywhere in my post?

Secondly if you knew the pressure that the likes myself/Ian and others had put on JB throughout the process you would realise what a ridiculous comment that is.

James Brent is now the owner of Argyle and should be scrutinised like anyone else. This meeting offers us the chance to look at how to effectively do that in the short term prior to the Club stabilising.

Chris

Fair does my friend, I saw it wrong and will hold my hand up. I never mean to cause offense. You are right, most of us don't know what you did, we can only hazard guesses. What we do know is that what ever it was you were doing was bloody effective and for that I am grateful.

[Mark Pedlar]

I think we're missing the real point of debate here. In the short-term there is nothing wrong with this meeting - in fact, we should all be thankful that JB is continiuing to be willing to meet our representatives in whatever form.

The debate now needs to focus on how we continue to engage with JB and what form that should take. The who can wait until we've established the other points. Anyway, I'm not sure any real Argyle fans would begrudge Ian or Chris or the other Ian or anyone else on the CPs a chance to meet and begin the process of going to the next stage of fans - they've done rather well so far haven't they?

Well said Mark.

I don't know what certain others are banging on about.

And after the meeting we will no doubt know a little more about the immediate future for the club. Enjoy the lunch!

I see no problem in this - the people involved helped JB, he has said that himself, I feel this is a good move - it's a business JB has no real knowledge of and he will be interacting (and no doubt gleening information and ideas) from the basic people of the business, the customers, he is at ease with these people, he knows them and no doubt the lunch is a small thank you as well for their assistance when he needed it from them (well deserved in my opinion)

(edited to add - sorry for calling you basic bheys )

New owner engages directly with supporters less than a week after the takeover has been rubber stamped. I fail to see how anyone can see this as anything but positive

Zackly. At least these fellas are doers as they have proved. And if JB wants to treat them to a cost price lunch why shouldn't he? That's the least they deserve after the huge amount of time and effort they have put in on behalf of thousands of supporters.

Well said Mark.

I don't know what certain others are banging on about.

Well it seems to me that a few do not realise that the fight is over and are looking for problems that simply do not exist, fuurther more if folk wish to have more of a say then surly they should join the trust first and then try to get elected or is that a to much simplistic view.

New owner engages directly with supporters less than a week after the takeover has been rubber stamped. I fail to see how anyone can see this as anything but positive

What he said.

Imagine this happening under previous regimes? No, me neither.

Reading between the lines as we eare encouraged to do, seems to me a JB sponsored lunch as a thank you to the CPers. However, by calling it a meeting, avoids tax issues, like "benefits in kind".

Not sure anyone could deny someone else a free lunch.