JB/PCC

[Ade the green]

I think yet again we find the future of the football club at a watershed. I wrote as much almost two years ago to the day.

The positives are that two years on we have seen the football club move towards a sustainable financial position with losses falling and debt due for repayment (outside the loans made by Directors) becoming more manageable, particularly, with the PCC loan to reduce the exposure of the balloon payment due in October 2016.

On the field the Board and the Chairman in particular, has fully backed the manager in the assembly of a squad capable of promotion despite the disappointment of the last two results. Attending matches at Home Park has become more joyous as the calibre of player and quality of play has reached levels unseen in the last five seasons or so.

So why the watershed? As ever the sustainable future of the club is inextricably linked to generate additional off field revenue. Quite simply we have a grandstand and facilities that are not fit for purpose. Refurbishment, with the excessive abnormal of dealing with potential asbestos together with the expensive requirements of meeting the Green Guide is not an option.

There are only two ways to fund the grandstand either as part of an overall externally funded leisure development or an arrangement whereby the stadium owner, PCC fund the build, funded by a higher rent, RPI linked, that would enable a better return on investment than the long term interest rates now on offer and likely to be in the future.

An externally funded leisure development in what the commercial market may perceive as a secondary location was always going to be vulnerable to better locationally placed commercial schemes and so it has proved with not only with the long planned Bretonside development (which was part of the Council's Core Strategy going back several years) but also other locations such as RWY, Sutton Harbour and Millbay. The chances of such a scheme funding a £8-10m grandstand continue to recede as the City tries to combat an uncertain commercial climate. The uncertainty and reluctance to invest will increase as Bretonside progresses towards implementation. That is why we are at a new watershed.

A couple of months ago discussions were progressing with the Council with a view to the Executive and Members of the ruling group supporting the principle at least of PCC funding a grandstand with the club paying a substantially enhanced rent to fund it. It would have enabled a 365 day operation of corporate, banqueting and conference facilities that would have provided significant income for the club to create a sustainable financial future and the ability to enhance the team on the pitch. It is hugely regrettable that whatever reason negotiations were unable to be progressed. With no formal comment from either side we can only speculate overthe reasons why. Whatever, it is imperative that these talks can resume and that bridges can be built. The Council have been exceptional in their continued support for the football club and the ruling Labour Group deserve great credit for the foresight in trying to see a way forward. It will probably need concessions, including the achievable and appropriate scale of development on HHP, and the ability to extend the stadium on a less restricted basis in the future if talks can restart. The imperative must be the beneficial and sustainable future of the football club.

Finally, a few connected comments on what has been said on this thread. I remain surprised this debate remains on the 'Rumours' board given the personal knowledge of some who have posted on here. The 'resignation' rumour was circulating from authoritative sources weeks ago. That this allegedly has been added to and verified by a current Board member is more than just unfortunate and unhelpful. Finally, the Chris Webb point has some legitimacy. There has been no clarity as to whether his views expressed in his Herald column or on Twitter are his own views or those of the football club given his President's role Without such clarification it is understandable that Council Members and Officers could not see or understand any disassociation. It has not been helpful.

Finally, let's make it clear that James Brent HAS lent the football club substantial sums from within his Group of companies. At the end of the day it is his and his wife's personal money as Directors of the Holding Cpmany and LLP. I have no idea whether any interest is attributable to these loans, perhaps only a Board member would know, but such inter company loans attract a lot of HMRC interest to ensure it is not a method of avoiding tax and so applying a commercial rate to anyloan is entirely appropriate in accounting terms.

Thank you Graham for the clearest answer to an uncomfortable truth to many and for explaining the issues without needing to get personal.

 

[Ceebs]

It appears we are reliant on PCC coming to the rescue again. However, I would hope this would have certain conditions attached as on the face of it a PCC funded grandstand would remove all obligation from JB to contribute towards it. He would then have HHP to do with as he wished. If this were to come to pass then the decision to allow HHP to be separated from the club could potentially prove to have been a very bad one.

The existing agreement to give Argyle 50% of the uplift in land value post HHP development would surely make any development unlikely. In an ideal world I would like to see Pafc or PCC take ownership of this land too.

 

[Womble]

An excellent post Graham. From what i understand we seem to have reached the following points:

Brent has stabalised the club. We are better on the pitch and stable(ish) at board level. For that he deserves much crefit.

However now we are stable he seems totally unable to take us forward and upgrade the infrastructure as required. For this he has received a lot of deserved critisism.

These are worrying times now - where can the club possibly go from here?

 

[Stuart_C]

It appears we are reliant on PCC coming to the rescue again. However, I would hope this would have certain conditions attached as on the face of it a PCC funded grandstand would remove all obligation from JB to contribute towards it. He would then have HHP to do with as he wished. If this were to come to pass then the decision to allow HHP to be separated from the club could potentially prove to have been a very bad one.

The existing agreement to give Argyle 50% of the uplift in land value post HHP development would surely make any development unlikely. In an ideal world I would like to see Pafc or PCC take ownership of this land too.

Very good point especially if the new lease transferring the 1.22 acres from PCC owned PAFC leased land to JB has actually been implemented.

The council passed the papers in Sept 2013 but I have never seen confirmation that new lease is in place and Graham Clark referred to the 2011 lease in a comment only a couple of weeks ago so hopefully not.

 

[Quintrell Green]

An excellent post Graham. From what i understand we seem to have reached the following points:

Brent has stabalised the club. We are better on the pitch and stable(ish) at board level. For that he deserves much crefit.

However now we are stable he seems totally unable to take us forward and upgrade the infrastructure as required. For this he has received a lot of deserved critisism.

These are worrying times now - where can the club possibly go from here?

You cannot really criticise the Chairman for the state of Plymouth's secondary commercial property market, surely?

It is, what it is, sadly.

 

[Stuart_C]

JB has lent a couple of million and zero rate of interest, he also charges nothing for his time as the Chair of RD&E and I would imagine the same for the Uni. Why compare JB to the avaricious supermarket chain who will shaft anyone at the drop of a hat.

£40-45K /annum for last two years for part time post according to RD&E Trust accounts. Pages 69 and 70 of links below if you want to check.

http://www.rdehospital.nhs.uk/docs/trust/documents/Annual report 201314 FINAL PUBLISHED.pdf
http://www.rdehospital.nhs.uk/docs/...port quality report v 190613 2.45pm FINAL.pdf

 

[IJN]

I stand corrected then. I know he hasn't charged for other posts he has held and holds.

Goes to show, Pasoti 'facts' are always what they appear to be Stu.

 

[chronicgreen]

Nice 'work' if you can get it

 

[Womble]

An excellent post Graham. From what i understand we seem to have reached the following points:

Brent has stabalised the club. We are better on the pitch and stable(ish) at board level. For that he deserves much crefit.

However now we are stable he seems totally unable to take us forward and upgrade the infrastructure as required. For this he has received a lot of deserved critisism.

These are worrying times now - where can the club possibly go from here?

You cannot really criticise the Chairman for the state of Plymouth's secondary commercial property market, surely?

It is, what it is, sadly.

I agree entirely QG. Not great times for a development. Any yet British Land have firm plans for Bretonside. We are where we are because the original HHP plan was not good enough.

My hope for the way forward is that the club and council can come to an arrangement meaning the council fund any new stand, with the club paying a proportionately increased rent for full tenency of the facilities. For this to happen tho the club will probably need to back down a little from its negotiating position, especially after recent critisism of the council by the club.

Note - the above represents my opinion only. It is not intended to come over as "fact".

 

[IJN]

I think any of us that can talk to the people concerned need to stress to both parties how important it is that they sit down and continue to talk.

Argyle needs PCC and Plymouth certainly needs Argyle.

 

[Quintrell Green]

Argyle was even mentioned in a question on University Challenge on Weds evening as a link to the city of Plymouth.

Of course Plymouth needs Argyle, it has the same symbiotic relationship as beer to a public house!

 

[ming the merciless]

I think any of us that can talk to the people concerned need to stress to both parties how important it is that they sit down and continue to talk.

Argyle needs PCC and Plymouth certainly needs Argyle.

If they are indeed talking, as your post suggests. Why is JB using the local paper to appeal to them. Why not just tell them at the next meeting. It doesn't sound like they on the same page at all to me. If as I suspect things have broken down, I just hope that the whole HHP thing gets put to bed and we can just get on with the football.

 

[IJN]

Perhaps they were, then they weren't and now they are again. That would tie in with my use of the word 'continue' wouldn't it?

Like you, all I want to do is talk about football and not all this poo.

 

[The Grumpy Loyal]

Perhaps they were, then they weren't and now they are again. That would tie in with my use of the word 'continue' wouldn't it?

Like you, all I want to do is talk about football and not all this sh1te.

If they are indeed talking then that will be a catastrophe for Argyle.

Be prepared for the absolute minimum 3,800 capacity stand, with the horseshoe being plush in comparison :facepalm:

Can you imagine the outcry in 2002 if someone had forecast that it would be 15 years till a Grandstand was built - and when it was, the capacity would be about 30% SMALLER than the Lyndhurst Stand opposite it?

Beyond disgraceful if Brent is allowed to get away with it.

 

[PL2 3DQ]

The 3,800 capacity for the grandstand was stipulated by the Council.

So what are YOU going to do to stop JB "getting away with it"?