I've posted on other threads why I think Stapleton should go, and don't want to do so again. Some won't agree, fair enough, but it baffles me why anyone should actively want him to stay.
The 'local man' argument is presumably one reason. I too would like a locally based Argyle fan at the helm, or at least on a new board, but why does that have to be Stapleton. Is he really the best there is locally? There are some very capable Argyle supporting businessmen living locally who, whilst not wanting to invest significantly might be prevailed upon to front a new Board. Is the "he did ok at first when he was last chairman", really enough?
It's not as if Stapleton is going to contribute significant finance. We know he is not massively wealthy, and it is believed that the same applies to Ridsdale. So if, as many believe they will, a Stapleton/Ridsdale alliance gain control, they will require backing presumably from non-Argyle supporting newcomers. Stapleton didn't cover himself in glory last time he sought external investors. There is also the fact that a major reason that Stapleton wants to stay is (presumably) to recoup some of his losses, so he starts from a negative position rather than with a clean slate.
So, genuine question, if you actively want Stapleton to stay, please set out your reasons. The one situation in which I might be prepared to accept Stapleton would be if he (once again) fronted a consortium of genuine Argyle supporting investors.
The 'local man' argument is presumably one reason. I too would like a locally based Argyle fan at the helm, or at least on a new board, but why does that have to be Stapleton. Is he really the best there is locally? There are some very capable Argyle supporting businessmen living locally who, whilst not wanting to invest significantly might be prevailed upon to front a new Board. Is the "he did ok at first when he was last chairman", really enough?
It's not as if Stapleton is going to contribute significant finance. We know he is not massively wealthy, and it is believed that the same applies to Ridsdale. So if, as many believe they will, a Stapleton/Ridsdale alliance gain control, they will require backing presumably from non-Argyle supporting newcomers. Stapleton didn't cover himself in glory last time he sought external investors. There is also the fact that a major reason that Stapleton wants to stay is (presumably) to recoup some of his losses, so he starts from a negative position rather than with a clean slate.
So, genuine question, if you actively want Stapleton to stay, please set out your reasons. The one situation in which I might be prepared to accept Stapleton would be if he (once again) fronted a consortium of genuine Argyle supporting investors.