-
This site is sponsored by Lang & Potter.
Frazer Lloyd-Davies":29zgtger said:
He's tidying up the grandstand (which is very welcome) but wasn't that Hallett's money ?
The development of the 'surrounding area' is of limited benefit to the football cub. It will generate profits for Brent personally, but I think that if the Council had played their cards right, some of the profits could have been used to help fund an entirely new grandstand. I think that was the original intention.
I don't think the wider Plymouth public will like the look of these commercial developments once they start getting built near the park- and its only going to undermine the City Centre further. Brent is pretty good at getting the Herald to portray him in a favorable light and is also good at manipulating the Council, who are weak.
Just to be clear- I'm not entirely "anti-Brent". We could certainly have worse. But I do get annoyed when people wont hear a word of criticism about him.
He has his good points and his less good points.
gaspargomez":1tsmj5zd said:
Let's debate those two shall we?
Tidy up??? Explain that comment if you would. When you tidy up your house do you take off the roof take down the walls and remove all the seats then?
'Hallett's Money' - He (The Vice Chairman) has loaned it to PAFC. Would SH be able to do it unless JB saved PAFC five years ago?
Knibbsworth":37qkb4b4 said:
I think you must have a persecution complex!
Where have I called you a liar?
Merely quoting figures from the media does not justify your argument!
Profit is not quoted and we are not privy to that information!
Therefore, I think, one can reasonably call your assumptions conjecture.
gaspargomez":3ix1b085 said:
Oh yes you are. You've made it perfectly obvious on many postings, usually when concerning money and budgets.
That's your opinion and you have every right to voice it but don't make out you're a fair minded poster when it comes to James Brent.
The original poster asks what other people think- we all know what YOU think IJN !
Personally, I'm not totally against Brent (as I have made clear in my post) but I am pointing out why some people are not such a big fan as yourself.
Personally, I'm not totally against Brent (as I have made clear in my post) but I am pointing out why some people are not such a big fan as yourself.
Incidentally Chris Dawson has a wealth close to £2bn, figures on regions rich list was re-evaluated yesterday, I asked him recently why he had never considered part or full ownership of PAFC, sadly he dislikes football ‘if Plymouth (argyle) was a a formula 1 team, it’d be a different matter’ was his riposte
It’s very simple to me.
Year on year progress including play off final, promotion and near play offs again.
Financial stability, culminating in major improvements to infrastructure and the holy grail of grandstand improvement.
Can anyone tell me of the better place they expected us to be at this point?
I see people who complain about JB as the same sort who come out of a ground lamenting that they only won 2-0 and not 3 or 4.
And I remain completely baffled by the people who think match attendance = size of budget.
Year on year progress including play off final, promotion and near play offs again.
Financial stability, culminating in major improvements to infrastructure and the holy grail of grandstand improvement.
Can anyone tell me of the better place they expected us to be at this point?
I see people who complain about JB as the same sort who come out of a ground lamenting that they only won 2-0 and not 3 or 4.
And I remain completely baffled by the people who think match attendance = size of budget.
Whether or not you support James Brent or not the plain fact of the matter is he saved the club when there was no credible alternative. Since then we have improved steadily year on year achieving some real success and done it with a sensible economic strategy. Why football supporters nationally think that clubs should operate on a continual loss/debt basis with all the implications of such a policy is a mind-set that needs changing albeit that's a different debate.
Leaving all that to one side though the abuse Brent (and others) gets is appalling. Typical sadly of the modern keyboard warriors who only equip themselves with the basic non-facts or inaccurate information to suit their own skewed prejudices. Half of them are real cowards and basically not very bright. Sensible qualified criticism is fair - abuse is not.
Leaving all that to one side though the abuse Brent (and others) gets is appalling. Typical sadly of the modern keyboard warriors who only equip themselves with the basic non-facts or inaccurate information to suit their own skewed prejudices. Half of them are real cowards and basically not very bright. Sensible qualified criticism is fair - abuse is not.
