Messageboard Home  | Fantasy Football  | Predictions  | Club Info  | About P@SOTI   IJN Payments
End of Season:

It is currently Wed Dec 13, 2017 12:40 pm

All times are UTC




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 128 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 10  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!
PostPosted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 7:02 am 
So at last the real truth behind the Heaney deal is starting to emerge. In the Herald (page 5 - but not yet online) Guilfoyle is on the record as saying,

"We are told that there is a deal he#s completing at the moment that requires completion to complete our deal"

"We continue to look him in the eye and we continue to ask him whether he#ll complete"

In reference to the deal, Guilfoyle says, "That is how he'd prefer to fund it but, if not, he has other routes to which he can fund to the level required".

Apparently, Heaney's solicitors have confirmed in writing that should the deal (as the preferred funding route) not be completed then "alternative funding routes remain open.

Informed sources have confirmed to me that this 'land deal' has allegedly been the 'main funding route' since the Sale and Purchase Agreement was signed back at the end of June when the original 'exclusivity deal' collapsed after Abe's withdrawal. Perhaps r. Guilfoyle would like to confirm that.

The same sources have confirmed that allegedly the Sale and Purchase Agreement was to conclude on 12th Augsut (it was 5th August but the signing of the SPA was delayed for a week). The SAP allegedly contains a clause that if both parties agree then the period of exclusivity and presumably confidentiality can extend indefinitely by agreement. Guilfoyle has allegedly agreed to extend it to 31st August. This would appear to been done to try and block out any alternative plan from being considered

One more on the record quote from Peter Ridsdale when referring to the £4.2m+ he will receive direct from Kevin Heaney into PAFC(125) Ltd - "It will be up to me as chairman how I manage the club with that money"

The above on the record quotes will surely bring further into question how this administrative process has been handled, how Heaney intends to fund the deal, whether the 'proof of funds' can be legally demonstrated, whether the deal can still pass the Association and Dual Purpose test at the Football League particularly in relation to the funding of PAFC (125) Ltd and I am sure there are many more.

Perhaps it is a little clearer now why, despite the bluster, Guilfoyle has admitted to not sleeping well. No wonder!!


Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!
PostPosted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 7:09 am 
Graham Clark wrote:
So at last the real truth behind the Heaney deal is starting to emerge. In the Herald (page 5 - but not yet online) Guilfoyle is on the record as saying,

"We are told that there is a deal he#s completing at the moment that requires completion to complete our deal"

"We continue to look him in the eye and we continue to ask him whether he#ll complete"

In reference to the deal, Guilfoyle says, "That is how he'd prefer to fund it but, if not, he has other routes to which he can fund to the level required".

Apparently, Heaney's solicitors have confirmed in writing that should the deal (as the preferred funding route) not be completed then "alternative funding routes remain open.

Informed sources have confirmed to me that this 'land deal' has allegedly been the 'main funding route' since the Sale and Purchase Agreement was signed back at the end of June when the original 'exclusivity deal' collapsed after Abe's withdrawal. Perhaps r. Guilfoyle would like to confirm that.

The same sources have confirmed that allegedly the Sale and Purchase Agreement was to conclude on 12th Augsut (it was 5th August but the signing of the SPA was delayed for a week). The SAP allegedly contains a clause that if both parties agree then the period of exclusivity and presumably confidentiality can extend indefinitely by agreement. Guilfoyle has allegedly agreed to extend it to 31st August. This would appear to been done to try and block out any alternative plan from being considered

One more on the record quote from Peter Ridsdale when referring to the £4.2m+ he will receive direct from Kevin Heaney into PAFC(125) Ltd - "It will be up to me as chairman how I manage the club with that money"

The above on the record quotes will surely bring further into question how this administrative process has been handled, how Heaney intends to fund the deal, whether the 'proof of funds' can be legally demonstrated, whether the deal can still pass the Association and Dual Purpose test at the Football League particularly in relation to the funding of PAFC (125) Ltd and I am sure there are many more.

Perhaps it is a little clearer now why, despite the bluster, Guilfoyle has admitted to not sleeping well. No wonder!!



That is certainly one for the Football League to be told about, forthwith - and as the contractually required funds appear not to have existed all along, it raises real questions about the conduct of the Mr Guilfoyle and his team. The question that comes to mind is the familiar one. "So who polices the police?".


Top
  
Reply with quote  
Online
 Post subject: Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!
PostPosted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 7:18 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2006 11:16 am
Location: Kenton, Devon
So how many chances will Heaney get to complete the deal? If he hasn't got the cash, surely the bid must be opened up to other parties again?

I can't see how Brenda could say that there was no alternative and that there wouldn't be time for a plan B to be implemented when Heaney hasn't got the cashflow for a plan A.

_________________
www.twitter.com/quinny265

"Ladies and gentlemen, I've suffered for my music ... now it's your turn"
Neil Innes (Bonzo Dog Doo-Dah Band)


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!
PostPosted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 7:21 am 
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2003 5:52 pm
Quote:
One more on the record quote from Peter Ridsdale when referring to the £4.2m+ he will receive direct from Kevin Heaney into PAFC(125) Ltd - "It will be up to me as chairman how I manage the club with that money"


£4.2 mill !!! is that the funding gap?

Woozer

So Ridsdale is paying a pound to get £4.2 million and Heaney wants nothing in return or rather no return on that money save the privelege of building on the car park....seriously how much money is to be made on that plot on land


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Offline
 Post subject: Pay up as agreed Mr Invisible or get out now
PostPosted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 7:26 am 
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 5:23 pm
A ring of steel seems to have descended around the bid. It is now clear that Mr Invisible was planning to finance the purchase through a land deal. The city fathers have told him where to get off and now he is unable to complete the deal as agreed. His plan is to push this to the wire with the council and use the leverage of the club being liquidated threat. This way he is hoping to gain concessions and fund the bid. I very much doubt he has any other funding sources. He needs an agreement with the council - at the very least verbally. I love Argyle with all my heart, but I also love my city and pray to the Almighty the council do not give an inch. BG now needs to sort this out - the money or your wife sorry meant out! No more messing BG sort it. The longer this now goes on the more likely Argyle will be liquidated. We need option B to step in and for as many people as possible to buy season tickets to keep Argyle afloat. REMEMBER NO MORE MESSING BG - WE KNOW YOU LIKE YOUR FEES BUT ENOUGH IS ENOUGH


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!
PostPosted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 7:36 am 
Player Sponsor #1 17/18 and Player Sponsor #2 17/18
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 10:42 am
Come on guys, let's not panic here.

Esmer and Marin(er) will be along shortly to tell us all that everything is "hunky dory".


I don't think we really needed confirmation that Heaney doesn't have two ha'pennies, did we?

I also think that Ridsdale's "on record" quote ""It will be up to me as chairman how I manage the club with that money"", when referring to a "freebie" £4.2million is frightening. It very much smacks of "I shall be very much alright, thank you Jack".

As for your question Graham, "Who polices the police", we know the answer to that as well, don't we. Guilfoyle!

As for the "other" land deal - is he trying to get rid of Truro City? That might make sense, well to him anyway!

_________________
There is no argument to equal a happy smile!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!
PostPosted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 7:45 am 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 10:17 am
When I started reading it I thought this was positive news, Guilfoyle seems to be distancing himself slightly from Heaney, maybe preparing the ground for seperation, for plan B.

Then you read that in the SAP he agreed to a clause that either side could postpone the completion date indefinately, WTF?, where have you ever seen a business contract with an open ended completion date? :shock:.

The fairtytale stories from Heaney just serve to underline, if it were needed, that he's running this bid solo. If there ever was a consortium it's long gone because how on earth can a deal involving a consortium rely so heavily on a Kevin Heaney land sale deal?.

Other revenue sources remain available?, yeah right. He's such a b*llshitter, unless you see a smug looking ginger haired 'little person' don a mask and burst into your Post Office with a sawn off he doesn't have any remaining revenue sources, no-one in the world would lend him money and he doesn't have any of his own.

_________________
Keep calm and support Argyle


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!
PostPosted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 7:48 am 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 12:21 pm
Location: Plymouth
For the life of me I don't understand why Gullifoyle hasn't started talking to Brent yet. Heany has no money, he hasn't paid for the exclusivity, how can Guilifoyle be tied t othe exclusivity agreement when the terms have been blatently breached by the missing £700k?

Brent is the only interested party with the funds to complete. He has already discussed property with the council. Everything Heany & co has said so far has proved to be utter bs. If the club is to be saved plan B must become plan A, and we should tell the ginger ninja to do one.

_________________
Thats "Mr" Womble to you


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!
PostPosted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 7:56 am 

Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 8:34 am
Closed shop - indefinite exclusivity!!

Poor show all concerned!! :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown: :thumbdown:

_________________
Back and all angelic!! Hahahahahah!!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!
PostPosted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 7:58 am 
User avatar

Joined: Tue Dec 28, 2004 11:26 am
Location: Cornwall
I've been feeling positive lately because we appear to be putting a decent team together and then the latest episode of Carry on Argyle is aired. Uneffing real. How much longer do we have to put up with these jokers until they're exposed for what they are and a respectable bidder with real funds can get involved? We're still alive and kicking because of our magnificent staff and supporters, not any of the suits, and we all deserve better than this charade. Why are the authorities letting this happen? Get rid and give us our dignity back.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!
PostPosted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 8:01 am 
Player Sponsor #1 17/18 and Player Sponsor #2 17/18
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 10:42 am
Andy_Symons wrote:
So the promised funds are tied up an another, unrelated property deal. The question that needs to be answered by Guilfoyle, then, is precisely what was the 'proof of funding' that allowed Bilbo and his mates to gain exclusivity?

This whole thing stinks, as it always has.


That would be an identical "proof of funding" that Paul Buttivant submitted Andy. A solicitor's letter.

And I used to think that Camel's Head stunk...smelled of bleddy roses compared to this shower of sh1t!

_________________
There is no argument to equal a happy smile!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!
PostPosted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 8:02 am 

Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 11:49 pm
Location: Saltash
This is quite simply unacceptable.

One need not refer back to 'previous', if this is how certain people conduct their business it is highly questionable whether we want them either:

(a) In charge of our club, Plymouth Argyle.

(b) As custodians of a key piece of land with great relevance to Plymouth and landlords of Home Park.


What possibility is there that we, as a fanbase, could gather together ahead of Saturday and 'make our feelings known'. It's not likely to get BG to change his mind straight away but it could build up pressure on the three of them.

If there is enough of us we could gather some extra attention with the media and put the deal / the three of them under extra scrutiny.

I really feel a public show of our displeasure needs to happen.

p.s.... I am a member of The Trust and wholeheartedly applaud all that they are doing, I also feel this is an additional angle we could try and work.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Offline
 Post subject: Re: Argyle takeover depends on separate property deal!
PostPosted: Mon Aug 01, 2011 8:08 am 

Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 9:09 am
Location: Plymouth
Graham Clark wrote:
Informed sources have confirmed to me that this 'land deal' has allegedly been the 'main funding route' since the Sale and Purchase Agreement was signed back at the end of June when the original 'exclusivity deal' collapsed after Abe's withdrawal. Perhaps r. Guilfoyle would like to confirm that.


If the original exclusivity deal collapsed, along with Heaney's funding, why wasn't BG now considering all bids to see who could give the best offer for creditors?


Last edited by storming on Mon Aug 01, 2011 8:13 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 128 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 10  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  

Specialist Vehicles




Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Developed by Vertical Plus Ltd