AFT statement on HHP development and **new update 19th Sept*

[Greenskin]

What amazes me Torquay United & Exeter City can get new stadium development completed & In progress while we are dealing with all the politics of the world with ours

Let's get it done :thumbs:

Incredible innit. And, cynical old me to the fore, if previous form is anything to go by both in Plymouth and the wider area, not a brick of this proposed development will be laid any time soon.

BTW, amid the maelstrom of "arguments" currently being traded around the bazaars, has any concrete [excuse the unintended pun] evidence materialised about how this is going to be funded, apart from Mr Hallett's loan? Seem to recall that the funding issue for the previous HHP proposal was always a bit cloudy too. May have missed something, would be grateful for any info.

Exeter City's development is being funded by the City Council, the landlords of the ground from the sale of land behind the Big Bank to developers to build student flats. I'm sure everyone would be happy for some sort of development on HHP to fund the Grandstand oh sorry they weren't!

Talk about a ground being hemmed in!

That would be excellent if it came to pass and Argyle were left with facilities to take the club into the 21st century- i'm sure that is what all supporters, no matter what their opinions on various matters may be, want to see. But coming back to my earlier post, has there actually been any definitive indication of where the funding for the HHP proposals is to come from, Mr Hallett's loan aside?

 

[Chancellor]

This is all very sad, the fanbase being split like this. But it is all of James Brents making because it didnt need to be this way. The refurb would have received pretty much universal fan approval as a stand-alone application. Divide and conquer.

 

[Ade the green]

This is all very sad, the fanbase being split like this. But it is all of James Brents making because it didnt need to be this way. The refurb would have received pretty much universal fan approval as a stand-alone application. Divide and conquer.

With the club one side and the AFT on the other.

 

[Chancellor]

This is all very sad, the fanbase being split like this. But it is all of James Brents making because it didnt need to be this way. The refurb would have received pretty much universal fan approval as a stand-alone application. Divide and conquer.

With the club one side and the AFT on the other.

You know I meant the fanbase, you are just being mischievous. I think most people know that the AFT dont actually have that much power but they do have a voice, as do you.

 

[Ade the green]

This is all very sad, the fanbase being split like this. But it is all of James Brents making because it didnt need to be this way. The refurb would have received pretty much universal fan approval as a stand-alone application. Divide and conquer.

With the club one side and the AFT on the other.

You know I meant the fanbase, you are just being mischievous. I think most people know that the AFT dont actually have that much power but they do have a voice, as do you.

You refuse to believe that the AFT has been divisive even amongst it's own membership to the point that a number of members leaving because the AFT committee are making unsubstantiated objections without their knowledge. Add to that that 90% of the fanbase don't give a monkey's about them.

If the AFT had held a referendum of it's members, would you accept them supporting the development as a whole? Would you heck!

 

[Chancellor]

This is all very sad, the fanbase being split like this. But it is all of James Brents making because it didnt need to be this way. The refurb would have received pretty much universal fan approval as a stand-alone application. Divide and conquer.

With the club one side and the AFT on the other.

You know I meant the fanbase, you are just being mischievous. I think most people know that the AFT dont actually have that much power but they do have a voice, as do you.

You refuse to believe that the AFT has been divisive even amongst it's own membership to the point that a number of members leaving because the AFT committee are making unsubstantiated objections without their knowledge. Add to that that 90% of the fanbase don't give a monkey's about them.

If the AFT had held a referendum of it's members, would you accept them supporting the development as a whole? Would you heck!

You say 90%? Can you elaborate on the number of fans you polled to come to that conclusion? The AFT is an organisation thats sole purpose is to look after the interests of the clubs fans regardless of ownership.

 

[Lundan Cabbie]

This is all very sad, the fanbase being split like this. But it is all of James Brents making because it didnt need to be this way. The refurb would have received pretty much universal fan approval as a stand-alone application. Divide and conquer.

But would not have delivered the revenue streams that the club desire.

 

[Chancellor]

This is all very sad, the fanbase being split like this. But it is all of James Brents making because it didnt need to be this way. The refurb would have received pretty much universal fan approval as a stand-alone application. Divide and conquer.

But would not have delivered the revenue streams that the club desire.

But there are no revenue streams from the other builds.

 

[Electronic]

Mr Tide, you are being sooo naive.

If there was no hybrid, they'd still object, but it would be something else. As sure as night follows day.

Don't agree with that. There are some who would still be snide about a standalone refurb but there would not have been objections.

Besides, the bigger point is whether or not there needed to be a hybrid application to achieve the refurb and the answer is a resounding 'no'.

The logic then says that James Brent has complicated the grandstand refurb and if the application gets chucked out he deserves criticism from Argyle fans for that.

 

[Knarf Reprah]

This is all very sad, the fanbase being split like this. But it is all of James Brents making because it didnt need to be this way. The refurb would have received pretty much universal fan approval as a stand-alone application. Divide and conquer.

With the club one side and the AFT on the other.

You know I meant the fanbase, you are just being mischievous. I think most people know that the AFT dont actually have that much power but they do have a voice, as do you.

You refuse to believe that the AFT has been divisive even amongst it's own membership to the point that a number of members leaving because the AFT committee are making unsubstantiated objections without their knowledge. Add to that that 90% of the fanbase don't give a monkey's about them.

If the AFT had held a referendum of it's members, would you accept them supporting the development as a whole? Would you heck!

The last sentence sums up in a nutshell the power crazy AFT Board

 

[NorfolkGreen]

What constitutes strong? Someone earlier mentioned 58 for and 38 against had emailed the planning department, is it those 58 that strong support refers?

60 to 38 now and some of the objectors don't object to all and some of the approvers don't approve of all.

So if I have understood correctly the strong support from the supporters in Devon and Cornwall is 60 emails? Can you imagine if the AFT or anyone else made that statement in opposition, yet people refer to it as though it is an overwhelming majority.

 

[Isondil]

This is all very sad, the fanbase being split like this. But it is all of James Brents making because it didnt need to be this way. The refurb would have received pretty much universal fan approval as a stand-alone application. Divide and conquer.

But would not have delivered the revenue streams that the club desire.

But there are no revenue streams from the other builds.

How obtuse. Take firstly the point that with more to do there the footfall will be higher, not to mention the draw for some people who may not wish to take a large detour from town as there are no facilities. Especially if their other half isn't interested.

The banqueting and conference facilities will mutually benefit a hotel. Who the hell wants a banquet or a conference when there is nowhere in the immediate vicinity to host people overnight? The conference facilities benefits the club, the hotel may not but they are mutually beneficial to one another.

Just because primary revenue come from the banqueting and conference facilities, doesn't mean the rest are completely superfluous. They compliment one another to provide a more rounded and complete facility.

People who can not think of the secondary and tertiary effects of builds, really present NIMBYism to the fullest extent.

The fact the many members of the AFT are resigning their membership, goes to show how they feel. They are not being represented, nor have they been afforded an opportunity to vote or comment to provide a 'democratic mandate'.

A fans Trust should have the club in mind, but it is there to represent the fans as well as its members. Not withstanding, the Argyle Fans Trust, instead of taking the rather real opportunity of being able to make a difference for fans, rejected part ownership options of 20%. Giving them both influence in and out of the club itself.

This rejection has damaged the club long term. But with it's current leadership and the actions of its board separately to it's membership or wider fans it represents , I call a vote of no confidence and ask they have a leadership contest. It is a democratic organisation after all.

 

[Ade the green]

This is all very sad, the fanbase being split like this. But it is all of James Brents making because it didnt need to be this way. The refurb would have received pretty much universal fan approval as a stand-alone application. Divide and conquer.

With the club one side and the AFT on the other.

You know I meant the fanbase, you are just being mischievous. I think most people know that the AFT dont actually have that much power but they do have a voice, as do you.

You refuse to believe that the AFT has been divisive even amongst it's own membership to the point that a number of members leaving because the AFT committee are making unsubstantiated objections without their knowledge. Add to that that 90% of the fanbase don't give a monkey's about them.

If the AFT had held a referendum of it's members, would you accept them supporting the development as a whole? Would you heck!

You say 90%? Can you elaborate on the number of fans you polled to come to that conclusion? The AFT is an organisation thats sole purpose is to look after the interests of the clubs fans regardless of ownership.

No I can't, the 90% figure was one I made up just like your AFT chair as to the numbers of "Argyle Fans" objecting to the development.

Answer the question, would you accept the AFT supporting the proposal had they held a referendum which stated quite clearly the rank and file members wanted it?

 

[Daz]

What constitutes strong? Someone earlier mentioned 58 for and 38 against had emailed the planning department, is it those 58 that strong support refers?

60 to 38 now and some of the objectors don't object to all and some of the approvers don't approve of all.

So if I have understood correctly the strong support from the supporters in Devon and Cornwall is 60 emails? Can you imagine if the AFT or anyone else made that statement in opposition, yet people refer to it as though it is an overwhelming majority.

I may have missed it, but I've not seen anyone refer to the comments as an "overwhelming majority" one way or the other. It is however a fact that more people who wrote in are in favour of the plans. Its also a fact that by in large the comments are irrelevant to the planning process.

 

[Knarf Reprah]

This is all very sad, the fanbase being split like this. But it is all of James Brents making because it didnt need to be this way. The refurb would have received pretty much universal fan approval as a stand-alone application. Divide and conquer.

But would not have delivered the revenue streams that the club desire.

But there are no revenue streams from the other builds.

How obtuse. Take firstly the point that with more to do there the footfall will be higher, not to mention the draw for some people who may not wish to take a large detour from town as there are no facilities. Especially if their other half isn't interested.

The banqueting and conference facilities will mutually benefit a hotel. Who the hell wants a banquet or a conference when there is nowhere in the immediate vicinity to host people overnight? The conference facilities benefits the club, the hotel may not but they are mutually beneficial to one another.

Just because primary revenue come from the banqueting and conference facilities, doesn't mean the rest are completely superfluous. They compliment one another to provide a more rounded and complete facility.

People who can not think of the secondary and tertiary effects of builds, really present NIMBYism to the fullest extent.

The fact the many members of the AFT are resigning their membership, goes to show how they feel. They are not being represented, nor have they been afforded an opportunity to vote or comment to provide a 'democratic mandate'.

A fans Trust should have the club in mind, but it is there to represent the fans as well as its members. Not withstanding, the Argyle Fans Trust, instead of taking the rather real opportunity of being able to make a difference for fans, rejected part ownership options of 20%. Giving them both influence in and out of the club itself.

This rejection has damaged the club long term. But with it's current leadership and the actions of its board separately to it's membership or wider fans it represents , I call a vote of no confidence and ask they have a leadership contest. It is a democratic organisation after all.

Well said! Democratic? IMHO it's an ego trip and a płatform for the anti-Brent brigade