James Brent

[JannerinCardiff]

Maybe, after (if) the refurb gets done, and once up and running, proves to be the success in terms of income in the original business plan, then maybe, just maybe, the Club will be easier to "sell" to potential investors or even new owners.

Unfortunately the refurb isn’t making Home Oark capacity very big by Championship standards so that might limit the type of buyer we’d like to hope for..

 

[jimsing]

The whole idea of the board subsidising the Club should be shot down immediately.

Whilst Brent, and Hallett, are in charge, the Club has to stand on its own two feet. They will NOT allow the Club to be burdened with debt, and they certainly will not spend/gamble/waste their own money in an effort to push the club where the fanbase want it to go. The club is not ready for that, even if it were an option.

The Club has to support itself. It's the Club that is not as rich as we would like, which is hardly surprising, IS IT???????

Improvement year after year is what we have, and is all that we can expect at the moment. It may not be very quick for some, but it is the right way to go after nearly going out of business.

I really don't know what people come to expect.

You have to be realistic about these things, but it seems there are still more than a few dreamers amongst us with unrealistic ambition.

When you say “they will NOT let the club be burdened with debt, you’re forgetting something. Where do you think the £5m is coming from? It isn’t a gift. It is a debt that must be repaid.

No one anywhere is looking for unabated money squandering.

But actively seeking investment would be rather refreshing.

Read my post again, people.

I said BURDENED with debt.

Manageable debt is what we have, and Hallett has already said that he was prepared to put more into the pot but he didn't want to BURDEN the Club with unmanageable debt.

Do you not see the difference?

You talk as if there is a line in the sand. Up to the line is manageable. Beyond the line is a burden. CORRECT

What you ignore from my post is the INVESTMENT part.

Seeking INVESTMENT, would allow your line in the sand to shift considerably, and perhaps take Argyle to a level none of us have been to before.

What is sad is there there appears no will from many to ever try, or even hope that we could get there.

Argyle trundling along as perennial lower league fodder is a depressing thought for me. I realise that for some simply Argyle existing is enough. I guess people just have different aspirations

Isn't the 5 million or so from Mr Hallett an investment?

Theoretically, it will increase non match day revenue, improve spectator experience and make the club more attractive to potential signings, advertisers and other investors? Thus increasing the club's income and asset value, which may prompt us to be self sufficient at Championship level - a position we have not been in before.

If that isn't investment that I really don't know what is.

Quite true. Mr Hallett has invested his money into the Club, with a fixed return on his investment over a set period of years; an investment that is satisfactory to both parties, and is serviceable for both parties

The Club has used this investment to improve facilities and create opportunities to increase its income. Therefore the Clubs assets have increased in value and will endeavour to increase its income stream, the price being the moderate terms of the initial investment.

As the Club's value increases (with improvements and additions to its assets), then there may be opportunities to increase investment opportunities further, providing that the repayments are not too prohibitive and can be repaid from within the total budget of the Club.

As can be seen ANY investment is debt.

As long as the Club grows, and any further investment can be repaid from the Clubs income without impinging on the day to day running costs of the Club, then ANY investment should be welcome.

Debt which is speculative, or which is not serviced properly will eventually lead to the demise of the club, as we all know only too well.

 

[KFA]

Any investment is not necessarily debt. Investment via issuing of new equity is true investment not loan. The club has increased its equity base since SH came on board both by his investing in new equity and other shareholders ( noticeably JB) converting loans made to the club previously into equity.

 

[Willis88]

Any investment is not necessarily debt. Investment via issuing of new equity is true investment not loan. The club has increased its equity base since SH came on board both by his investing in new equity and other shareholders ( noticeably JB) converting loans made to the club previously into equity.

Technically equity is a debt, rather than a loan it is the company owing the value of itself to the shareholders.

A company can repay this debt by cancelling shares through paying shareholders back.

But the point is valid, I would rather they took shares over a loan.

Some people seem to want a multi billionaire to turn up and flood the club with cash and hope they succeed before they get bored. I'd rather not have the risk of them losing interest and the cash drying up

 

[KFA]

Sorry to be picky but equity is not debt as it is not “repaid” but in the circumstances you describe the shares would be bought back and cancelled.

 

[Willis88]

Sorry to be picky but equity is not debt as it is not “repaid” but in the circumstances you describe the shares would be bought back and cancelled.

Choice of words there, but same principal, only difference is a loan would have a fixed repayment amount and equity bought back at a market price

 

[Ollieargyle9]

You talk as if there is a line in the sand. Up to the line is manageable. Beyond the line is a burden.

What you ignore from my post is the INVESTMENT part.

Seeking INVESTMENT, would allow your line in the sand to shift considerably, and perhaps take Argyle to a level none of us have been to before.

What is sad is there there appears no will from many to ever try, or even hope that we could get there.

Argyle trundling along as perennial lower league fodder is a depressing thought for me. I realise that for some simply Argyle existing is enough. I guess people just have different aspirations

Different aspirations or different views on how to achieve them? There's a big difference.

 

[gaspargomez]

Here's a genuine question that I'm never sure of the answer to. Does any of the land that was previously owned by PAFC now belong to James Brent personally ?

And , if so, is this land now part of Brent's own development proposals ?

 

[Quizmike]

You talk as if there is a line in the sand. Up to the line is manageable. Beyond the line is a burden.

What you ignore from my post is the INVESTMENT part.

Seeking INVESTMENT, would allow your line in the sand to shift considerably, and perhaps take Argyle to a level none of us have been to before.

What is sad is there there appears no will from many to ever try, or even hope that we could get there.

Argyle trundling along as perennial lower league fodder is a depressing thought for me. I realise that for some simply Argyle existing is enough. I guess people just have different aspirations

Grumps, the stadium improvements will make it easier for us to get investment.

Therefore, those who are trying to sabotage the stadium work because they think it will get rid of Brent are idiots. They should be encouraging the project to get the club sold quicker.

 

[Kentishgreen]

Argyle have always been perennial lower league fodder. That’s not likely to change until someone comes along with several hundred millions of pounds to spare. People like that don’t grow on trees and I’m not sure we’d particularly like a rich Arabian sheikh, a Russian money launderer or a Thai “ businessman”. It would be brilliant if we could do better but that requires patience.

 

[The Grumpy Loyal]

You talk as if there is a line in the sand. Up to the line is manageable. Beyond the line is a burden.

What you ignore from my post is the INVESTMENT part.

Seeking INVESTMENT, would allow your line in the sand to shift considerably, and perhaps take Argyle to a level none of us have been to before.

What is sad is there there appears no will from many to ever try, or even hope that we could get there.

Argyle trundling along as perennial lower league fodder is a depressing thought for me. I realise that for some simply Argyle existing is enough. I guess people just have different aspirations

Grumps, the stadium improvements will make it easier for us to get investment.

Therefore, those who are trying to sabotage the stadium work because they think it will get rid of Brent are idiots. They should be encouraging the project to get the club sold quicker.

You’re absolutely right.

 

[Tugboat]

Here's a genuine question that I'm never sure of the answer to. Does any of the land that was previously owned by PAFC now belong to James Brent personally ?

And , if so, is this land now part of Brent's own development proposals ?

I think he owns the land of the old car park. Guessing that land will be used as part of the refurbished stand so even when he leaves he will still be a landlord to that piece of land.

Think he mentioned it being a planned pension fund for a later date but not sure if he’ll charge a rent for it between now as then.

 

[Greenskin]

Argyle have always been perennial lower league fodder. That’s not likely to change until someone comes along with several hundred millions of pounds to spare. People like that don’t grow on trees and I’m not sure we’d particularly like a rich Arabian sheikh, a Russian money launderer or a Thai “ businessman”. It would be brilliant if we could do better but that requires patience.

Argyle have not always been "perennial lower league fodder". In the overall scheme of things,their historical position is that of a middle ranking football league club whose essential problem when reaching a certain level in the second tier has been the lack of wherewithal to finish the job,with the inevitable consequence of the stand still, go backwards syndrome setting in. It would not necessarily have needed the much quoted "russian/thai/middle eastern billionaire" [although IMHO it is very difficult to understand a mentality which would actually not appreciate investment of that kind which would enable a real club to be built and a long term goodbye waved to the lower leagues in all probability] at various points in history to see matters through-indeed it is interesting to speculate what the effect would have been had the new world crew been in situ when Pulis or Holloway were in charge and where the club would have been now.

 

[up the line]

From a Telegraph article dated 8 September 2013:

“We’re putting in a very substantial conference and banqueting centre and that revenue comes into the football club and will help fund the future development of the team. If we achieve that ambition then there is no reason why we shouldn’t get into the Premier League."

Firstly, hopefully all those who like to p1$$ on the chips of anyone who suggests Argyle should show ambitions to reach the highest level will now see that Mr Brent has actually set that very expectation.

Secondly, it has been Mr Brent's maxim since day 1 in 2011 that the 'non matchday revenue streams' are what will drive team financing. And yet, nearly a decade later, we still wait for him to deliver this 'golden fleece', the latch lifter to more spending on the team.
A 'banqueting facility' could have been built 3 or 4 times over in the time that Mr Brent has been here, so in my opinion he's been failing to deliver the one key thing that he describes as being the gateway to pumping money into the team. I can't see how anyone can be happy that it's taken 7 years to get to a point where we might, might just be seeing the delivery of a project that in the chairman's own words is imperative to the funding of a successful team.
The flip side is that there is now apparently something happening at Home Park, albeit slowly. So I suppose the argument will be that we can't really judge until such a facility is operational and delivering this El Dorado of additional transfer funds.

 

[Allanon]

From a Telegraph article dated 8 September 2013:

“We’re putting in a very substantial conference and banqueting centre and that revenue comes into the football club and will help fund the future development of the team. If we achieve that ambition then there is no reason why we shouldn’t get into the Premier League."

Firstly, hopefully all those who like to p1$$ on the chips of anyone who suggests Argyle should show ambitions to reach the highest level will now see that Mr Brent has actually set that very expectation.

Secondly, it has been Mr Brent's maxim since day 1 in 2011 that the 'non matchday revenue streams' are what will drive team financing. And yet, nearly a decade later, we still wait for him to deliver this 'golden fleece', the latch lifter to more spending on the team.
A 'banqueting facility' could have been built 3 or 4 times over in the time that Mr Brent has been here, so in my opinion he's been failing to deliver the one key thing that he describes as being the gateway to pumping money into the team. I can't see how anyone can be happy that it's taken 7 years to get to a point where we might, might just be seeing the delivery of a project that in the chairman's own words is imperative to the funding of a successful team.
The flip side is that there is now apparently something happening at Home Park, albeit slowly. So I suppose the argument will be that we can't really judge until such a facility is operational and delivering this El Dorado of additional transfer funds.

You conveniently excluded the fact that the first 5 of those 7 years the club were clearing the legacy(administration) debt. But hey that fact obviously doesn't stop you fuelling your agenda.