-
This site is sponsored by Lang & Potter.
James Brent
- Thread starter CornishLyndhurst1886
- Start date
If a banqueting facility etc is so much of a money spinner surely it wouldnt have been a gamble for an investment in such a facility right from the outset to actually expedite the payment of said debts??
Mr Brent has stated the importance of a banqueting and conference facility to the future of the club time and again. So why wasn't this given utmost priority. Such a facility could have been built on club land very early in his tenure, independent of a grandstand refit.. Perhaps on the space where an ice rink is pencilled in.
It doesn't make sense to me that if this banqueting and conference hall is so much of a latch lifter why it hasn't been given priority over a more expensive and complex grandstand rebuild.
It's like me saying I need a guitar to start my band but instead of buying one I instead attempt to build a concert hall
Mr Brent has stated the importance of a banqueting and conference facility to the future of the club time and again. So why wasn't this given utmost priority. Such a facility could have been built on club land very early in his tenure, independent of a grandstand refit.. Perhaps on the space where an ice rink is pencilled in.
It doesn't make sense to me that if this banqueting and conference hall is so much of a latch lifter why it hasn't been given priority over a more expensive and complex grandstand rebuild.
It's like me saying I need a guitar to start my band but instead of buying one I instead attempt to build a concert hall
I'll take a 'live within your means' model to a 'sugar daddy' model all day long. James Brent is without doubt the best owner this club has ever had.
UTL. Following through your thought process of building the banqueting/ conference facilities not as part of Grandstand refurb.
Where would you have built them and how would the banqueting facilities have been dual use( football and non football)? On the football banqueting side of things how would you have made the corporate experience throughout better than now if not refurbing Grandstand?
Do you think investment in new facilities would have been welcomed by those still owed from the previous failure or do you think there would have been a hue and cry about club doing that on the back of unpaid debts?
Would you consider the club a better proposition for SH or an alternative investor now worst of financial position addressed and team progressing upwards rather than falling like a stone and remaining in the League by skin of our teeth? Therefore how likely would it have been to attract the funding needed to carry out your separate conference facility project?
As well as the 7 days a week/ conference/ corporate income generating aim of the Grandstand project the other two aims the Board has declared are the delivery of improved facilities to the “ordinary” fan and attracting additional spectators. Assuming you agree those are good aims then the question is how much more would following your proposal of carrying out two development projects have cost?
Where would you have built them and how would the banqueting facilities have been dual use( football and non football)? On the football banqueting side of things how would you have made the corporate experience throughout better than now if not refurbing Grandstand?
Do you think investment in new facilities would have been welcomed by those still owed from the previous failure or do you think there would have been a hue and cry about club doing that on the back of unpaid debts?
Would you consider the club a better proposition for SH or an alternative investor now worst of financial position addressed and team progressing upwards rather than falling like a stone and remaining in the League by skin of our teeth? Therefore how likely would it have been to attract the funding needed to carry out your separate conference facility project?
As well as the 7 days a week/ conference/ corporate income generating aim of the Grandstand project the other two aims the Board has declared are the delivery of improved facilities to the “ordinary” fan and attracting additional spectators. Assuming you agree those are good aims then the question is how much more would following your proposal of carrying out two development projects have cost?
That’s quite a claim to make at this stage. I thought the Stapleton board was until it all went pear shaped. The signs are that you could possibly be correct but I think those sort of judgements should be reserved for when his time is done and he has moved on.monkeywrench":33hesfva said:
KFA":eio9ddp4 said:
Good points. It strikes me that some of our armchair entrepreneurs, if ever on Dragons' Den, would likely cause the 4 'celebrity investors' to have heart attacks
jerryatricjanner":p2x20jla said:
It's a genuine and honest opinion that I hold at the moment Jerry.
esmer":qms1d82e said:
Maybe not Es, but he's had more abuse than probably anybody. And for no valid reason that I can identify.
monkeywrench":15pwh59g said:
I'm sure it is and to be fair you were referring to up to the present. I have held some reservations largely due to his failure to deliver anything development wise previously and thought property developer a bit of a misnomer or whether he just bought and sold land without doing anything with it himself. It does now seem that the football club part of the Home Park improvements with some big help from Simon Hallett is finally going to happen and we will have some facilities we can be reasonably proud of. I also had reservations about him because I found the original plans to develop HP and HHP, hemming us in forever with a smaller capacity stadium with no hope of any future expansion very ill thought out and doomed to failure. What now happens with the rest of the HHP land doesn't really bother me, my only concern is the future of the football club. It will have taken 8 years or so which is longer than most of we traditionally impatient fans would have wanted but in the 7 years leading up to it we have come from the abyss and improved on and off the field each year so for that he deserves great credit. I hope his legacy in the future will be as the greatest ever custodian of PAFC because it will mean he would have left us in great shape both on and off the field.
There are two reasons for it.monkeywrench":1z06zswl said:
1) PASOTI. This site (more specifically certain individuals on this site ) 'championed' Mr Brent's bid during administration. At the very same time, by pure coincidence, a cavernous schism between PASOTI and several banned former PASOTI users had emerged. The very fact PASOTI supported something set the agenda for the displaced former users, 'anything they want, we don't'. Honestly, it really is that petty.
The alternative at that time was the pre-ordained carve up between Heaney and Ridsdale that would now see Argyle as a paper asset entity only with all property and thus property generated revenue going to Heaney (seee Truro's current crisis with no ground and having to ground share 100 miles away). That or (not that it ever had any credibility) handing Argyle over to an obscure Tory councillor from the home counties with pipe dreams of football ownership.
Despite those frankly frightening prospects the lack of any objectivity from the other side of the 'divide' meant that James Brent was cast as the pantomime villian purely because he was supported by their 'enemies'. It was from that acorn that the now oak of objection was born. Had PASOTI supported free season tickets for all, this bunch would've taken up pitchforks to demand the doubling of ST prices for all.
Despite six or seven (I lose count) years of continual improvement in league position under his stewardship and doing so without returning to debt burden they see no good in him simply because of who he is and who supported his bid for Argyle at that time. We won't, clearly, but if Argyle went onn to the premiership title from here and then finished runners up the following season they would herald that as vindication that they were right all along and their 'foe' was wrong... "we told you so" :facepalm:
Nothing, literally nothing, will change their bile fuelled ostrich head in the sand mindset on James Brent. That any fans who weren't motivated by the initial catalyst of the 'PASOTI v the banned former PASOTI' schism have joined the entrenched cut your nose off to spite your face stance since just serves to underline how dumb and led by the (vestigial remnants of a) nose some people are. Which leads to the second reason for the abuse he gets...
2) Facetw@tter. The last few years has seen this grubby little cyberworld grow from a niche entity for the fetish of bile to a full on mainstream bile-o-thon. Few agree with me that social media is the work of the devil that gives a platform for those who would otherwise have just mumbled to themselves between barking at the moon, but I have been consistent in my belief that it demonstrates mankind disappearing up it's own hoop.
It is another accident of timing but the wider spread of social media has coincided with JB's tenure allowing the voices of a tiny minority to resonate wider and seemingly more numerous than would otherwise have been the case in any other time in history. We now get to hear the noises that just used to echo in these individuals massively empty heads.
That is why James Brent gets more abuse than any previous incumbent of his post. No record of continual improvement with sustained financial stability will ever be good enough to reverse it. I used to believe that common sense would prevail and that time and prudent fiscal management would vindicate the backing of the RIGHT horse back then. I have grown to see however that those with no sense cannot and will not ever see common sense and that this situation will never ever change.
All we can do is just continue to believe what we believe to be right. They do, even though they are so demonstrably wrong in their belief, a belief they just invented and a belief based on nothing more than hate for the sake of hate.
Sad but true :sad:
That and the continual 'we must speculate to accumulate' cycle of arguments are such a bore. They are just unnecessary ancillary political bollox to what should otherwise be the simple pleasure of collectively supporting your tribe's team. It is a massive turn off and you just know from bitter historical experience that It'll only get far worse going forwards.
