Thanks Tony. Good news regarding the statement but disappointing that some members of the PASB don't support the development. As the PASB represents the fans can we be told which members are for or against the development?
PL2 3DQ":3il5fxmr said:Thanks Tony. Good news regarding the statement but disappointing that some members of the PASB don't support the development. As the PASB represents the fans can we be told which members are for or against the development?
ejh":3psruakm said:PL2 3DQ":3psruakm said:Thanks Tony. Good news regarding the statement but disappointing that some members of the PASB don't support the development. As the PASB represents the fans can we be told which members are for or against the development?
And can those in Brent's back pocket like Webb and Jon B write a letter for critics of the stand, just to make sure they are representing those supporters too (and not just themselves).
48% of the last conducted poll is an extremely large minority to marginalise and ignore.
GreenSam":132s4tow said:As one of the most outspoken critics of this development in its current format, I think Jon is right that it's better for the club than to not have it. I do think it hugely limits our potential in the long-term but without a development of some kind who knows if there will be a long-term. I won't be happy about it, it will leave a sour taste in the mouth that it isn't what the club and the fanbase (IMHO of course) deserve. The situation I want is a bigger and better development but I think the time has come to swallow the bitter pill and hope for the least bad of two bad outcomes (again imo).
I don't think it's big enough, I think we should show the vision that Hull, Brighton etc did but having a club comes first. That's just bitter realism that I think our status as a club could be in serious danger without this stand's income. A real shame it's come to this choice but I'd give the plans my very grudging support.
Won't even get that from me,I don't think it'll be good for the club ,I've yet to see any evidence of how this will increase our revenue. I think it will only stifle the club for many years to come and that Plymouth argyle is just a temporary inconvenience that will be offloaded the second he gets what he wants. It's the worst thing to happen to our club since the M 7Lee Roberts":glahbho1 said:GreenSam":glahbho1 said:As one of the most outspoken critics of this development in its current format, I think Jon is right that it's better for the club than to not have it. I do think it hugely limits our potential in the long-term but without a development of some kind who knows if there will be a long-term. I won't be happy about it, it will leave a sour taste in the mouth that it isn't what the club and the fanbase (IMHO of course) deserve. The situation I want is a bigger and better development but I think the time has come to swallow the bitter pill and hope for the least bad of two bad outcomes (again imo).
I don't think it's big enough, I think we should show the vision that Hull, Brighton etc did but having a club comes first. That's just bitter realism that I think our status as a club could be in serious danger without this stand's income. A real shame it's come to this choice but I'd give the plans my very grudging support.
This for me sums up my stance on the development.
'Grudging support', hits the nail on the head.
Are ypu sure?Womble":17qvu36b said:Ffs. It'll get approved, probably with a few amenments re road access. The opinions of an utterly pointless fans body and a couple fans are totally insignificant to the decision.
I must say although i want the thing built i found the pasb statement rather toe curling.
JonB":3o476x3l said:What is clear to me is that without being alarmist, the Club’s future progress and stability is strongly aligned to the grandstand being successfully redeveloped.
Argylealan, this club will never be financially safer until this development is complete.argylealan84":1ncbexwi said:i personally would love to see the redevelopment of hp, but at the same time, id rather leave it until we have got a firm footing in the football league and are safer finacially, or home park will be a waste of time when there is no team playing there. use the money to invest in the club 1st i say
But it's Brent's money, not Argyle's. He has an interest in putting it into the stand as it's part of a wider project. He'd have no tangible interest out of putting the lot into the team/club coffers. It would just never happen.argylealan84":3839xdsg said:i personally would love to see the redevelopment of hp, but at the same time, id rather leave it until we have got a firm footing in the football league and are safer finacially, or home park will be a waste of time when there is no team playing there. use the money to invest in the club 1st i say
To be fair though, you say 'capacity aside' like it's a minor issue.Biggs":3uh92yrd said:I still think those against the development in its current form (as I was) are still thinking of this stupidly released first image. I know I couldn't believe my eyes:
If this had been the first image released, I don't think we'd have half the disappointment amongst the fanbase. I'm certainly right behind it now, capacity aside. Forget figures and architects impressions, just imagine how good this will look compared to the Mayflower when it's actually there. And with the bigger roof and supporting truss, it's actually a bigger structure: