• Welcome to PASOTI (Sponsored by GA Solictors and Lang & Potter)

Update "Contingency" Plan Meeting 1/8/11 (Q&A pages 18,19)

A

Anonymous

Guest
Hi All
As you will be aware another meeting was held today to discuss a contingency plan for Plymouth Argyle Football Club.

A couple of bits of information……

Firstly the committee has decided to change the name of group to “The PAFC Contingency Plan Committee”. This change has been made for a key reason. - The Joint Administrator is refusing to engage with supporters on the Rescue Plan (see press release) so we are now in a position where in the finest spirits of any business / organisation we are preparing a contingency plan should Plan A fail to complete.

We feel that preparing a contingency plan puts us in a position where we are clearly not attempting to derail the preferred bidders. As a group we are simply committing to ensuring that in the event that the PB fails to perform we will give it the best possible shot at saving the club. Every sensible organisation has a contingency plan.

Secondly we are today launching our Draft Manifesto, setting out to Plymouth Argyle Supporters and the wider community what we stand for. We want to make it very clear that this is a draft and that we now welcome feedback from Plymouth Argyle supporters before we finalise the document at our next meeting.

The Contingency Plan Committee has provisionally agreed to meet again on August 12th.

Hopefully I will be able to post more later on. For now, the day job calls.

Chris

PRESS RELEASE BY THE PAFC CONTINGENCY PLAN COMMITTEE

The PAFC Contingency Committee held its third meeting today, 1st August 2011. Present were the fans’ representatives and James Brent.

Chris Webb reported that on Friday 22nd July he had received a letter from Brendan Guilfoyle (Joint Administrator for PAFC) focusing solely on the level of funding that would be required if a contingency plan was to be put in place. Chris Webb, on behalf of the contingency plan committee responded to this letter on Saturday 23rd July setting out in detail the conditions that needed to be met, who was responsible for meeting each of them and the timetable for completing the contingency plan and funding the Club. Mr Guilfoyle responded (email dated 29/7/11) stating that he wished to focus on completing the sale to the Preferred Bidder and that he ‘cannot currently engage’ with the Contingency Plan Committee.

The Committee noted that the Joint Administrators has reportedly extended the completion date for the sale and purchase, possibly until to the end of August. This is at least the third such extension and the new completion date compares to the original proposed end date for exclusivity of 14th June. The Committee further noted that the Joint Administrators control the assets and undertaking of PAFC and that, without their support, the Contingency Plan cannot be advanced or implemented.

Chris Webb, Chairman of The Argyle Fans’ Trust commented: “It takes two to tango and the Joint Administrators are not willing at this stage even to start pre-dance exercises with us. Whilst it is very frustrating, we can only assume that their unwillingness to engage with a contingency plan reflects their very high level of confidence that their preferred deal will complete. We hope that such confidence is justified. If the preferred deal does not happen, we hope that the Joint Administrators will give the backers of the Contingency Plan a reasonable period of time (we have suggested no longer than the latest extension granted to the Preferred Bidder) to complete an acquisition and fund the Club once stakeholder approvals have been received. There is no certainty that these approvals will be received.”

ENDS

Plymouth Argyle. The Contingency Plan. Draft Manifesto.

Background and context

If you’re running a hospital in a warzone, you need to have an emergency generator available just in case the mains power supply gets hit.

That’s what the Contingency Plan is all about.

There is currently no such contingency plan. Hence the creation of a group with a single, simple remit.

There to provide a credible backstop option if the current preferred bidder fails to come up with the cash needed to buy the club within the appropriate timeframe; or convince the Football League to return the club its “Golden Share”.

Furthermore, an alternative plan needs to be capable of being executed very quickly – the new season is very nearly upon us.

So it has to be ready.

Of course, there would be little point in putting the time, effort and resource into such a project without attempting to make the best possible job of it – for the club, for its supporters, and for the city it represents on the national scale.

In the interests of absolute transparency (after all, Argyle is a matter of great public interest, and is of huge importance to the community it serves), we are issuing a draft “manifesto”.

This is created in order to articulate our mission, our key policies, and the values we would expect any new regime born from this rescue to adopt and abide by.

We would appreciate feedback from people who really care about Argyle, and of course, the city itself.

So we present this as a first draft, as a discussion document.

Responses, please, by e-mail to consulation@argylefanstrust.com

Contingency Plan – Manifesto. Draft 1

Mission

To plan and prepare a coherent and sustainable contingency option for Plymouth Argyle Football Club, capable of being delivered at short notice should the need arise.

Key Policies

o From day 1, there will be a total commitment to openness and transparency and the chance to ‘get involved’; formal mechanisms to provide the fan-base a clear voice in the running of the club will be put in place. Long-term ways of involving supporters in the club’s ownership via the Argyle Fans’ Trust will be explored.
o All of the focus will be on the creation of a successful football club. The needs of the team manager as he sets out to create success on the pitch will be paramount
o The football club will be run as a sustainable business.
o The highest standards of corporate governance will be embraced.
o The club will work hard to embrace and involve the broad Plymouth community, and will do all it can to support it, via its facilities, its people, its brand.
o The club will work closely with Plymouth City Council in order to maximise the potential delivery of a fully integrated, world-class Central Park leisure offer.
o Pricing structures will be reviewed, with a particular emphasis on attracting young people.
o The Youth Development programme will be a priority going forward.
o The club will adopt a local supplier policy whilst also committing to do its best to utilise the services of the companies damaged through the administration process.
o The Plymouth Argyle brand has been damaged considerably as a result of the events of the last year or two. An intelligent strategic recovery plan will be developed.

Values

1. Highest standards of business ethics
2. Value our people – and our “customers”
3. At the heart of the community
4. Absolute determination to succeed

Resurgam!
 
Feb 17, 2004
8,368
5
cheshire
Andy_Symons":3tmx1su0 said:
I think the Committee should be congratulated on producing such a clear Mission statement. I can't see any way in which the details laid out in Chris's post can't be welcomed by all Argyle supporters. it's been made clear (as if it wasn't already) that this is a plan contingent upon the PB's not completing, and the manifesto ticks all the right boxes as far as I'm concerned. Well done all, and thanks for such a full and speedy update.

I agree with your opinion, but, I expect there may be one or two who have different thoughts. :roll:
 

Tugboat

50/50 Sponsor
NHS Volunteer Supporter
Feb 24, 2007
13,273
35
2
A massive :clap: to you and your team.

I prey that this 'contingency plan' cones to fruction and we are saved from the clutches of evil.
 
Jan 31, 2005
1,835
0
Tavistock
A clear and concise statement, well done everyone involved. :clap: :clap:

If only the PB's or administrator would take a leaf out of your book.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
cheshiregreen":2w8gf38f said:
I agree with your opinion, but, I expect there may be one or two who have different thoughts. :roll:

Doesn't really matter CG, the people involved have a single aim, and that is the safety of PAFC.

The people that do make up the Contingency Committee are 100% together and can't be separated. :huddle:
 
Oct 9, 2003
1,241
0
For Christs sake, no amount of Commitee name changing, comments or manifesto gumph is going to disguise the fact that this is still purely a bid by James Brent. Plain and simple.

If your going to expand any further than that, then u could call it 'Brents bid, supported by a few who a) yes, do want Argyle to survive, but, b) don't half love the sound of their own voices.'

It's Brents Bid. So just say it like it is FFS.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
IJN":1qvejitz said:
cheshiregreen":1qvejitz said:
I agree with your opinion, but, I expect there may be one or two who have different thoughts. :roll:

Doesn't really matter CG, the people involved have a single aim, and that is the safety of PAFC.

The people that do make up the Contingency Committee are 100% together and can't be separated. :huddle:

Good shout Ian. On that note one thing that I ommitted from my post was a list of attendees at today's meeting.

James Brent
Chris Webb - AFT
John Petrie - AFT
Peter Ryan - AFT
Ian Newell - PASOTI
Ian De Lar - Special Detective ;)
Damon Lenszner - GTs
Peter Jones
Jamie Yabsley
Graham Clark

Westcountry TV also did quick interviews with Ian Newell and myself. They also took a shot of the meeting "in action".
 
Sep 6, 2006
10,896
33
Chris Webb":fqey1bfo said:
IJN":fqey1bfo said:
cheshiregreen":fqey1bfo said:
I agree with your opinion, but, I expect there may be one or two who have different thoughts. :roll:

Doesn't really matter CG, the people involved have a single aim, and that is the safety of PAFC.

The people that do make up the Contingency Committee are 100% together and can't be separated. :huddle:

Good shout Ian. On that note one thing that I ommitted from my post was a list of attendees at today's meeting.

James Brent
Chris Webb - AFT
John Petrie - AFT
Peter Ryan - AFT
Ian Newell - PASOTI
Ian De Lar - Special Detective ;)
Damon Lenszner - GTs
Peter Jones
Jamie Yabsley
Graham Clark

Westcountry TV also did quick interviews with Ian Newell and myself. They also took a shot of the meeting "in action".

Good work but bit worrying that nobody from the Council there.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
BG

VP was unable to make it due to diary committments. To be fair to the Council they cannot really add to the meetings at this point. There position is clear - that they would not rule anything in/out with regards to saving Argyle and also they would do "everything possible" to help save te club.

Currently though we have a PB so until such a time as that changes (if it does) we cannot explore things with the CC much more.

Chris
 
Jan 5, 2011
114
0
Guildford
Just reading the Mission Statement on it's own, doesn't really say anything about this being a contingency plan to purchase PAFC.

Perhaps it should read

To plan and prepare a coherent and sustainable contingency option for the purchase of Plymouth Argyle Football Club, capable of being delivered at short notice should the need arise.

Or perhaps i'm reading it in the wrong context.
 
Sep 6, 2006
10,896
33
Chris Webb":38ucv9m7 said:
BG

VP was unable to make it due to diary committments. To be fair to the Council they cannot really add to the meetings at this point. There position is clear - that they would not rule anything in/out with regards to saving Argyle and also they would do "everything possible" to help save te club.

Currently though we have a PB so until such a time as that changes (if it does) we cannot explore things with the CC much more.

Chris

The Council are crucial though. They could take weeks to come to any decision if it comes to it and we wont have that time by then. Cant they get some indication from members re the level of support?
 
Sep 13, 2003
107
0
The Grumpy Loyal":tm09evn2 said:
For Christs sake, no amount of Commitee name changing, comments or manifesto gumph is going to disguise the fact that this is still purely a bid by James Brent. Plain and simple.

If your going to expand any further than that, then u could call it 'Brents bid, supported by a few who a) yes, do want Argyle to survive, but, b) don't half love the sound of their own voices.'

It's Brents Bid. So just say it like it is FFS.

Dear Grumpy Loyal,

Your grubby little post saddens me.

At least the people involved in today`s meeting have the moral courage to act, write and speak under their own names and to stand up to be counted.

From what I can see , you have skulked under a daft pseudonym, not just once, but on 2278 previous occasions. It is so easy to be forthrightand controversial, anonymously, from behind a keyboard.

PS: In the context in which you write, it should be `you are` not `your`. (As in `You are hiding your identity because you are too frightened to say things to peoples` faces.`)
 
May 20, 2006
281
0
WHERE EVER I AM
Well done gents it's good to see that there are still business type people that care about our club, as Mr Symons says no real Argyle fan can argue with what you have planned, so lets wait for the usual posters to come along and slag the plans off.
 
Jun 9, 2006
3,903
0
Somerset
As normal the language is florrid but this sounds more like a political manifesto than a serious attempt to save a football club.

There is no statement from James Brent that he will allow others with less experience to dictate the sort of company he would own and one would assume run.

From the first moment this "baby" was mooted I have asked Why?. Why would the only person with the money hand over responsibility for running the campaign to those not experienced in such matters. We know James is no football fan let alone an Argyle one and when he had the opportunity to become the PB didnt take it. He may be genuine in what his says about the place of Argyle in the community, but he sure aint going to pay for it over and above the minimum he can get away with. Many of us saw this reticense as the first sign he didnt really want to be here and nothing since has changed my mind on that point.

So I ask again Why. Why would James Brent risk, lets face it, considerable sums of his own money when no one else apparently will and take no responsibility for it. Why would a successful businessman, an otherwise intelligent man, let a band of brothers dictate how he spends it.

I can not for the life of me understand why anyone would wish to hand of some influence to a Trust with less than 1,100 paying members, although that figure may have increased recently, no current figure appears available. And before anyone says its more than the Trust, all I can say is then they are neutered like a Tom Cat as its Chris and the Trust that are running rings around you all. On a personal note I have to say Chris has played a blinder and will no doubt not be facing election for Trust Chairman in the forthcoming election.

I note one of the aims is to review pricing, especially for the young, shame when they had the chance in talks with the club they didnt express them then.

I also note that none of the other constituent grounps issue statements, another aspect I have found worrying and facsinating in equal measure.

But the bit that saddens me most is people like me who are oppossed to Heaney and frankly, his failure to either explain or complete also find we have nothing to support by way of Goverance. To date I have not renewed my ST, as things stand I would find it difficult to financially support this Contingency Plan as presently constituted. personally, this is a lose/lose.
 
Sep 6, 2006
10,896
33
tonycholwell":3qrp6coi said:
As normal the language is florrid but this sounds more like a political manifesto than a serious attempt to save a football club.

There is no statement from James Brent that he will allow others with less experience to dictate the sort of company he would own and one would assume run.

From the first moment this "baby" was mooted I have asked Why?. Why would the only person with the money hand over responsibility for running the campaign to those not experienced in such matters. We know James is no football fan let alone an Argyle one and when he had the opportunity to become the PB didnt take it. He may be genuine in what his says about the place of Argyle in the community, but he sure aint going to pay for it over and above the minimum he can get away with. Many of us saw this reticense as the first sign he didnt really want to be here and nothing since has changed my mind on that point.

So I ask again Why. Why would James Brent risk, lets face it, considerable sums of his own money when no one else apparently will and take no responsibility for it. Why would a successful businessman, an otherwise intelligent man, let a band of brothers dictate how he spends it.

I can not for the life of me understand why anyone would wish to hand of some influence to a Trust with less than 1,100 paying members, although that figure may have increased recently, no current figure appears available. And before anyone says its more than the Trust, all I can say is then they are neutered like a Tom Cat as its Chris and the Trust that are running rings around you all. On a personal note I have to say Chris has played a blinder and will no doubt not be facing election for Trust Chairman in the forthcoming election.

I note one of the aims is to review pricing, especially for the young, shame when they had the chance in talks with the club they didnt express them then.

I also note that none of the other constituent grounps issue statements, another aspect I have found worrying and facsinating in equal measure.

But the bit that saddens me most is people like me who are oppossed to Heaney and frankly, his failure to either explain or complete also find we have nothing to support by way of Goverance. To date I have not renewed my ST, as things stand I would find it difficult to financially support this Contingency Plan as presently constituted. personally, this is a lose/lose.

So easy to find fault. Got any better ideas? Perhaps you can come up with your own plan.