Update from "Contingency" Plan Meeting

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 [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

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!

Hello Chris,

Thanks for taking the time in posting this information on here. Was the Council involved in this meeting at all?

Thanks

After todays news, i think were gonna need it

Chemical Ali wrote:

Hello Chris,

Thanks for taking the time in posting this information on here. Was the Council involved in this meeting at all?

Thanks

Hi

VP was unable to make it because of diary committments.

Hopefully we will have someone from the CC there on the 12th.

Chris

125+1 wrote:

After todays news, i think were gonna need it

What news, and need what 125 ?
Do you refer to Ridsdale's comments that appear to at last state publicly what we have always thought ... the administrators will do nothing to contracturally stop Heaney taking his time right up to the start of the season after next, with no sanction on his exclusivity ?
We've suspected as much right from the outset ... so what's new ? have I missed something ?

As to the trust's release, i see nothing new there ... more rhetoric but they are going to do absolutely nothing to OPPOSE the Heaney bid ... we already know that.

penzancepirate wrote:

125+1 wrote:

After todays news, i think were gonna need it

What news, and need what 125 ?
Do you refer to Ridsdale's comments that appear to at last state publicly what we have always thought ... the administrators will do nothing to contracturally stop Heaney taking his time right up to the start of the season after next, with no sanction on his exclusivity ?
We've suspected as much right from the outset ... so what's new ? have I missed something ?

As to the trust's release, i see nothing new there ... more rhetoric but they are going to do absolutely nothing to OPPOSE the Heaney bid ... we already know that.

The news that the Heaney funding relies on a seperate property deal going through, although his soliciter does say alternative funding is availible!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A real alternative to the heaney bid thats all ready to run if need be.

And as for your little dig at the trust, they are not in a position to oppose the Heaney bid. The sale and purchase agreement that has been signed is legally binding. They can only really act if it goes tits up.

125+1 wrote:

The news that the Heaney funding relies on a seperate property deal going through, although his soliciter does say alternative funding is availible!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A real alternative to the heaney bid thats all ready to run if need be.

And as for your little dig at the trust, they are not in a position to oppose the Heaney bid. The sale and purchase agreement that has been signed is legally binding. They can only really act if it goes tits up.

Thanks 125. Nothing new then ... we have always known this whole Heaney/pre pack thing depended on getting a 'deal' from the Council. What we don't know is if this 'deal' involves Central Park, Derriford or Milbay. It involves the 'student accomodation' and I'm sure Heaney would be delighted to get Central park but that isn't going to happen, so Derriford is the only other likely candidate at say the old barracks site... what a wasteland that has been for years.
Hopefully, PCC, like most Councils throughout the land these days, think we are saturated with such accomodations and projects ... they have become a blight and many will be the future reduced living spec slums that even any self respecting housing associations wouldn't touch at present.

As to the trust thing, they do have a choice. They can keep out of the 'rescue bid' and get on with OPPOSING the Heaney bid... they are not restrained by some other contract they are not involved with. Only being involved in a rescue package excludes them from creating a campaign.

And despite Ridsdale's bullshit, the administrators would not ditch a good £3m extra by liquidating instead of a Brent deal should Heaney colapse. Don't forget, the huge majority of a Brent deal was already about to run before the long planned sting happened at the last moment... and that was without the trust.

Sadly though, it's been a good weekend for Ridsdale and Heaney, they've outed their long term administration plans and few are upset, and will now concentrate on trying to get fan pressure to come down on the council. But that won't happen... they've miscalculated there apart from a few Philistines on Pasoti.

Starve all the bastards out. The club is dead. Might as well start again in the wilderness.

Tringreen wrote:

Starve all the bastards out. The club is dead. Might as well start again in the wilderness.

.........that's my Plan C Tring, well in truth Plan B is my plan A and Plan C, as I call it, is my Plan B.

Clear as custard .

Tringreen wrote:

Starve all the bastards out. The club is dead. Might as well start again in the wilderness.

Exactly, force them out and then allow the Trust in with Plan B!

Tringreen wrote:

Starve all the bastards out. The club is dead. Might as well start again in the wilderness.

Yep, that's what will work in the medium term, the next couple of years. And I hope PCC will play a part in starving these people out. The city doesn't need their sort.

PCC in their ever so independent wisdom, gave them the favour of delaying their business rates!

GOB wrote:

PCC in their ever so independent wisdom, gave them the favour of delaying their business rates!

A mere bagatelle Gob.
I remember PCC 'giving' McCauley Drakes Island so as to help facilitate his removal from Argyle.
He's still got it and was sold a worthless pup in development terms.... ha ha.... excellent stuff.

The Council are not as benign as they appear.... they do plan for eventualities.

[quote="penzancepirate"]

125+1 wrote:

The news that the Heaney funding relies on a seperate property deal going through, although his soliciter does say alternative funding is availible!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A real alternative to the heaney bid thats all ready to run if need be.

And as for your little dig at the trust, they are not in a position to oppose the Heaney bid. The sale and purchase agreement that has been signed is legally binding. They can only really act if it goes tits up.

Thanks 125. Nothing new then ... we have always known this whole Heaney/pre pack thing depended on getting a 'deal' from the Council.

Nothing to do with the Council, hence why it involves raising funds, more to do with property Heaney is looking to sell

There's just no way in today's economic climate and depressed property market that he's going to get enough money to do this thing without a hefty uplift in useage value in Central Park .... it hinges on that, not selling a few houses in Cornwall.... that's nonsense. If he got the assurances from the council ( which he won't ), there would be enough uplift development profit around to seal the deal and get his investors. It isn't just this touted cinema chain he needs, he also needs the student accomodation to make it all pay, to get people to put money in.

penzancepirate wrote:

There's just no way in today's economic climate and depressed property market that he's going to get enough money to do this thing without a hefty uplift in useage value in Central Park .... it hinges on that, not selling a few houses in Cornwall.... that's nonsense. If he got the assurances from the council ( which he won't ), there would be enough uplift development profit around to seal the deal and get his investors. It isn't just this touted cinema chain he needs, he also needs the student accomodation to make it all pay, to get people to put money in.

Who said anything about selling a few house's, to even suggest that is nonsense. Heaney owns alot of property and land in the south west, and the student thing has also been ruled out by Heaneys planning guy. They know that is a no go. And as the council are involved with the trust's rescue plan there is no need to twist the planning rules to Heaney's favour.

125+1 wrote:

penzancepirate wrote:

There's just no way in today's economic climate and depressed property market that he's going to get enough money to do this thing without a hefty uplift in useage value in Central Park .... it hinges on that, not selling a few houses in Cornwall.... that's nonsense. If he got the assurances from the council ( which he won't ), there would be enough uplift development profit around to seal the deal and get his investors. It isn't just this touted cinema chain he needs, he also needs the student accomodation to make it all pay, to get people to put money in.

Who said anything about selling a few house's, to even suggest that is nonsense. Heaney owns alot of property and land in the south west, and the student thing has also been ruled out by Heaneys planning guy. They know that is a no go. And as the council are involved with the trust's rescue plan there is no need to twist the planning rules to Heaney's favour.

Careful.......... you're showing that you do have thought processes again, which doesn't sit comfortably with your blind faith Avivaness.

125+1 wrote:

penzancepirate wrote:

There's just no way in today's economic climate and depressed property market that he's going to get enough money to do this thing without a hefty uplift in useage value in Central Park .... it hinges on that, not selling a few houses in Cornwall.... that's nonsense. If he got the assurances from the council ( which he won't ), there would be enough uplift development profit around to seal the deal and get his investors. It isn't just this touted cinema chain he needs, he also needs the student accomodation to make it all pay, to get people to put money in.

Who said anything about selling a few house's, to even suggest that is nonsense. Heaney owns alot of property and land in the south west, and the student thing has also been ruled out by Heaneys planning guy. They know that is a no go. And as the council are involved with the trust's rescue plan there is no need to twist the planning rules to Heaney's favour.

Humbug. While This is just another version Heaney and Ridsdale might be trying to sell the administrators, the Council, the Football League or the fans.
Practice the different mantras all you like, but it still says the same thing ... the cheque is in the post.... give me another year.
It's all a bit John De Lorean ? remember him ... what a prize contender he was.

Of course, we all know by now Ridsdale Hall is up for sale .... Wrayton Hall that is ..... £1.3m. Is Heaney waiting for a bunce from Ridsdale ? Perhaps Heaney and Ridders are in it to win it .... themselves.

So...

The trust have been fobbed off by Brenda and the Riddler and now Pengelly has fobbed em off twice in a row also.
Now suddenly, despite no concrete assurance whatsoever, the trust don't need her involvment.

Also... Not a word on who would actually run the club under whatever name the plan is now being called? Isn't that rather strange? All these meetings and everyone avoids discussing who is going to be the boss like it's the plague. Who is going to give us all this 'morality' and "good football governance"? How can you have a plan to run a football club without somebody in place to implement it?

Rickler wrote:

So...

The trust have been fobbed off by Brenda and the Riddler and now Pengelly has fobbed em off twice in a row also.
Now suddenly, despite no concrete assurance whatsoever, the trust don't need her involvment.

Also... Not a word on who would actually run the club under whatever name the plan is now being called? Isn't that rather strange? All these meetings and everyone avoids discussing who is going to be the boss like it's the plague. Who is going to give us all this 'morality' and "good football governance"? How can you have a plan to run a football club without somebody in place to implement it?

I think under the trust it will still be risdale!

Not according to Chris Webb.

He pointedly told everyone that if Riddler didn't come to the meetings he could hardly run the club.

So somebody is definately needed, but the Trust (sorry fans group) haven't discussed it at all according to them.

So that leads me to the conclusion... They are either lying or just plain stupid.

Peter Jones has links with Dunford so maybe he's under consideration?

Chemical Ali wrote:

Peter Jones has links with Dunford so maybe he's under consideration?

That would certainly be a safe pair of hands, he knows what he's doing and wouldn't 'risk take', always a (ahem) risk with Ridsdale.

Thing is i've always said we had to be cute and give Ridsdale a reason to ditch Heaney, he holds the strings to all this so leavinga door open to him gives him an escape hatch. That was never a ringing endorsement of Ridsdale, personally I want him seen over the county line but it was a pragmatic means to and end if you will, give him the CEO stop, shackled but still in a job.

As time has gone on though whilst I know there is logic to that thinking I know I just couldn't stomach it, I just couldn't see him in the directors box and feel comfortable. He's got to go, it wouldn't work.