Whilst I'm not particularly a soccer fan, I did follow/continue to follow the Argyle stuff in our local press - partly because living across the Tamar I work with a number of AFC fans.

I concur that Peter's comment "[i. . . he is as sharp as paper cut and not as pleasant . . .[/i" succinctly covers BG . . . . .

Suppose he has to be.. if he doesnt do what hes paid to do he wont get paid, noone else will and we wont have a club.

All I really want to say on here is that it would have been immediately obvious to people like me which way things were likely to be heading, had the identity of the "independent reviewer" - he has a high profile in the insolvency field - been made public at the outset.

I did tell people I expected the reviewer to be an insolvency specialist, and indeed in the circumstances it would have been reasonable to look to someone in the "corporate recovery" field.

Adeybull why do you seem to have some sort of moral superiority complex. Your posts predominantly say "I told you so". Wow congratulations you narcissistic being.

He sounds like a Thomas Hardy character (Guilfoyle, not Adeybull - he's an Andy McNab character).

Lots of Wakey fans told you what was going to happen, lots of Wakey fans told you what needed to be done, Lots of wakey fans told you not to support the pledge but to set up a supporters trust with the money being pledged rather than give it to a defunct BoD.
You told all the Wakey fans that we were wrong and to top it all lots of fans from all over the RL community told you the reason for the RFL buying the Odsal lease was to help bail the bulls out of financial ruin and you disagreed with that.
When I say "You" I am actually referring to "You" Adey, you are an ostrich you come across to the fans on here as knowing what is going on but in truth you know "Jack"
I think it's about time you come clean on here it's not fair on the rest of the bulls fans for you to keep leading them down the garden path

Happy to help drop me a PM

To be fair to BG, he is supposed to be the creditors friend not your's, he may well come across nicey nicey in the media, but his legal remit is much different.

As it has already been clearly shown that the vast majority PAID knowing Caisley had scuppered the BOD, and did so simply to resuscitate the club for a short further period of breathing space (which may, or may not have worked); and as nothing else would have kept the club alive, your continuing desire to repeat this bollox must be due to some sort of comprehension problem you have.

If the club had not been able to pay any demands, but some improbably cobbled together supporters organisation was sitting on a small amount of money, how the hell would that have done anything, at all, to help in our particular situation?

Even leaving aside the big issue of whether such an organisation could have been set up overnight, what sum could it have raised? Much less than the Pledge did, and that amount (£1/2m) was as we knew only to keep the biggest wolf from the front door, and not some panacea.

We kept the club going to give all concerned a small window of opportunity to sort it out. The fact they have not so far done so does not = that there was any sensible or even possible alternative. Which you very well know.

Well, only sort of. Under the Insolvency Act there are only 3 statutory purposes for an administrator and the top of the list is rescuing the company as a going concern. There, the interests of fans and creditors co-incide and indeed maybe the fans are in front, since the only way that ever happens is if the creditors take a big %age hit.

Who pays the administrator?

Just musing a thought, Mr. Guilfoyle will be spoilt for choice won't he, surely both Caisley and Hood are presenting their rescue packages to him as they were both cast iron to win but only depended upon a) The other not being there; and b) the level of debt being reduced. Will there be white smoke rising from the Coral Stand when the deal is done!

He is paid out of the funds available from ongoing trading and asset realisations.

BG will be very well aware there will be bugger all of either - he has already made that clear - so he won't want to be in office for any longer than he has to be.

Prior to his appointment as administrator, he will have been paid by those who retained him and his firm, and on whose instructions he and his firm were acting and were representing. Bear in mind that the pre-admin period was very different, since Caisley will have retained his firm to carry out a specific job and in such cases a predetermined objective has already been established.