Pilgrims Regress: The Continuing Suffocation of Plymouth Argyle

On August 16th, Brendan Guilfoyle, the lead administrator for Plymouth Argyle’s parent company, was asked on BBC Radio Devon if he had received proof of funding from the club’s prospective buyers. His answer was simple: “we haven’t had proof of funding today”. This was just the latest in a string of deadlines announced, missed, and then ignored in the five-month saga of Argyle’s administration.

Guilfoyle, of The P&A Partnership, was appointed in March by a board for whom Peter Ridsdale had been acting as a ‘consultant’. Ridsdale, now the club’s ‘acting chairman’, has been a constant presence throughout a process that has often seemed to defy logic and even the plain meaning of words.

A Preferred Bidder

As early as March 7th, Guilfoyle told the Plymouth Herald, “I think I have seen the guy who is likely to buy Plymouth Argyle.” Soon after, a company named ‘PAFC 2011 Limited’ was incorporated with Julia Sincock, partner of Truro City owner Kevin Heaney, as sole director. Heaney initially denied any involvement, claiming speculation was “wide of the mark”, only for reports to later confirm he had pulled out of talks he said he was never in.

The administrator’s requirement was clear: a preferred bidder needed to provide substantial funding, “something north of £2m and south of £3m”, to cover wages and costs in return for a period of exclusivity. A ‘mystery West Country businessman’ released a six-figure sum, later revealed to be £100,000, as the first part of a supposed £1m kitty for a month’s exclusivity. That exclusivity period has now stretched to almost four months, yet the full £1m has never been paid. The group fronted by Heaney, initially described as a “Dublin-based investment group”, was formally named the preferred bidder on May 6th.

Other interested parties, including an investment business named Akkeron chaired by James Brent, and a consortium headed by property developer Paul Buttivant, were not afforded the same leniency. Buttivant’s group claimed to have provided “irrefutable proof of funding”, which Guilfoyle dismissed as “not in a satisfactory form”. Akkeron, meanwhile, refused to pay for exclusivity, seeing themselves only as an alternative to liquidation. Yet Heaney’s group was ‘preferred’ despite Guilfoyle admitting at one stage, “I don’t know their names,” and having not received the agreed funds.

Words Without Meaning

The entire process has been characterised by a redefinition of common terms. In May, Ridsdale claimed “the administrator has told me they have proven funding”, a statement directly contradicted by Guilfoyle’s radio interview this week. The £1m exclusivity payment, which Ridsdale claimed in June the group would pay, remains outstanding. On June 27th, Guilfoyle told a supporters’ forum that the group got preferred status because “the highest bidder was prepared to fund (the administration), no other bidder was”. But their preparedness did not translate into action. He was forced to concede the funding received was “not as great as I would have liked”. The word ‘agreed’ appears to have lost all meaning.

The structure of the proposed deal has also raised serious questions. It emerged that the plan involves splitting the club from its ground, Home Park. Guilfoyle stated that Heaney would not be buying the club, as the Football League would not allow it, and that “the club is going to be entirely owned by Peter Ridsdale”. Ridsdale insisted Heaney would only be the landlord, with no influence on the club’s running. This claim, however, is difficult to reconcile with a July 1st report in the Western Morning News stating the Football League “must be sure Heaney - despite being Plymouth Argyle’s initial financier under the proposed deal - will not be able to influence the running of the club.” How can the initial financier, the guarantor of the club’s financial stability, not hold influence?

Heaney himself has passed the buck for delays, telling the press that money “was not an issue” and that the only hold-ups were “issues with the football league and creditors”.

An Irrational Determination

Despite the lack of proven funding, the missed deadlines, and the questionable structure of the takeover, Guilfoyle’s determination to push ahead with the Heaney and Ridsdale plan appears unshakable. There is a contingency plan in place should the deal collapse, yet the administrator continues to pursue a bid from a group whose funding is apparently dependent on an unrelated property deal.

The situation is hardly helped by the fact that Ridsdale, the proposed new owner, faces fraud charges relating to his time as chairman of Cardiff City.

One is left to wonder why Guilfoyle has shown such patience with this particular bidder, and why the process seems to be engineered towards a handover to Ridsdale, the very man who was advising the board that appointed the administrators. The case is due back in court on September 27th.