Jump to content

EFL commission independent ground valuation?


Recommended Posts

You can pay anything between £1 and £3.50 for a 500ml bottle of Coke. 

 

Do venues and service stations charging £3.50 get investigated? 

 

It's ripp off Britain in many aspects of life and nothing gets done about it.

I think the EFL are wasting there time on this one. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mkowl said:

 

Totally irrelevant about land prices

 

The stadium valuation is based on cost to re-build to same specification less useful years left of the stadium

 

It is a technical type valuation not linked to commercial value - almost like the one used in your home insurance policy about re-build cost not current value in the market if it was destroyed 

So if it is going to cost more than £70m to build Brentford’s new 20,000 capacity stadium is a £60m valuation of Hillsborough unreasonable?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, bradowl said:

You can pay anything between £1 and £3.50 for a 500ml bottle of Coke. 

 

Do venues and service stations charging £3.50 get investigated? 

 

It's ripp off Britain in many aspects of life and nothing gets done about it.

I think the EFL are wasting there time on this one. 

 

They bloody should do! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ChapSmurf said:

 

Bigger company/higher risk? I am actually a one-man band, but wrapped under a Limited company as I am a contractor.

 

Accountancy practice lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

The EFL indicated this some time ago  but like most things with EFL there is little purpose in what they do and usually get things wrong. Thin this is to consider ways of blocking loophole to prevent other clubs following suit. The hole P & S process is to stop clubs getting into financial difficulties. This year Bolton and Bury have been in huge difficulties one has succumbed the other survived by skin of teeth. It is well known numerous others are on brink but they are using resources to chase after owners who have money to put into clubs. They got TV deal wrong for Championship clubs in a big way which is hit them all financially. The problem is distribution of TV money and anomaly parachute payments has on Championship. The Championship either has to break free of other leagues and sell what is an excellent product independently or they have to review parachute payment situation and distribute more money to EFL. 

Championship now gets second billing on Sky with no Spanish football the number of hours dedicated to Championship has increased dramatically and is now referenced far more in PL shows. Sky still charge as much if not more for product they are offering and Championship are definitely being short changed for rewards they get. There are some huge clubs in second tier who dwarf some of those currently in PL and who have only got their by financial benefactor who at the time were not constrained by P & S. The huge TV money has an incredible impact upon a club and enables them to develop infrastructure to a standard which can attract the best young talents in game and ensure they have productive academies.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, oldowl67 said:

So if it is going to cost more than £70m to build Brentford’s new 20,000 capacity stadium is a £60m valuation of Hillsborough unreasonable?

 

that is the point - the valuation is based on replacement cost but depreciated to take into account the residual useful life of the stadium

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, bigthinrob said:

Can someone put me right on this.

 

Whereas the Premier league seem to wrap their clubs in cotton wool & reward & protect them at every opportunity, it seems the EFL try and make it as difficult as possible for the clubs under their banner.

 

They initially stabbed at a random figure for FFP before they were forced to ‘re brand’ it, made life harder for clubs season on season by not index linking the amount & then retrospectively trying to again, screw clubs that have been forced to try & maximise assets because of said arbitrary, non index linked FFP.

 

It smacks of a teacher punishing a kid they are supposed to care for because the kid shows too much ambition & takes on private tuition.

 

They will no doubt try & quote the Bury situation (laughably), as justification, which is down to one mans greed & the EFLs abject failure to comply with ‘due diligence’ checks by their own staff.

 

Not unlike the SYP situation where they c*ck it up & then punish us for their admitted said c**k up.

 

 

 

 

 

Post of the day, 100% this. Particularly the part I have highlighted in bold. The EFL are not fit for purpose, and need to be investigated themselves for some extremely dubious decisions over the last few years.

Edited by The Italian Stallion
Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Animis said:

 

Thanks - I think you'll find it does have to be a RICS valuer as the valuation will need to be 'red book'.

 

To apply a value, an alternate use wouldn't be used in this case, as it could only be a use, which the assumptions proved could be actually developed. Of the alternative land values, residential has traditionally been the highest, and Hillsborough could feasible be residential subject to planning consent and restrictions (flooding etc.). If you deducted the demolition costs, the club could only feasibly raise up to £5m.

 

To have got to £60m, it would have been based on existing use taking an hypothetic annual rent x an investment yield rate x the years of the lease.

 

Hypothetical rent could be based on examples/comparables like Leeds when the rented their ground which was reported to have been £1.7m/annum, so say £2m/annum adjusted for inflation.

 

The yield is likely to be mid range due to the competing risks of investors' view of the stability of a football club's ability to pay, and whether there is a market. Clearly football grounds are for the sole use of the particular football club so on one hand they ain't going anyway, but the financial sustainability is always in question - see Bury.

 

Clearly this is all academic as DC essentially set two companies up to undertake the transaction. I do wonder whether he has to actual set up a rental stream between the two companies to justify the above - not in a valuation sense, but accountancy.

 

 

 

I don't disagree that in this case I would believe it would be a RICS valuer

 

The Derby valuation was on a depreciated replacement cost basis 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, mkowl said:

 

I don't disagree that in this case I would believe it would be a RICS valuer

 

The Derby valuation was on a depreciated replacement cost basis 

 

I see - that implies football stadiums are a special use - like for example civic buildings City/Town Halls etc.

 

The issue I see is that there are examples of commercial rental transactions (Leeds up to 2017), which 'values' the use of football stadiums, like any other commercial use.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Royal_D said:

Was always gonna pop up this,  there ever actually been an official figure for what Chansiri pumped in for the ground ? 

In the accounts it looked like around £60m from what I remember. This was based on a ‘sale of assets’ sum

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, BIG D said:

Are the EFL going to put a value on every player sale?

The ground is worth what someone is willing to pay.

It's more complicated than that when the person buying it is the person selling it. Who knows what "D-Taxis" were paying for advertising but there's a limit to what you can get away with.

 

I can't see why we would be in any bother - some clubs will have been kicking up a fuss and we have exploited an obvious loophole which I gather has opened up because the EFL has adopted PL rules. It's fundamental to us avoiding a points deduction so it's belt and braces from their point of view. They'll investigate, we'll have done things properly and all will be well. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Animis said:

 

No its not - it's based on very clear and robust rules. 

 

What are those robust rules?

 

If there was a piece of land next to your house where only you and your neighbour could gain access and you and your neighbour really wanted to have a bigger garden, that land in essence is pretty worthless however as the only land available and two parties desperately wanting that land what it sells for and its inherent value can be two very different values...  What the EFL are trying to imply is that if the ground is sold for more than its value then its dodgy, my point is lots of things sell for way over their inherent value.

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, mkowl said:

 

Accountancy practice lol

 

lol

 

I thought you were involved in the "financial" industry (loose term I know) due to some of your other posts over the years.

 

I think you clearly win that round of Top Trumps :biggrin:

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, mkowl said:

 

that is the point - the valuation is based on replacement cost but depreciated to take into account the residual useful life of the stadium

Using that formula  can you work back from the £60m valuation to an estimated rebuild cost or are there too many variables in the depreciation calc?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, bradowl said:

Let's tell EFL to do one and go and play in Scottish League. :biggrin:

 

Isn't there already an English based club in it,? 

 

Welsh clubs play in EFL so what's to stop us? 

 

Sheffield Wednesday v Aberdeen, Hearts, Celtic, Rangers would be more attractive than watching us play Wigan, Brentford, Reading year after year. 

 

We'd stand a chance of winning a trophy too. :cool:

The away trips would be more expensive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...