Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
SuperDerbySuperRams

EFL order independent valuation of Pride Park

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, AdamRam said:

Are the EFL looking for someone to blame ? From what I have read they are seeking an independent valuation of PP to ensure the value that has been put on it, is realistic.

I would assume only if there is a considerable difference would they investigate why.

Perhaps not, but you get the feeling this wouldn’t have been an issue if Steve Gibson and the like hadn’t stuck their noses in. Strikes me as trying to save face, and theyll look to hand out a punishment to us to try and make a statement if it’s at all possible. Which it only will be if the valuation differs like you say.

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, Nuwtfly said:

Can't help but feel a little bit worried about this.

No smoke without fire, right?

EFL just doing their due diligence, they should have done this immediately to be fair.

You can't overvalue or undervalue an asset in these sorts of transactions (moving assets between companies you own) without breaking actual law, not just the rules of a competition. 

And HMRC would not have waited as long as the EFL have to get involved, were that the case.

Edited by SaintRam

Share this post


Link to post
3 minutes ago, AdamRam said:

Are the EFL looking for someone to blame ? From what I have read they are seeking an independent valuation of PP to ensure the value that has been put on it, is realistic.

I would assume only if there is a considerable difference would they investigate why.

Sheffield Wednesday and Reading are also being investigated after selling their stadiums. Wednesday's went for £60m (£38.1m profit). Villa sold theirs too but i believe they can't be penalised by the EFL now they're in the Prem.

The EFL are probably only doing this to keep the likes of Gibson quiet.

Share this post


Link to post

Are the EFL also going to get independent valuations on other balance sheet assets that have been sold by clubs too? For example, players under contract are assets and profit can be made from the transfer?

Perhaps they should look at Huddersfield for their valuation of Jacob Butterfield when they sold him to us? Or Reading for Nick Blackman? And if Watford get relegated back into the EFL they should be squitting themselves over the Anya sale....??

FFP is a politically-nice idea but is completely undeliverable in a division of so many income variables. You get the feeling that the EFL are desperate to make it work but are permanently fighting fires over it as clubs look to compete with the ludicrous parachute payments.

Professional sport is always about seeking a competitive advantage and that applies just as much off the field as it does on. Won't be long before the best Finance Directors are being sold for more than a 20-goal striker!

Share this post


Link to post

Mel said that the sale of the ground was made based on an independent valuation and there is nothing to suggest that wasn't the case. Another independent valuation carried out by EFL may well be different but still doesn't mean the original was incorrect. Get 2 estate agent to value your house and they could quite conceivably be substantially different.

At the moment the EFL must be highly sensitive to any criticism for their handling of the Bury situation so must feel they need to be seen, at the very least, to be investigating the PP sale if one of their members have logged a formal complaint. If there was a loophole which existed at the time and Derby benefited from it then more fool the EFL for their lack of foresight.

Share this post


Link to post
36 minutes ago, Red_Dawn said:

drama popcorn GIF

If I was a red dog I’d be more worried about the Greek match fixing investigation and police investigations into other alleged activities by their owner . Wonder if NCC are charging the dogs a fair market rent for the Council Tip ? Perhaps that needs an investigation 

Share this post


Link to post
45 minutes ago, StarterForTen said:

Are the EFL also going to get independent valuations on other balance sheet assets that have been sold by clubs too? For example, players under contract are assets and profit can be made from the transfer?

Perhaps they should look at Huddersfield for their valuation of Jacob Butterfield when they sold him to us? Or Reading for Nick Blackman? And if Watford get relegated back into the EFL they should be squitting themselves over the Anya sale....??

FFP is a politically-nice idea but is completely undeliverable in a division of so many income variables. You get the feeling that the EFL are desperate to make it work but are permanently fighting fires over it as clubs look to compete with the ludicrous parachute payments.

Professional sport is always about seeking a competitive advantage and that applies just as much off the field as it does on. Won't be long before the best Finance Directors are being sold for more than a 20-goal striker!

Not quite sure I understand the first part of your argument, the players you mentioned were sold by the clubs, whether we overpaid or not is irrelevant, the two clubs agreed on a price and we paid that. Had MM owned both clubs then I could see where your coming from.

Agree on the paragraph on FFP though.

Share this post


Link to post
58 minutes ago, Millenniumram said:

Perhaps not, but you get the feeling this wouldn’t have been an issue if Steve Gibson and the like hadn’t stuck their noses in. Strikes me as trying to save face, and theyll look to hand out a punishment to us to try and make a statement if it’s at all possible. Which it only will be if the valuation differs like you say.

Agreed, you would have thought they would engage with the company that did the valuation to understand how they came up with that figure, what happens if their independent valuation is higher- is MM then up on charges for ripping the club off.

Seems a bit bizarre to me, why not have independent accountants for all the clubs balance sheets, seems as though they are accusing the club of doing something wrong by picking on something which is allowed within their rules.

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, AdamRam said:

Agreed, you would have thought they would engage with the company that did the valuation to understand how they came up with that figure, what happens if their independent valuation is higher- is MM then up on charges for ripping the club off.

Revise the books and get more clearance on FFP - Use that to buy Gareth Bale

Share this post


Link to post

I didn't believe the EFL could stoop to deeper levels of incompetence after how they have dealt with the Bury situation, however, once again they prove me wrong. How can you sign off an action as correct and then decide later its wrong?

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but to me it just looks looks like a box-ticking exercise designed to

1) shut up the likes of Boro & Leeds who have complained

2) make it clear to other clubs going forward that anyone pulling this move in future will be subject to the same scrutiny so don't even think about having your independent valuation done by Shonky & Brown Envelope Real Estate Surveyors Ltd

I don't think we need to worry

Share this post


Link to post

I've always argued what would be more sensible than capped losses, is limiting the debts a club can can relative to its turnover. The problem with a lot of clubs, including Bury, are debts against the club. If Mel wants to lose his money (say he spends £40 on transfers and wages) that's fine. If Mel borrows £40m against the club for the same thing DCFC have a debt of £40m. The FFP lose made would theoretically be the same, but the circumstances are obviously different.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

I've always argued what would be more sensible than capped losses, is limiting the debts a club can can relative to its turnover. The problem with a lot of clubs, including Bury, are debts against the club. If Mel wants to lose his money (say he spends £40 on transfers and wages) that's fine. If Mel borrows £40m against the club for the same thing DCFC have a debt of £40m. The FFP lose made would theoretically be the same, but the circumstances are obviously different.

Isn’t this where the sustainability part of FFP comes in though, why would it be fine if Mel loses his money but it the process racks up a wage bill that is unsustainable. If he for example walked away / didn’t have the money to cover it etc.....

The EFL get a lot of stick for their rules but did the clubs not vote these in ? Or did I dream that 🤣

Share this post


Link to post

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.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.