Middlesbrough to sue the EFL over Derby's Stadium Purchase

[uttoxram75]

27 minutes ago, Millenniumram said:

So the EFL cleared the stadium sale valuation after clearing it beforehand, but now want to investigate it again? Sue them back, absolute joke of an organisation. There’s no way anything should come of this, and if it does... well..

I'll sellotape myself to the ICI factory in Middlesbrough in protest if we get done for this. 

[RandomAccessMemory]

2 hours ago, Woodley Ram said:

It’s a fair point you make , although having lived in Reading and owning a house in Derby I can tell you that property in Reading is significantly more expensive than Derby.

but who cares Mel had an independent valuation end of 

Of course it would be much more expensive.

However on that basis, if you consider that PP was revalued at £55m in 2007 (before FFP?) then doesn't their sale price of around half of what it cost to build (which was similar to our revaluation amount, and they were built within a couple of years of each other) seem very low, rather than ours very high?

I know that the stadium valuations are based on depreciated replacement cost, and for that they have to assume the lifespan of the asset, surely the fact that many clubs are still playing in their original grounds shows that with regular maintenance and updates (which PP has obviously had) the lifespan would most likely be much longer than the assumed one?

I wonder if that would mean that when a revaluation is done they consider a new lifespan and that might wipe out most of the previous assumed depreciation, as it hadn't depreciated as much as imagined. So if when the revaluation comes around it's say 15 years into a 30 year expected lifespan and they decide it still has another 30 year lifespan from that point, would that decrease the previous depreciation and make it immediately worth more than it's book value - as that is cost/valuation minus depreciation?

I think they also sold theirs to their parent company, where as ours was sold to a company outside of the group, even though they are both ultimately under control of the same person. I'm not sure whether that would make a difference on whether they had to get a valuation to complete the sale?

That's why I'm really not sure whether or not they had it valued. If they didn't then surely their price has absolutely no relevance to ours as we did get ours valued?

On a slight side note I found it interesting reading about DRC valuations, as I, like I think most do going from other comments, assumed that it was the cost for a replica stadium in the same place that lead to the valuation. However it seems to say that it is for a 'modern equivalent' (maybe not so relevant with PP already being fairly modern) in a different location, as though you were starting from scratch, because you wouldn't pay more for the existing (with it's potential limitations) than it would cost to build a new one.

I do wonder if the expected cost of acquisition of a new site would increase the cost of PP, as I'm not sure where a theoretical new stadium could be built if required? I can't remember whether it said it would have to be land that could actually be bought and used for that purpose, but I'd assume so and there's not too much of that around.

[Bubbles]

ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhh,

Gibson is a bamford

He wears a bamford hat

He probably likes the forest 

but hes just a boro t  at

he despises king mel

cos he's a proper arse

and when he sues the EFL it'll be a proper farce

[Mucker1884]

Ohhhhhhhh,
Gibson is a Bamford.  He wears a Bamford hat.
He didn't check our figures, 'cos he's a footy t at.

We kept him out the Play-Offs, his parachute's now spent,
...AND when he visits Pride Park, we'll charge him duckin' rent!

 

 

[desirelines]

8 minutes ago, Mucker1884 said:

Ohhhhhhhh,
Gibson is a Bamford.  He wears a Bamford hat.
He didn't check our figures, 'cos he's a footy t at.

We kept him out the Play-Offs, his parachute's now spent,
...AND when he visits Pride Park, we'll charge him duckin' rent!

Brilliant! This HAS to become a thing

[The Scarlet Pimpernel]

18 hours ago, Gritty said:

So Mel's argument will be he was misled and he paid himself too much... not sure that works...

If the issue is the valuation of the stadium then it works perfectly as Mel will be seen to have taken professional outside advice. If the issue is whether he can sell to himself or not then that is another matter.

[Spanish]

7 minutes ago, The Orange Pimpernel said:

If the issue is the valuation of the stadium then it works perfectly as Mel will be seen to have taken professional outside advice. If the issue is whether he can sell to himself or not then that is another matter.

sure it can't be, the concept of separate legal entities is a fundamental part of company governance.  It should be all about the valuation which on certain rare assets can be subjective.  Difficult to challenge if it has be prepared by an unrelated party, been audited and apparently reviewed and accepted twice by the EFL.  Wouldn't put anything past the EFL which continue to confirm by their actions that they are unfit for purpose

[DarkFruitsRam7]

1 hour ago, Mucker1884 said:

Ohhhhhhhh,
Gibson is a Bamford.  He wears a Bamford hat.
He didn't check our figures, 'cos he's a footy t at.

We kept him out the Play-Offs, his parachute's now spent,
...AND when he visits Pride Park, we'll charge him duckin' rent!

 

 

Cue mass confusion from the 98% of Derby fans who have no idea why we're singing about Bamford.

[OohMartWright]

11 hours ago, uttoxram75 said:

I'll sellotape myself to the ICI factory in Middlesbrough in protest if we get done for this. 

The only time a Popsider will ever be accused of being stuck up. ?

 

[Mucker1884]

6 hours ago, DarkFruitsRam7 said:

Cue mass confusion from the 98% of Derby fans who have no idea why we're singing about Bamford.

To be fair, when I was writing it I thought "hang on" that's not even the censor for the right word"... but it flowed so beautifully in the post before mine, I decided to keep it in (copy it!), rather than change it to "banker"!  ?