WHY DOES VINCENT TAN,NEED A BUSINESS PLAN

Your lack of understanding of the situation is astounding.

1) He hasnt invested £100m, after he settles Langston it will be around £60m.
2) If it goes tits up - HE OWNS more than £60m worth of our assetts due to the conversion to equity, so no absolutely no risk to him anymore. Its like taking out a loan and securing it against your house.
3) If he does invest further, it will be in real estate which will also add to his assetts, again no risk.
4) We faced winding up orders of £2.8 million from HRMC. are you saying we didnt have any players or assetts worth £2.8 million?

1.VT,s full investment (debt to equity) will be £100 million after he pays off issacs and borlet etc, he has already stated that this is the overall figure.
2.As above, his total finacial commitment, (£100 mill) will not be covered by the assetts of the club. (stadium approx £50 mill, training centre approx £10 mill and playing staff approx £20 mill)
3.Real estate is only worth what somebody is prepared to pay for it, football clubs do not operate as a normal bricks and mortar investment, as i said, all the risk is his because if he does not get us to the promised land then there will not be anyone interested in buying the club, therefoe leaving him with a white elephant an is hands. VT now needs Cardiff City to be successful on the pitch for him to have any chane of chashing in on his investment.
4.At the time the team was infested with loan players on massive wages, not worth a penny to the club, i would say peter whittingham would have been the only player who could have provided transfer funds to pay the tax bill, even then this would not have been possible because risdale had sold the first £3.5 million transfer rights to Ray Ranson. But you are still not grasping the situation we were in before VT took over are you?? we could,nt pay our tax bills to HMRC, we were weeks away from going under!!!

So PMG and Ray Ransons company do not hold secured loans against assets of the club? or are you saying VT plans to settle those loans as well because I cannot remember reading that anywhere.

Unfortunately there are at least two secured creditors of the club and who were secured creditors long before VT arrived. Are you really sure that they do not present a risk to VT?

I don't understand your assertion that VT covers any shortfall for a fee of 7%. How does the interest charged by VT differ from that charged by PMG, or any other director. What is their 7% covering.

You seem to be misunderstanding what im saying. PMG and RR will only come into the reckoning once the club has been put into administration and they are looking for their piece of the pie. As far as im aware only £3.2 million is secured against assetts and that is player sales.

If we fail to go up, instead of giving the club another £17 million to cover their financial obligations for another 12 months (this then taking the investment above the cost of assetts - which is clear he wont do) he can sell assetts to recoup his investment. This is not administration.

When he moves on and we default on ant payments owed to other parties, THEN the club will be taken to court and then down the insolvency route due to the fact our assets have already been sold.

To start the stadium we do not even own 5%, the players are all freebies rite now bar 2-3 so i can not see what assets we got at all let alone 60million your going on about its a good though.

So PMG and Ray Ransons company do not hold secured loans against assets of the club? or are you saying VT plans to settle those loans as well because I cannot remember reading that anywhere.

Unfortunately there are at least two secured creditors of the club and who were secured creditors long before VT arrived. Are you really sure that they do not present a risk to VT?

I don't understand your assertion that VT covers any shortfall for a fee of 7%. How does the interest charged by VT differ from that charged by PMG, or any other director. What is their 7% covering.

You seem to be misunderstanding what im saying. PMG and RR will only come into the reckoning once the club has been put into administration and they are looking for their piece of the pie. As far as im aware only £3.2 million is secured against assetts and that is player sales.

If we fail to go up, instead of giving the club another £17 million to cover their financial obligations for another 12 months (this then taking the investment above the cost of assetts - which is clear he wont do) he can sell assetts to recoup his investment. This is not administration.

When he moves on and we default on ant payments owed to other parties, THEN the club will be taken to court and then down the insolvency route due to the fact our assets have already been sold.

So the £7,692,000 PMG loan detailed on page 19 of the clubs last annual accounts and listed as "Secured by means of a debenture over the assets and undertakings of the group" doesn't exist or matter. It has to be repaid surely

Also the £3.5m Player Finance Fund loan and the £1.1m loans to other directors these don't exist

Doesn't appear to me that VT owns everything in fact he looks a long way from that. Biggest shareholder yes and maybe even majority shareholder if and when the debt to equity takes place.

But that looks a fair way off and these other loans surely represent a risk and certainly mean he is a long way off owning everything.

1.VT,s full investment (debt to equity) will be £100 million after he pays off issacs and borlet etc, he has already stated that this is the overall figure.

Nope. Tan has already invested £40.8 million, this includes £6 million initial fee for the 40% equity and £34.8 million covering our shortfall since hes been with us. He has/will then loan us £35 million more which includes £10 million set aside for Langston, about £8 million transfer budget and £17 million to cover our shortfall until May 2013. This takes the amount to £75.8m. IF we secure promotion he will invest a further £10 million in training facilities and £12 million on increasing the stadium. He also then has a contingency of £2.2m to take the investment to £100m.

This is what Tan has told us. So his investment will be £75.8m, and only if we get promoted will it rise. The fact he has a contongency of £2.2 uggests that he doesnt want to invest anymore as it will not be a viable investment. So he has covered the shortfall until May 2013. He will not be doing it until May 2014 if we are still in this league, it makes no business sense.

2.As above, his total finacial commitment, (£100 mill) will not be covered by the assetts of the club. (stadium approx £50 mill, training centre approx £10 mill and playing staff approx £20 mill)

£75.8m is covered by assetts and any firther investment will only be on saleable asetts be that new real estate or improving existing.

3.Real estate is only worth what somebody is prepared to pay for it, football clubs do not operate as a normal bricks and mortar investment, as i said, all the risk is his because if he does not get us to the promised land then there will not be anyone interested in buying the club, therefoe leaving him with a white elephant an is hands. VT now needs Cardiff City to be successful on the pitch for him to have any chane of chashing in on his investment.

Thats the same as anything, but market value is market value. As I have said the risk is not his. He isnt planning to make money from selling the football club, well not much - its only worth £15m, its a company that loses around £17m a year. The contingency is selling the assetts.

4.At the time the team was infested with loan players on massive wages, not worth a penny to the club, i would say peter whittingham would have been the only player who could have provided transfer funds to pay the tax bill, even then this would not have been possible because risdale had sold the first £3.5 million transfer rights to Ray Ranson. But you are still not grasping the situation we were in before VT took over are you?? we could,nt pay our tax bills to HMRC, we were weeks away from going under!!!

Of course I am. We couldnt pay our bills because of the fact we kept spending money on players we couldnt afford and not willing to sell the ones that did have value to the club in order to settle the outstanding debts. Simple as that.

Off out for a couple of hours now so list your questions and I will field them when I return.

Exactly, the best argument anyone has put up is still based around what if's, well what if it works and we become succesful, have people forgotten how desperate we were when they first came on board, we were only heading one way then , and as I keep saying at least we have a punters chance now.

I can understand people being concerned, it's been bred into us down here, but I swear some would love to see it fail just so they can say, "see I told you so" show us the plan B or the other choices, because from where I see it, we haven't been swamped with other alternatives.

Ok well lets entertain that idea. Tell me then as a supporter of the Malaysians, what is the best realistic outcome your are expecting.

When did I become a supporter of the Malaysians? I support the club and want what's best for the club and for it to stabilise and succeed. Personally if we don't get to the Prem over night, then what does that change, I've had 46 years of waiting, not like i'm a glory hunter.
I just want us to be stable and well run and have a long sustainable future, success to me is being able to have hopes and dreams I suppose and being in business is a big part of that, mind you it's all relative and success to a Merthyr fan will be different to success as a Cardiff fan, but at the end of the day it's all the same thing we are after surely !!!

having rich backers don't guarantee success, but it does make it more achievable if playing at the very top level is how you measure success.
An account my class a second division team existing mid table year in year out but making a pound a year profit as successful, where as he may see Man Unites yer on year losses as an outright failure.
So it depends what you cal success.

According to the 2010/11 accounts the loans from the Malaysian investors, or companies they are associated with, is a secured one (page 20 - loans from directors).

Of course Vincent Tan is virtually going to own the club lock, stock and barrel once any debt to equity conversion goes through - you have this way of presenting the bleeding obvious and making it sound like some masterplan than no one but you can see through!

I'd be fascinated to know what the Cardiff City Board should have done more than two years ago, when faced with tax bills they couldn''t pay, to have avoided the situation they now find themselves in and what should they be doing now to stop Vincent Tan achieving his dastardly plan of getting complete ownership of the club by spending £100 million on it?

Sell a player and cut expenditure and live within our means like other clubs do...

not rocket science.

I see you choose to ignore a few things in your reply like the fact that the transfer window was closed for most of the time we were being served with winding up orders. You also don't bother to address the accounts contradicting your opinion that the Malaysian investor's loans were unsecured and you choose to ignore my question about what the Board should do now to stop Vincent Tan getting full control of the club - you obviously think this would be a disaster for Cardiff City, so maybe you can give them the benefit of your expertise by providing them with some viable alternative strategies?

According to the 2010/11 accounts the loans from the Malaysian investors, or companies they are associated with, is a secured one (page 20 - loans from directors).

Of course Vincent Tan is virtually going to own the club lock, stock and barrel once any debt to equity conversion goes through - you have this way of presenting the bleeding obvious and making it sound like some masterplan than no one but you can see through!

I'd be fascinated to know what the Cardiff City Board should have done more than two years ago, when faced with tax bills they couldn''t pay, to have avoided the situation they now find themselves in and what should they be doing now to stop Vincent Tan achieving his dastardly plan of getting complete ownership of the club by spending £100 million on it?

Sell a player and cut expenditure and live within our means like other clubs do...

not rocket science.

We couldn't sell a player because the High Court hearing was outside of the transfer windows.

A lot of Mr Tans puppets on here.

According to the 2010/11 accounts the loans from the Malaysian investors, or companies they are associated with, is a secured one (page 20 - loans from directors).

Of course Vincent Tan is virtually going to own the club lock, stock and barrel once any debt to equity conversion goes through - you have this way of presenting the bleeding obvious and making it sound like some masterplan than no one but you can see through!

I'd be fascinated to know what the Cardiff City Board should have done more than two years ago, when faced with tax bills they couldn''t pay, to have avoided the situation they now find themselves in and what should they be doing now to stop Vincent Tan achieving his dastardly plan of getting complete ownership of the club by spending £100 million on it?

Sell a player and cut expenditure and live within our means like other clubs do...

not rocket science.

We couldn't sell a player because the High Court hearing was outside of the transfer windows.

Well you should have sold a player in the January window then to stop going to court in the first place

So PMG and Ray Ransons company do not hold secured loans against assets of the club? or are you saying VT plans to settle those loans as well because I cannot remember reading that anywhere.

Unfortunately there are at least two secured creditors of the club and who were secured creditors long before VT arrived. Are you really sure that they do not present a risk to VT?

I don't understand your assertion that VT covers any shortfall for a fee of 7%. How does the interest charged by VT differ from that charged by PMG, or any other director. What is their 7% covering.

You seem to be misunderstanding what im saying. PMG and RR will only come into the reckoning once the club has been put into administration and they are looking for their piece of the pie. As far as im aware only £3.2 million is secured against assetts and that is player sales.

If we fail to go up, instead of giving the club another £17 million to cover their financial obligations for another 12 months (this then taking the investment above the cost of assetts - which is clear he wont do) he can sell assetts to recoup his investment. This is not administration.

When he moves on and we default on ant payments owed to other parties, THEN the club will be taken to court and then down the insolvency route due to the fact our assets have already been sold.

Absolutely wrong. Tan cannot sell club assets which RR & PMG have priority mortgage charges over, they get first dibbs on whatever money would be realised if sold i.e. Players, Stadium or even the lawn mower.

These mortgages are in force with or without administration so your great masterplan for the evil Dr Tan has a massive flaw in it, not to mention he only has a 34% share issue stake not 40% (another 15% (taking the Malaysian holding to 49%) is held by TG and other Malaysian directors)

According to the 2010/11 accounts the loans from the Malaysian investors, or companies they are associated with, is a secured one (page 20 - loans from directors).

Of course Vincent Tan is virtually going to own the club lock, stock and barrel once any debt to equity conversion goes through - you have this way of presenting the bleeding obvious and making it sound like some masterplan than no one but you can see through!

I'd be fascinated to know what the Cardiff City Board should have done more than two years ago, when faced with tax bills they couldn''t pay, to have avoided the situation they now find themselves in and what should they be doing now to stop Vincent Tan achieving his dastardly plan of getting complete ownership of the club by spending £100 million on it?

Sell a player and cut expenditure and live within our means like other clubs do...

not rocket science.

We couldn't sell a player because the High Court hearing was outside of the transfer windows.

Well you should have sold a player in the January window then to stop going to court in the first place

Sound advice but that was the Golden Ticket Scam January where players were supposed to be coming IN after we coughed up £3m+ in early season ticket sales.

According to the 2010/11 accounts the loans from the Malaysian investors, or companies they are associated with, is a secured one (page 20 - loans from directors).

Of course Vincent Tan is virtually going to own the club lock, stock and barrel once any debt to equity conversion goes through - you have this way of presenting the bleeding obvious and making it sound like some masterplan than no one but you can see through!

I'd be fascinated to know what the Cardiff City Board should have done more than two years ago, when faced with tax bills they couldn''t pay, to have avoided the situation they now find themselves in and what should they be doing now to stop Vincent Tan achieving his dastardly plan of getting complete ownership of the club by spending £100 million on it?

Sell a player and cut expenditure and live within our means like other clubs do...

not rocket science.

We couldn't sell a player because the High Court hearing was outside of the transfer windows.

Well you should have sold a player in the January window then to stop going to court in the first place

Sound advice but that was the Golden Ticket Scam January where players were supposed to be coming IN after we coughed up £3m+ in early season ticket sales.

So? How did that stop you selling players to pay your tax bill?

Also, did it ever cross your mind what would happen to funding for the following season after all your ST money would have already been spent if players had been bought?

So? How did that stop you selling players to pay your tax bill?

It is a long story but the short answer is Peter Ridsdale.

He completely f**ked up the tax bill, the season ticket money and pissed VT/TG off by not telling them that the HMRC had issued a winding up order against us (they only found out when a poster on here ihatealiens informed them in an email exchange), whilst at the same time trying to sell them the club!

The plan was for VT to invest in January but that basically ended because of Ridsdale's behaviour. By the time it all came to light January had passed without the expected investment and we were up creek ally and unable to sell anyone.

I would further add that having got us all to cough up season ticket monies pre-Christmas on the promise of January signings, Ridsdale would have been torn apart if he had then gone and sold Peter Whittingham (for example) instead.

So? How did that stop you selling players to pay your tax bill?

It is a long story but the short answer is Peter Ridsdale.

He completely f**ked up the tax bill, the season ticket money and pissed VT/TG off by not telling them that the HMRC had issued a winding up order against us (they only found out when a poster on here ihatealiens informed them in an email exchange), whilst at the same time trying to sell them the club!

The plan was for VT to invest in January but that basically ended because of Ridsdale's behaviour. By the time it all came to light January had passed without the expected investment and we were up creek ally and unable to sell anyone.

I would further add that having got us all to cough up season ticket monies pre-Christmas on the promise of January signings, Ridsdale would have been torn apart if he had then gone and sold Peter Whittingham (for example) instead.

How about the second question?

Tan does not need a plan he can do what he wants when he wants with or without the fans thats what money can do in life, whos to say what you can and can not do when you got the wallet to do what you want.

So? How did that stop you selling players to pay your tax bill?

It is a long story but the short answer is Peter Ridsdale.

He completely f**ked up the tax bill, the season ticket money and pissed VT/TG off by not telling them that the HMRC had issued a winding up order against us (they only found out when a poster on here ihatealiens informed them in an email exchange), whilst at the same time trying to sell them the club!

The plan was for VT to invest in January but that basically ended because of Ridsdale's behaviour. By the time it all came to light January had passed without the expected investment and we were up creek ally and unable to sell anyone.

I would further add that having got us all to cough up season ticket monies pre-Christmas on the promise of January signings, Ridsdale would have been torn apart if he had then gone and sold Peter Whittingham (for example) instead.

How about the second question?

I did say it was a long answer

What was supposed to happen was we coughed up £3m in early season ticket sales (it was limited to 10,000 fans) and that was used to buy players in the January window.

At the same time VT/TG were supposed to inject £6m into the club via a share issue and that would be used to pay off HMRC and provide working capital until the summer when it was hoped we would be a premiership team.

But as I explained Ridsdale f**ked the whole thing up.

So? How did that stop you selling players to pay your tax bill?

It is a long story but the short answer is Peter Ridsdale.

He completely f**ked up the tax bill, the season ticket money and pissed VT/TG off by not telling them that the HMRC had issued a winding up order against us (they only found out when a poster on here ihatealiens informed them in an email exchange), whilst at the same time trying to sell them the club!

The plan was for VT to invest in January but that basically ended because of Ridsdale's behaviour. By the time it all came to light January had passed without the expected investment and we were up creek ally and unable to sell anyone.

I would further add that having got us all to cough up season ticket monies pre-Christmas on the promise of January signings, Ridsdale would have been torn apart if he had then gone and sold Peter Whittingham (for example) instead.

How about the second question?

I did say it was a long answer

What was supposed to happen was we coughed up £3m in early season ticket sales (it was limited to 10,000 fans) and that was used to buy players in the January window.

At the same time VT/TG were supposed to inject £6m into the club via a share issue and that would be used to pay off HMRC and provide working capital until the summer when it was hoped we would be a premiership team.

But as I explained Ridsdale f**ked the whole thing up.

Doesn't really answer the question of how you were supposed to fund the following season if you, as it turned out, failed to get promoted, having blown most of your ST sales money on players mind.

Tan does not need a plan he can do what he wants when he wants with or without the fans thats what money can do in life, whos to say what you can and can not do when you got the wallet to do what you want.

He probably has a business plan (I would imagine we are on about Plan D or E by now ) but as you rightly state he doesn't need to devulge it to anyone as he is the Plan lock stock and barrel.

Tan does not need a plan he can do what he wants when he wants with or without the fans thats what money can do in life, whos to say what you can and can not do when you got the wallet to do what you want.

He probably has a business plan (I would imagine we are on about Plan D or E by now ) but as you rightly state he doesn't need to devulge it to anyone as he is the Plan lock stock and barrel.

I agree tony and thats why theres a stink going on between city fans because hes done what he wanted without us thats thing weather the red or blue side liked it or not its what we have got to go along with.

His own funding secured against the assets of the club when the conversion happens you mean?

And how much of his investment will the ASSETTS cover? great plan, invest a fortune to asset strip and get pennies.

£6 million ST money
£44 million Stadium
£10 million+ player sales.

£60 million.


We are left with nothing. Go team Tan

how do you know how many st we will sell?
stadium well didnt thing was worth that much!
players mmm who knows how much we get for a player and how many we can sell?
all speculation and esumtions
dont think have enough assets to cover debts do you? which means ???
admin at least dont you think?

-Ive gone for 15,000 ST sales, a pretty conservative figure im sure you will agree, which brings in £6 million.
-The stadium is worth £44 million according to the clubs balance sheet registered at companies house.
-Tan can sell any amount of players he wants and we are no different to any other club and will get market value, and if you dont think we have £10 million worth of players then surely theres something wrong considering we have just spent £6 million just on our last 3 players, not including Husdon, Whitts, Mason and Gunnarson.

This is before even mentioning the TV money and sponsorship...

So yes its clear we have the assetts to cover the debt, if we didnt then he would be converting would he.

The stadium may be in the balance sheet at £44m but has no real realisable value as it cannot be sold and the funds paid back to a secured creditor or shareholder due to the 20 year restricted covenant imposed on it by Cardiff Council.

15,000 season tickets do not generate £6m. That number would include children and seniors tickets at considerably lower prices than adult ones and ALL ticket prices include v.a.t at 20%. At an average rate of £200 , this would generate £3m not £6m. And part of that relates to Premier Club , where the income is charged to PMG.

The League will not allow future TV money to be mortgaged , so only current season money (currently £3m in the Championship) would be available - in 2 tranches in a season. Taking it out midway through a season would risk the club not being able to fulfil its fixtures which again the League would not allow.

The even bigger point you miss is , if the debt is converted to equity , it is illegal for a shareholder to take it out by way of a dividend as the club has no distributable revenue reserves.

Your lack of understanding of the situation is astounding.

1) He hasnt invested £100m, after he settles Langston it will be around £60m.
2) If it goes tits up - HE OWNS more than £60m worth of our assetts due to the conversion to equity, so no absolutely no risk to him anymore. Its like taking out a loan and securing it against your house.
3) If he does invest further, it will be in real estate which will also add to his assetts, again no risk.
4) We faced winding up orders of £2.8 million from HRMC. are you saying we didnt have any players or assetts worth £2.8 million?

It would get people to believe a little more that you have a basic grasp of finances if you could even spell the word "assets".

Being able to distinguish the difference between owning the club as a shareholder and being a creditor (which gives no ownership of assets) , would also help.

It just adds to your previous faux pas of not knowing the difference between profits and cashflows , as illustrated in several of your previous posts.

I did say it was a long answer

What was supposed to happen was we coughed up £3m in early season ticket sales (it was limited to 10,000 fans) and that was used to buy players in the January window.

At the same time VT/TG were supposed to inject £6m into the club via a share issue and that would be used to pay off HMRC and provide working capital until the summer when it was hoped we would be a premiership team.

But as I explained Ridsdale f**ked the whole thing up.

Doesn't really answer the question of how you were supposed to fund the following season if you, as it turned out, failed to get promoted, having blown most of your ST sales money on players mind.

TBH with you NJ73 it was a point which was heavily debated on here at the time.

The Golden Ticket Scam was sold to us on the back of a promise of Premier League football. The inference was that we could do this safely as we had new wealthy investors awaiting in the background to take up the slack.

So basically the Malaysians would prop us up until Christmas 2010 when season tickets would go back on sale and re-capitalise the club to a certain extent.

Don't get me wrong I'm not defending the way it was done but at the time we were being heavily lied to and Ridsdale was making the Mother of all f**king cock ups as well.

Strange, Roath Magic can't stop talking in other threads and yet he's dropped his interest in this one like a hot potato .

According to the 2010/11 accounts the loans from the Malaysian investors, or companies they are associated with, is a secured one (page 20 - loans from directors).

Of course Vincent Tan is virtually going to own the club lock, stock and barrel once any debt to equity conversion goes through - you have this way of presenting the bleeding obvious and making it sound like some masterplan than no one but you can see through!

I'd be fascinated to know what the Cardiff City Board should have done more than two years ago, when faced with tax bills they couldn''t pay, to have avoided the situation they now find themselves in and what should they be doing now to stop Vincent Tan achieving his dastardly plan of getting complete ownership of the club by spending £100 million on it?

Sell a player and cut expenditure and live within our means like other clubs do...

not rocket science.

We couldn't sell a player because the High Court hearing was outside of the transfer windows.

Well you should have sold a player in the January window then to stop going to court in the first place

Sound advice but that was the Golden Ticket Scam January where players were supposed to be coming IN after we coughed up £3m+ in early season ticket sales.

So? How did that stop you selling players to pay your tax bill?

Also, did it ever cross your mind what would happen to funding for the following season after all your ST money would have already been spent if players had been bought?

With the benefit of hindsight and much info. that was not known at the time there is no doubting that the club was being run on ' shit or bust' basis. Ridsdale did a marvelous job of plate juggling but by this time they were starting to crash. As for the following season Ridsdale must have known he was heading for administration unless something turned up.The delay in the Malysian investment did for the January investment in players and the rest is history.The club was effectively bust by the time of the play-off final. DT's/Mr Tan's investment saved the club at this point. They could have walked away.

As we know since this point,Mr Tan has invested considerable sums. There are no issues with the taxman.the investors have set out their plans for future progress.Some current setbacks on player targets but there will be a better squad than last season.The club is developing hugely in terms of the youth set-up and with professional background infrastructures.There are negotiations to deal with Langston.

I am however concerned. The visiting football/corporate finance expert on this board(swansea college of business admin) has a dodgy dossier(wikipedia/daily mail etc) which sets out how Mr Tan has weapons of mass destruction aimed at the club. Irrespective of the time/effort/money etc that will have been spent he is building up the club just to be able to pull the trigger at some point. Wow.What a bang!

It must be true. Our visiting expert spend hours of his time - at all hours of the day - drawing this dossier to our attention.I mean, surely he wouldn't spend so many hours of his time obsessively posting and peddling this dossier at all hours of the day and night unless it were true.Would he?

Simple question, how can a stadium be an asset, who's going to buy it if things go tits up?

You buy a million pound house, things take a downturn, you sell the house, I understand that

You build a stadium, stick it in as asset, things take a downturn, who are you going to sell it too?, its not as if Bristol City are going to say, we need a new stadium, Cardiff are selling, lets buy that

Simple question, how can a stadium be an asset, who's going to buy it if things go tits up?

You buy a million pound house, things take a downturn, you sell the house, I understand that

You build a stadium, stick it in as asset, things take a downturn, who are you going to sell it too?, its not as if Bristol City are going to say, we need a new stadium, Cardiff are selling, lets buy that

This is an obvious point and a good one to make.
The basis of valuation in the accounts (no time to look at notes to see if it's stated)will not I think be at an 'open market value assuming it's for sale without the club in being.Very simply, the options will be a version of 'replacement build cost' or a version of a profit based value derived from it's current use as a football stadium and home of Cardiff City F.C. as a going concern.

Not sure how this squares with the dodgy dossier.