Breaking: ' Cardiff City Accounts RELEASED '

Basically without covid we would of broke even ,not too bad I think

That's absolute rubbish and you know it.

These accounts cover a very short period of Covid. If the whole Covid period was represented, they would be far worse.


More bullshit from Dalman when he said the only debt we had was to Tan (even though Tan said we'd be debt free by now).

The other debtors aren't registered charges at companies house but they're still debts.

In these accounts, Tan has still not converted any of our debts to him to shares.


The money taken out of the club by these people is a disgrace.

Worcester, i could not of put it better.
Wez, supports Dalman, tan no matter what even when its their in black and white, Wez should be putting our club first instead he backs Dalmans shite, unbelievable

I hope you are not calling out these corporate robbing bas.... are you. You'll get slagged on here by the mob for critical thinking mind.

Get with the narrative and just happy clap the club and the this greedy industry. Players are gods and all that crap.

Loyalty lol, dont make me laugh. They will piss all over you and wont think twice about it. You, me are last on their list of priorities. Fuc.. the lot of them!!!!

i dont think your one man crusade against football is working mate... and even if it did i doubt youd see the return of woolshops to the level they once were... the women that deserted in droves to watch football will just move onto something else...

Thanks, Keith

Enlightening and informative as ever...

Chris very informative and enlightening but still people only see what they want to see and use various figures to prove points for and against tan and club..... think its time people stopped believing Dalman whatever he says because he makes things up like sala case we'll go bust if have to pay yet it clearly states provisions made for it which as been stated previously as well.....far to many amateur accountants on here who can't even use an abacus.

Allan on three different occasions Tan / Dalman said we would be debt free, well 12 years later and we are not, so yes there is concern and rightly so.

Tan in 2013 said “in days we will be debt free” it’s now 2022.

Are we not allowed to ask questions Allan?

Is this forum not for debates and discussions or do you want us to be dictated to?

Yes and I am debating whats being said and putting a point of view across..... as I've pointed out people on here believe Dalman when it suits them but then calls him a liar when that suits them hence said people shouldn't believe anything he says? As for debt free well my stance as been same over the years and that is wait if or when tan as gone and then judge him..... I am not concerned about debt free simply because we are no different from every club we all got money problems but simply adjust cloth accordingly... and I am correct in saying people use debt figures to suit themselves latest headlines on here is 100m in debt and plenty of other sums used previously yet trust person "kieth" says 24m? I Know who I believe it Sort of proves my point in my post
Ps even if debt free 10yrs ago we would not be debt free today and had the success we've had.

As far as I can see the debt Mr Tan's own investment cash in the main. The big problem would be if the debt was to other parties with extortionate interest rates/penalties/recalls etc.
I recall at some point the club's main Bank lender moved to call in their loans which would have bust the club. Presumably Ninian Park then sold to housebuilders or whoever. Thankfully Steve Borley managed to save the day.

Basically without covid we would of broke even ,not too bad I think

That's absolute rubbish and you know it.

These accounts cover a very short period of Covid. If the whole Covid period was represented, they would be far worse.


More bullshit from Dalman when he said the only debt we had was to Tan (even though Tan said we'd be debt free by now).

The other debtors aren't registered charges at companies house but they're still debts.

In these accounts, Tan has still not converted any of our debts to him to shares.


The money taken out of the club by these people is a disgrace.

Worcester, i could not of put it better.
Wez, supports Dalman, tan no matter what even when its their in black and white, Wez should be putting our club first instead he backs Dalmans shite, unbelievable

I hope you are not calling out these corporate robbing bas.... are you. You'll get slagged on here by the mob for critical thinking mind.

Get with the narrative and just happy clap the club and the this greedy industry. Players are gods and all that crap.

Loyalty lol, dont make me laugh. They will piss all over you and wont think twice about it. You, me are last on their list of priorities. Fuc.. the lot of them!!!!

i dont think your one man crusade against football is working mate... and even if it did i doubt youd see the return of woolshops to the level they once were... the women that deserted in droves to watch football will just move onto something else...

Good reply...

Any modernistic, realistic and educated thinking is wasted on our Victorian Revolutionary, the money man that is the B£ue £agoon (aka Fu.. Man Choo), I'm afraid...

The realities of what is required to operate a modern business is way out of his comfort zone

We don't know his real position but he whinges like a Republican about being misunderstood, misinterpreted and misrespresnted, yet he calls out Tan and anyone who has money whilst still purchasing tickets/merchandise and boasting he is off on a 'Fu.. Man Choo everyone else' Florida holiday because he had his two jabs early...

Double standards is him...

The book valuation of the stadium for £80 million is a farce and concerning. Who is going to ever buy it? No one I hope. Simply a means Tan can leverage and borrow on clubs behalf.

And the amount of money going the way of Directors, most of which I'm guessing goes to Chairman Dalman, is shocking for an organisation with heavy losses.

About time football made transfer fees totally and absolutely transparent. Installments, agents fees the lot.

To rebuild our stadium would cost at least 80m so hardly a farce tbh

It didn't cost £80,000,000 to build and no one will now pay £80,000,000 for it so it is a farce. And not in the proper interests of the club.

Excess valuations of assets for accounting purposes serve no purpose unless you want to borrow against them or sell them to yourself.

The book valuation of the stadium for £80 million is a farce and concerning. Who is going to ever buy it? No one I hope. Simply a means Tan can leverage and borrow on clubs behalf.

And the amount of money going the way of Directors, most of which I'm guessing goes to Chairman Dalman, is shocking for an organisation with heavy losses.

About time football made transfer fees totally and absolutely transparent. Installments, agents fees the lot.

To rebuild our stadium would cost at least 80m so hardly a farce tbh

It didn't cost £80,000,000 to build and no one will now pay £80,000,000 for it so it is a farce. And not in the proper interests of the club.

Excess valuations of assets for accounting purposes serve no purpose unless you want to borrow against them or sell them to yourself.

Brentfords stadium cost over 70mill to build.

The book valuation of the stadium for £80 million is a farce and concerning. Who is going to ever buy it? No one I hope. Simply a means Tan can leverage and borrow on clubs behalf.

And the amount of money going the way of Directors, most of which I'm guessing goes to Chairman Dalman, is shocking for an organisation with heavy losses.

About time football made transfer fees totally and absolutely transparent. Installments, agents fees the lot.

To rebuild our stadium would cost at least 80m so hardly a farce tbh

It didn't cost £80,000,000 to build and no one will now pay £80,000,000 for it so it is a farce. And not in the proper interests of the club.

Excess valuations of assets for accounting purposes serve no purpose unless you want to borrow against them or sell them to yourself.

It cost 48m to build back in 2009 which would be 65m these days when accounting for inflation. That cost doesn't include the Ninian extension which was around 12m, which would've increased by a few million in the last 6 years. So 80m seems a pretty reasonable estimate.

The book valuation of the stadium for £80 million is a farce and concerning. Who is going to ever buy it? No one I hope. Simply a means Tan can leverage and borrow on clubs behalf.

And the amount of money going the way of Directors, most of which I'm guessing goes to Chairman Dalman, is shocking for an organisation with heavy losses.

About time football made transfer fees totally and absolutely transparent. Installments, agents fees the lot.

To rebuild our stadium would cost at least 80m so hardly a farce tbh

It didn't cost £80,000,000 to build and no one will now pay £80,000,000 for it so it is a farce. And not in the proper interests of the club.

Excess valuations of assets for accounting purposes serve no purpose unless you want to borrow against them or sell them to yourself.

Brentfords stadium cost over 70mill to build.

And its half the capacity of ccs and by looks if it half the size at least so to build ccs today would certainly be well above 70m!
As for money going to directors ect well have never heared of directors not taking money out of a club owners yes directors NO.. ..regardless of financial state of
club

The book valuation of the stadium for £80 million is a farce and concerning. Who is going to ever buy it? No one I hope. Simply a means Tan can leverage and borrow on clubs behalf.

And the amount of money going the way of Directors, most of which I'm guessing goes to Chairman Dalman, is shocking for an organisation with heavy losses.

About time football made transfer fees totally and absolutely transparent. Installments, agents fees the lot.

To rebuild our stadium would cost at least 80m so hardly a farce tbh

It didn't cost £80,000,000 to build and no one will now pay £80,000,000 for it so it is a farce. And not in the proper interests of the club.

Excess valuations of assets for accounting purposes serve no purpose unless you want to borrow against them or sell them to yourself.

It cost 48m to build back in 2009 which would be 65m these days when accounting for inflation. That cost doesn't include the Ninian extension which was around 12m, which would've increased by a few million in the last 6 years. So 80m seems a pretty reasonable estimate.

i think his point is more that its not something you can realistically sell and the value of anything is only what someone is prepared to pay you for it...

plus i dont get the point of how much it would cost to replace being valid including inflation ....as at some point in the future ,like all stadia it will need replacing { hopefully not for decades } and at that point the CCS { knocking it down } will cease being an asset and become a liability ? so surely its not a case of adding inflation yearly to its original build cost where the end game we know is zero value , millions to knock down and millions to rebuild...but instead depreciating its value over time down to zero.....

The book valuation of the stadium for £80 million is a farce and concerning. Who is going to ever buy it? No one I hope. Simply a means Tan can leverage and borrow on clubs behalf.

And the amount of money going the way of Directors, most of which I'm guessing goes to Chairman Dalman, is shocking for an organisation with heavy losses.

About time football made transfer fees totally and absolutely transparent. Installments, agents fees the lot.

To rebuild our stadium would cost at least 80m so hardly a farce tbh

It didn't cost £80,000,000 to build and no one will now pay £80,000,000 for it so it is a farce. And not in the proper interests of the club.

Excess valuations of assets for accounting purposes serve no purpose unless you want to borrow against them or sell them to yourself.

It cost 48m to build back in 2009 which would be 65m these days when accounting for inflation. That cost doesn't include the Ninian extension which was around 12m, which would've increased by a few million in the last 6 years. So 80m seems a pretty reasonable estimate.

i think his point is more that its not something you can realistically sell and the value of anything is only what someone is prepared to pay you for it...

plus i dont get the point of how much it would cost to replace being valid including inflation ....as at some point in the future ,like all stadia it will need replacing { hopefully not for decades } and at that point the CCS { knocking it down } will cease being an asset and become a liability ? so surely its not a case of adding inflation yearly to its original build cost where the end game we know is zero value , millions to knock down and millions to rebuild...but instead depreciating its value over time down to zero.....

The stadium is being depreciated by just over £2m a year. so would be down to zero in around 40 years. The independent professional valuation in 2018 also took depreciation into account in arriving at that valuation (a depreciated replacement value basis commonly used in such stadium valuations).

As I mentioned in an earlier post , the valuation also takes into account the income generation ability of the asset from corporate and other hires , not just from football.

As for money going to directors ect well have never heared of directors not taking money out of a club owners yes directors NO.. ..regardless of financial state of
club

Peter Ridsdale?

As for money going to directors ect well have never heared of directors not taking money out of a club owners yes directors NO.. ..regardless of financial state of
club

Peter Ridsdale?

He did it for nothing then the man must be a philanthropist like Bill Gates ect
.....

As for money going to directors ect well have never heared of directors not taking money out of a club owners yes directors NO.. ..regardless of financial state of
club

Peter Ridsdale?

He did it for nothing then the man must be a philanthropist like Bill Gates ect
.....

I think Tony was tongue in cheek. No way did Riddler do it for nothing. He had his nose firmly in the trough. Even when we were close to bankruptcy.

The book valuation of the stadium for £80 million is a farce and concerning. Who is going to ever buy it? No one I hope. Simply a means Tan can leverage and borrow on clubs behalf.

And the amount of money going the way of Directors, most of which I'm guessing goes to Chairman Dalman, is shocking for an organisation with heavy losses.

About time football made transfer fees totally and absolutely transparent. Installments, agents fees the lot.

To rebuild our stadium would cost at least 80m so hardly a farce tbh

It didn't cost £80,000,000 to build and no one will now pay £80,000,000 for it so it is a farce. And not in the proper interests of the club.

Excess valuations of assets for accounting purposes serve no purpose unless you want to borrow against them or sell them to yourself.

It cost 48m to build back in 2009 which would be 65m these days when accounting for inflation. That cost doesn't include the Ninian extension which was around 12m, which would've increased by a few million in the last 6 years. So 80m seems a pretty reasonable estimate.

i think his point is more that its not something you can realistically sell and the value of anything is only what someone is prepared to pay you for it...

plus i dont get the point of how much it would cost to replace being valid including inflation ....as at some point in the future ,like all stadia it will need replacing { hopefully not for decades } and at that point the CCS { knocking it down } will cease being an asset and become a liability ? so surely its not a case of adding inflation yearly to its original build cost where the end game we know is zero value , millions to knock down and millions to rebuild...but instead depreciating its value over time down to zero.....

The stadium is being depreciated by just over £2m a year. so would be down to zero in around 40 years. The independent professional valuation in 2018 also took depreciation into account in arriving at that valuation (a depreciated replacement value basis commonly used in such stadium valuations).

As I mentioned in an earlier post , the valuation also takes into account the income generation ability of the asset from corporate and other hires , not just from football.

sorry i hadnt read the earlier post ..but people basing the value on build cost plus yearly inflation just did not sound correct... its obviously an asset in that without it where would we play but dont see it being sold to some American tycoon and shipped to Arizona any time soon...

The book valuation of the stadium for £80 million is a farce and concerning. Who is going to ever buy it? No one I hope. Simply a means Tan can leverage and borrow on clubs behalf.

And the amount of money going the way of Directors, most of which I'm guessing goes to Chairman Dalman, is shocking for an organisation with heavy losses.

About time football made transfer fees totally and absolutely transparent. Installments, agents fees the lot.

To rebuild our stadium would cost at least 80m so hardly a farce tbh

It didn't cost £80,000,000 to build and no one will now pay £80,000,000 for it so it is a farce. And not in the proper interests of the club.

Excess valuations of assets for accounting purposes serve no purpose unless you want to borrow against them or sell them to yourself.

It is an independant valuation by chartered surveyors who would soon be closed down if they gave excess valuations

Basically without covid we would of broke even ,not too bad I think

That's absolute rubbish and you know it.

These accounts cover a very short period of Covid. If the whole Covid period was represented, they would be far worse.


More bullshit from Dalman when he said the only debt we had was to Tan (even though Tan said we'd be debt free by now).

The other debtors aren't registered charges at companies house but they're still debts.

In these accounts, Tan has still not converted any of our debts to him to shares.


The money taken out of the club by these people is a disgrace.

Worcester, i could not of put it better.
Wez, supports Dalman, tan no matter what even when its their in black and white, Wez should be putting our club first instead he backs Dalmans shite, unbelievable

I hope you are not calling out these corporate robbing bas.... are you. You'll get slagged on here by the mob for critical thinking mind.

Get with the narrative and just happy clap the club and the this greedy industry. Players are gods and all that crap.

Loyalty lol, dont make me laugh. They will piss all over you and wont think twice about it. You, me are last on their list of priorities. Fuc.. the lot of them!!!!

i dont think your one man crusade against football is working mate... and even if it did i doubt youd see the return of woolshops to the level they once were... the women that deserted in droves to watch football will just move onto something else...

Good reply...

Any modernistic, realistic and educated thinking is wasted on our Victorian Revolutionary, the money man that is the B£ue £agoon (aka Fu.. Man Choo), I'm afraid...

The realities of what is required to operate a modern business is way out of his comfort zone

We don't know his real position but he whinges like a Republican about being misunderstood, misinterpreted and misrespresnted, yet he calls out Tan and anyone who has money whilst still purchasing tickets/merchandise and boasting he is off on a 'Fu.. Man Choo everyone else' Florida holiday because he had his two jabs early...

Double standards is him...

There he is again,lol,lol.

Just keep happy clapping to the tune they don't gove a fu... about you.

Just for the record I dont buy full price mechandise and I just wait till its in the sale. In any case I dont where the stuff myself. Not my style and taste personally.


Also, I didnt buy a season ticket only a shielding deposit.

Dont forget the robbing bast... you happy clap charged you and others to watch club tv and didnt want to give you a refund if a 2nd wave of covid kicked in. Fu.. the lot of them and this greedy ind.

Basically without covid we would of broke even ,not too bad I think

That's absolute rubbish and you know it.

These accounts cover a very short period of Covid. If the whole Covid period was represented, they would be far worse.


More bullshit from Dalman when he said the only debt we had was to Tan (even though Tan said we'd be debt free by now).

The other debtors aren't registered charges at companies house but they're still debts.

In these accounts, Tan has still not converted any of our debts to him to shares.


The money taken out of the club by these people is a disgrace.

Worcester, i could not of put it better.
Wez, supports Dalman, tan no matter what even when its their in black and white, Wez should be putting our club first instead he backs Dalmans shite, unbelievable

I hope you are not calling out these corporate robbing bas.... are you. You'll get slagged on here by the mob for critical thinking mind.

Get with the narrative and just happy clap the club and the this greedy industry. Players are gods and all that crap.

Loyalty lol, dont make me laugh. They will piss all over you and wont think twice about it. You, me are last on their list of priorities. Fuc.. the lot of them!!!!

i dont think your one man crusade against football is working mate... and even if it did i doubt youd see the return of woolshops to the level they once were... the women that deserted in droves to watch football will just move onto something else...

Good reply...

Any modernistic, realistic and educated thinking is wasted on our Victorian Revolutionary, the money man that is the B£ue £agoon (aka Fu.. Man Choo), I'm afraid...

The realities of what is required to operate a modern business is way out of his comfort zone

We don't know his real position but he whinges like a Republican about being misunderstood, misinterpreted and misrespresnted, yet he calls out Tan and anyone who has money whilst still purchasing tickets/merchandise and boasting he is off on a 'Fu.. Man Choo everyone else' Florida holiday because he had his two jabs early...

Double standards is him...

There he is again,lol,lol.

Just keep happy clapping to the tune they don't gove a fu... about you.

Just for the record I dont buy full price mechandise and I just wait till its in the sale. In any case I dont where the stuff myself. Not my style and taste personally.


Also, I didnt buy a season ticket only a shielding deposit.

Dont forget the robbing bast... you happy clap charged you and others to watch club tv and didnt want to give you a refund if a 2nd wave of covid kicked in. Fu.. the lot of them and this greedy ind.

could have pirated the games but i am a fan...

The book valuation of the stadium for £80 million is a farce and concerning. Who is going to ever buy it? No one I hope. Simply a means Tan can leverage and borrow on clubs behalf.

And the amount of money going the way of Directors, most of which I'm guessing goes to Chairman Dalman, is shocking for an organisation with heavy losses.

About time football made transfer fees totally and absolutely transparent. Installments, agents fees the lot.

To rebuild our stadium would cost at least 80m so hardly a farce tbh

It didn't cost £80,000,000 to build and no one will now pay £80,000,000 for it so it is a farce. And not in the proper interests of the club.

Excess valuations of assets for accounting purposes serve no purpose unless you want to borrow against them or sell them to yourself.

It cost 48m to build back in 2009 which would be 65m these days when accounting for inflation. That cost doesn't include the Ninian extension which was around 12m, which would've increased by a few million in the last 6 years. So 80m seems a pretty reasonable estimate.

i think his point is more that its not something you can realistically sell and the value of anything is only what someone is prepared to pay you for it...

plus i dont get the point of how much it would cost to replace being valid including inflation ....as at some point in the future ,like all stadia it will need replacing { hopefully not for decades } and at that point the CCS { knocking it down } will cease being an asset and become a liability ? so surely its not a case of adding inflation yearly to its original build cost where the end game we know is zero value , millions to knock down and millions to rebuild...but instead depreciating its value over time down to zero.....

It's not about it's value as something the club can sell, but it's value as an existing asset and how much it would cost to have an equivalent built if it didn't exist. Any new owners for clubs without a modern stadium such as Luton, QPR, Peterborough, etc, will get a cheaper deal than clubs with new stadiums but will most likely be paying for a new stadium at some point in the next decade. Whereas any new owner for Cardiff would not have to. Claiming it's value to be £80m seems pretty reasonable because that's what a new 30k stadium of a similar design would roughly cost to build today.

Of course in reality, as a simple purchase, the stadium isn't worth anywhere near £80m as no one except Cardiff City would be using it regularly and no one else will be buying it.

The book valuation of the stadium for £80 million is a farce and concerning. Who is going to ever buy it? No one I hope. Simply a means Tan can leverage and borrow on clubs behalf.

And the amount of money going the way of Directors, most of which I'm guessing goes to Chairman Dalman, is shocking for an organisation with heavy losses.

About time football made transfer fees totally and absolutely transparent. Installments, agents fees the lot.

To rebuild our stadium would cost at least 80m so hardly a farce tbh

It didn't cost £80,000,000 to build and no one will now pay £80,000,000 for it so it is a farce. And not in the proper interests of the club.

Excess valuations of assets for accounting purposes serve no purpose unless you want to borrow against them or sell them to yourself.

It cost 48m to build back in 2009 which would be 65m these days when accounting for inflation. That cost doesn't include the Ninian extension which was around 12m, which would've increased by a few million in the last 6 years. So 80m seems a pretty reasonable estimate.

i think his point is more that its not something you can realistically sell and the value of anything is only what someone is prepared to pay you for it...

plus i dont get the point of how much it would cost to replace being valid including inflation ....as at some point in the future ,like all stadia it will need replacing { hopefully not for decades } and at that point the CCS { knocking it down } will cease being an asset and become a liability ? so surely its not a case of adding inflation yearly to its original build cost where the end game we know is zero value , millions to knock down and millions to rebuild...but instead depreciating its value over time down to zero.....

It's not about it's value as something the club can sell, but it's value as an existing asset and how much it would cost to have an equivalent built if it didn't exist. Any new owners for clubs without a modern stadium such as Luton, QPR, Peterborough, etc, will get a cheaper deal than clubs with new stadiums but will most likely be paying for a new stadium at some point in the next decade. Whereas any new owner for Cardiff would not have to. Claiming it's value to be £80m seems pretty reasonable because that's what a new 30k stadium of a similar design would roughly cost to build today.

Of course in reality, as a simple purchase, the stadium isn't worth anywhere near £80m as no one except Cardiff City would be using it regularly and no one else will be buying it.

if you read the accounrs or NINIAN 62s post above regarding the accounts... the stadium is being depreciated by £2 mill a year over 40 years nothing to do with how much a stadium might cost...

The book valuation of the stadium for £80 million is a farce and concerning. Who is going to ever buy it? No one I hope. Simply a means Tan can leverage and borrow on clubs behalf.

And the amount of money going the way of Directors, most of which I'm guessing goes to Chairman Dalman, is shocking for an organisation with heavy losses.

About time football made transfer fees totally and absolutely transparent. Installments, agents fees the lot.

To rebuild our stadium would cost at least 80m so hardly a farce tbh

It didn't cost £80,000,000 to build and no one will now pay £80,000,000 for it so it is a farce. And not in the proper interests of the club.

Excess valuations of assets for accounting purposes serve no purpose unless you want to borrow against them or sell them to yourself.

It cost 48m to build back in 2009 which would be 65m these days when accounting for inflation. That cost doesn't include the Ninian extension which was around 12m, which would've increased by a few million in the last 6 years. So 80m seems a pretty reasonable estimate.

i think his point is more that its not something you can realistically sell and the value of anything is only what someone is prepared to pay you for it...

plus i dont get the point of how much it would cost to replace being valid including inflation ....as at some point in the future ,like all stadia it will need replacing { hopefully not for decades } and at that point the CCS { knocking it down } will cease being an asset and become a liability ? so surely its not a case of adding inflation yearly to its original build cost where the end game we know is zero value , millions to knock down and millions to rebuild...but instead depreciating its value over time down to zero.....

It's not about it's value as something the club can sell, but it's value as an existing asset and how much it would cost to have an equivalent built if it didn't exist. Any new owners for clubs without a modern stadium such as Luton, QPR, Peterborough, etc, will get a cheaper deal than clubs with new stadiums but will most likely be paying for a new stadium at some point in the next decade. Whereas any new owner for Cardiff would not have to. Claiming it's value to be £80m seems pretty reasonable because that's what a new 30k stadium of a similar design would roughly cost to build today.

Of course in reality, as a simple purchase, the stadium isn't worth anywhere near £80m as no one except Cardiff City would be using it regularly and no one else will be buying it.

if you read the accounrs or NINIAN 62s post above regarding the accounts... the stadium is being depreciated by £2 mill a year over 40 years nothing to do with how much a stadium might cost...

There's a difference between the value of the Cardiff City Stadium and the value of a fully equipped 33k stadium.
The £80m figure is it's value as an asset and the estimated cost a club without such an asset would have to pay to build a stadium like ours. If QPR or Luton build a new ~30k stadium in the coming years it will probably cost £70m - £100m, any new owners will long term plans will be paying for that new stadium. If a potential investor shows interest in Cardiff City the current owners can say "here's a pre built stadium which would've cost you £80m and if you own CCFC for the next 2 decades you won't need to pay for a new stadium"

When Tan took over, the stadium would probably have been valued around ~£50m. Again, no one would buy the stadium for that price but that's what it's value is considered as an asset. If the stadium sold for it's actual value it would mean any selling owners would lose out on 10's of millions as the stadium would start depreciating in value immediately.

As Igovener said, this is an independent valuation and not done by the club. Valuing the stadium so incorrectly doesn't help them at all.

The book valuation of the stadium for £80 million is a farce and concerning. Who is going to ever buy it? No one I hope. Simply a means Tan can leverage and borrow on clubs behalf.

And the amount of money going the way of Directors, most of which I'm guessing goes to Chairman Dalman, is shocking for an organisation with heavy losses.

About time football made transfer fees totally and absolutely transparent. Installments, agents fees the lot.

To rebuild our stadium would cost at least 80m so hardly a farce tbh

It didn't cost £80,000,000 to build and no one will now pay £80,000,000 for it so it is a farce. And not in the proper interests of the club.

Excess valuations of assets for accounting purposes serve no purpose unless you want to borrow against them or sell them to yourself.

It cost 48m to build back in 2009 which would be 65m these days when accounting for inflation. That cost doesn't include the Ninian extension which was around 12m, which would've increased by a few million in the last 6 years. So 80m seems a pretty reasonable estimate.

i think his point is more that its not something you can realistically sell and the value of anything is only what someone is prepared to pay you for it...

plus i dont get the point of how much it would cost to replace being valid including inflation ....as at some point in the future ,like all stadia it will need replacing { hopefully not for decades } and at that point the CCS { knocking it down } will cease being an asset and become a liability ? so surely its not a case of adding inflation yearly to its original build cost where the end game we know is zero value , millions to knock down and millions to rebuild...but instead depreciating its value over time down to zero.....

It's not about it's value as something the club can sell, but it's value as an existing asset and how much it would cost to have an equivalent built if it didn't exist. Any new owners for clubs without a modern stadium such as Luton, QPR, Peterborough, etc, will get a cheaper deal than clubs with new stadiums but will most likely be paying for a new stadium at some point in the next decade. Whereas any new owner for Cardiff would not have to. Claiming it's value to be £80m seems pretty reasonable because that's what a new 30k stadium of a similar design would roughly cost to build today.

Of course in reality, as a simple purchase, the stadium isn't worth anywhere near £80m as no one except Cardiff City would be using it regularly and no one else will be buying it.

if you read the accounrs or NINIAN 62s post above regarding the accounts... the stadium is being depreciated by £2 mill a year over 40 years nothing to do with how much a stadium might cost...

There's a difference between the value of the Cardiff City Stadium and the value of a fully equipped 33k stadium.
The £80m figure is it's value as an asset and the estimated cost a club without such an asset would have to pay to build a stadium like ours. If QPR or Luton build a new ~30k stadium in the coming years it will probably cost £70m - £100m, any new owners will long term plans will be paying for that new stadium. If a potential investor shows interest in Cardiff City the current owners can say "here's a pre built stadium which would've cost you £80m and if you own CCFC for the next 2 decades you won't need to pay for a new stadium"

When Tan took over, the stadium would probably have been valued around ~£50m. Again, no one would buy the stadium for that price but that's what it's value is considered as an asset. If the stadium sold for it's actual value it would mean any selling owners would lose out on 10's of millions as the stadium would start depreciating in value immediately.

As Igovener said, this is an independent valuation and not done by the club. Valuing the stadium so incorrectly doesn't help them at all.

for petes sake , ninian1962 who is chairman of the trust and an accountant who has studied the accounts says ...whats in the accounts is £2 mill a year depreciation for 40 years....

The book valuation of the stadium for £80 million is a farce and concerning. Who is going to ever buy it? No one I hope. Simply a means Tan can leverage and borrow on clubs behalf.

And the amount of money going the way of Directors, most of which I'm guessing goes to Chairman Dalman, is shocking for an organisation with heavy losses.

About time football made transfer fees totally and absolutely transparent. Installments, agents fees the lot.

To rebuild our stadium would cost at least 80m so hardly a farce tbh

It didn't cost £80,000,000 to build and no one will now pay £80,000,000 for it so it is a farce. And not in the proper interests of the club.

Excess valuations of assets for accounting purposes serve no purpose unless you want to borrow against them or sell them to yourself.

It cost 48m to build back in 2009 which would be 65m these days when accounting for inflation. That cost doesn't include the Ninian extension which was around 12m, which would've increased by a few million in the last 6 years. So 80m seems a pretty reasonable estimate.

i think his point is more that its not something you can realistically sell and the value of anything is only what someone is prepared to pay you for it...

plus i dont get the point of how much it would cost to replace being valid including inflation ....as at some point in the future ,like all stadia it will need replacing { hopefully not for decades } and at that point the CCS { knocking it down } will cease being an asset and become a liability ? so surely its not a case of adding inflation yearly to its original build cost where the end game we know is zero value , millions to knock down and millions to rebuild...but instead depreciating its value over time down to zero.....

It's not about it's value as something the club can sell, but it's value as an existing asset and how much it would cost to have an equivalent built if it didn't exist. Any new owners for clubs without a modern stadium such as Luton, QPR, Peterborough, etc, will get a cheaper deal than clubs with new stadiums but will most likely be paying for a new stadium at some point in the next decade. Whereas any new owner for Cardiff would not have to. Claiming it's value to be £80m seems pretty reasonable because that's what a new 30k stadium of a similar design would roughly cost to build today.

Of course in reality, as a simple purchase, the stadium isn't worth anywhere near £80m as no one except Cardiff City would be using it regularly and no one else will be buying it.

if you read the accounrs or NINIAN 62s post above regarding the accounts... the stadium is being depreciated by £2 mill a year over 40 years nothing to do with how much a stadium might cost...

There's a difference between the value of the Cardiff City Stadium and the value of a fully equipped 33k stadium.
The £80m figure is it's value as an asset and the estimated cost a club without such an asset would have to pay to build a stadium like ours. If QPR or Luton build a new ~30k stadium in the coming years it will probably cost £70m - £100m, any new owners will long term plans will be paying for that new stadium. If a potential investor shows interest in Cardiff City the current owners can say "here's a pre built stadium which would've cost you £80m and if you own CCFC for the next 2 decades you won't need to pay for a new stadium"

When Tan took over, the stadium would probably have been valued around ~£50m. Again, no one would buy the stadium for that price but that's what it's value is considered as an asset. If the stadium sold for it's actual value it would mean any selling owners would lose out on 10's of millions as the stadium would start depreciating in value immediately.

As Igovener said, this is an independent valuation and not done by the club. Valuing the stadium so incorrectly doesn't help them at all.

for petes sake , ninian1962 who is chairman of the trust and an accountant who has studied the accounts says ...whats in the accounts is £2 mill a year depreciation for 40 years....

Which gives it a value of £80million, also in the accounts. I'm not sure what you're trying to argue?

What have I said that contradicts with what Keith has said?

for pete sake , ninian1962 who is chairman of the trust and an accountant who has studied the accounts says ...whats in the accounts is £2 mill a year depreciation for 40 years....

So the stadium is valued @ £80m this year and next year it will be £78m and so on. If the stadium is upgraded for example had a hotel or conference facilities added it would be revalued.

Any valuation will be credited as an asset on the balance sheet in the same way as player registrations are which also depreciate over time but can be revalued if the player signs a new longer contract.

for pete sake , ninian1962 who is chairman of the trust and an accountant who has studied the accounts says ...whats in the accounts is £2 mill a year depreciation for 40 years....

So the stadium is valued @ £80m this year and next year it will be £78m and so on. If the stadium is upgraded for example had a hotel or conference facilities added it would be revalued.

Any valuation will be credited as an asset on the balance sheet in the same way as player registrations are which also depreciate over time but can be revalued if the player signs a new longer contract.

As Keith says in the original post “The Cardiff City Stadium was valued (based on an independent professional valuation carried out in 2018) at £81.0m, with other fixed assets such as fixtures and fittings having a value of £1.2m and training ground improvements of £314k.”