SHA Small Heath Alliance

Just thinking:

Will it have a greater value when the new Stadium and S/Q is up and running?, so they sit tight?.

Or perhaps KH will treat it as a financial asset to bolster our profit and sustainability stance going forward from now.

Whatever they do it will be shrewd/astute decision of that I have no doubt.

Probably got this wrong but wasn’t it included in the deal to purchase the wheels site? Seem to recall Wagner saying something about having to accept it will be redeveloped for housing. Like I said probably got that wrong.

I think you are right, its part of the overall deal to get the SQ.

number8

I think you are right, its part of the overall deal to get the SQ.

Yeah I’m sure it’s been marked for affordable housing projects.

I suspect it isn’t particularly valuable…

Bloody Gypsies Curse

I was thinking about this, the other day. Was some kind of charge put on it so it can only be used for sporting purposes? I assume that would be easy enough to remove?

sydneyblue

I suspect it isn’t particularly valuable…

It will be

Mutley

Bloody Gypsies Curse

Just need Baz to piss in the corners when we leave. Put him on an uplift 💰

I think there might be an interesting loophole for FFP in this.

The EFL officially banned the practice of selling stadiums to related parties (intra-group sales). But Blues would be selling St Ans to a non-related party (Bham Council).

Infrastructure spending is exempt from FFP so the costs of the new stadium will not be accounted, but the sale of the old stadium will. So we receive the benefits of a sale but not the cost of the purchase?

Bernard Sun

I think there might be an interesting loophole for FFP in this.

The EFL officially banned the practice of selling stadiums to related parties (intra-group sales). But Blues would be selling St Ans to a non-related party (Bham Council).

Infrastructure spending is exempt from FFP so the costs of the new stadium will not be accounted, but the sale of the old stadium will. So we receive the benefits of a sale but not the cost of the purchase?

Yeah, that's what I was getting at.

Clever bleeders kH.

Bernard Sun

I think there might be an interesting loophole for FFP in this.

The EFL officially banned the practice of selling stadiums to related parties (intra-group sales). But Blues would be selling St Ans to a non-related party (Bham Council).

Infrastructure spending is exempt from FFP so the costs of the new stadium will not be accounted, but the sale of the old stadium will. So we receive the benefits of a sale but not the cost of the purchase?

It isn't a loophole, it's been designed to encourage investment in facilities. Also, please don't think all costs of a new stadium will be exempt from the current PSR regulations because that isn't the case. Yes, depreciation on the build cost is exempt, but the club only incurs that if the club is building the stadium itself (we don't know which company will build and/or own the stadium yet). If the club builds and/or owns the stadium then it will have incurred a large debt pile to pay for it and the interest on that does count against your PSR calc. If another (presumably Knighthead group) company owns it, then the club will pay a right of use charge for it which, again, would count against the PSR calc.

It's all moot anyway, as we'll likely be under squad cost ratio (SCR) rules by then

If memory serves, the stadium and possibly the land was sold by the club in 2019 to a holding company. The club benefited from it at that time so there will be no future financial benefits to the club. Shelby Companies is current owner i belive.