The Leasehold of Bramall Lane

[bricktop]

Would I be correct in thinking that this piece of prime city centre real estate is owned solely by McCabe and the Scaroborough Property Group?

Leads me to think that now Sheffield United football are tenants of the Scarborough Property Group, how much would the going rate for a lease on a modern, 33,000 seater, ground located in a prime, city centre location? Can't be cheap can it?

 

[super_pig]

my goodness. it's back. the 'who owns the leasehold?' thread..
welcome back. we've missed you.

 

[Linz]

beightonblade this one has your name on it, old chap...

 

[LoughboroBlade]

my goodness. it's back. the 'who owns the leasehold?' thread..
welcome back. we've missed you.

All this has happened before, and will happen again.

I personally can't wait till 2017 when the "how much does the Academy cost us?" thread resurfaces.

 

[Bert]

Would I be correct in thinking that this piece of prime city centre real estate is owned solely by McCabe and the Scaroborough Property Group?

Leads me to think that now Sheffield United football are tenants of the Scarborough Property Group, how much would the going rate for a lease on a modern, 33,000 seater, ground located in a prime, city centre location? Can't be cheap can it?

You'd need to find a tenant first before you could get a return on your investment

 

[super_pig]

You'd need to find a tenant first before you could get a return on your investment

imposter

 

[BushBlade]

Probably academic at present. However, if KM can shift the rest of his shares to the Prince, at a price he wants, I imagine the rent will start to rise quite quickly. There is the possibility of including a rent cap in the sale of the club contract but I can't imagine it being in perpetuity.
Then, the owners will face the choice of either paying the higher rent or building a new stadium. That leaves Scarborough with an empty stadium and the possibility of getting planning consent for redevelopment, which they'd probably get due to a combination of the stadium being a white elephant and a generous CIL contribution.

So the answer is to include the freehold in the club purchase. But, for the reasons above, it won't be cheap.

Or does anyone think KM is crippling the club with massive rent payments meaning we'll struggle to get promoted and thus won't increase our capital value? Arguably a club our size is worth around £50m if in the championship and double that plus some if we're in the PL. Right now we're worth next to fuck all. (As a football club that doesn't own it's ground).

 

[Bert]

The stadium is never going to be knocked down and redeveloped. Not ever.

 

[blade too long]

its not leasehold its freehold
we , ie the club ie mccabe owns it

if mccabe charges "rent" its purely for tax , accounting purposes
as he would be asking himself for rent

 

[Bladepicker]

The stadium is never going to be knocked down and redeveloped. Not ever.

I'm sure Arsenal, West Ham and Man City fans all had similar thoughts.

I hope you are right but everything about today's game tells me to never say never.

 

[Bert]

its not leasehold its freehold
we , ie the club ie mccabe owns it

if mccabe charges "rent" its purely for tax , accounting purposes
as he would be asking himself for rent

Bert used to have his business premises inside his SIPP, so his pension fund charged Bert plc rent for the use of the premises. A very tax efficient method of putting money into your pension fund.

 

[Bert]

I'm sure Arsenal, West Ham and Man City fans all had similar thoughts.

I hope you are right but everything about today's game tells me to never say never.

They needed new stadiums, we don't.

 

[BushBlade]

its not leasehold its freehold
we , ie the club ie mccabe owns it

if mccabe charges "rent" its purely for tax , accounting purposes
as he would be asking himself for rent

He'd be asking a company he owns half of for rent. Subtle difference.

 

[Sean Thornton]

its not leasehold its freehold
we , ie the club ie mccabe owns it

if mccabe charges "rent" its purely for tax , accounting purposes
as he would be asking himself for rent

There's a rent charge in the accounts. It isn't paid to McCabe though so he's notcactually paying rent to himself. That's reminiscent of the pigs claim the werent in debt to Milan because " you can't owe money to yourself" The football club no longer owns the freehold and hasn't done for a couple of years. All out in the open and above board and reported at the time, including shareholders.

Rather than asking himself for rent he could be clawing back losses at a very slow rate. Or paying off borrowings. He said that the freehold could at some point be transferred back to the FC Ltd. assuming everything fell into place to make it worthwhile.

He's lost fortunes. Much of it his own doing. He's still running with it though at whatever level. Can the Prince afford to buy him out and get the ground back? Mmmm.

 

[blade too long]

He'd be asking a company he owns half of for rent. Subtle difference.

once again "rent" in this case is purely for accounting purposes
if you need more info ask Starbucks or Alan Carr about creative accounting

 

[Bladepicker]

They needed new stadiums, we don't.

Aresnal yes, but not Man City at the time or West Ham. Both had ready modernised stadiums built for them at a fraction of the cost.

What if we had a run of sustained success and the prince started pumping some family wealth into us? Unlikely I know but I wouldn't say 'never' - especially as the football club does not own the ground.

 

[BushBlade]

Aresnal yes, but not Man City at the time or West Ham. Both had ready modernised stadiums built for them at a fraction of the cost.

What if we had a run of sustained success and the prince started pumping some family wealth into us? Unlikely I know but I wouldn't say 'never' - especially as the football club does not own the ground.

A fraction? West Ham have more or less been given it, at our fucking expense.

 

[Sean Thornton]

W

Aresnal yes, but not Man City at the time or West Ham. Both had ready modernised stadiums built for them at a fraction of the cost.

What if we had a run of sustained success and the prince started pumping some family wealth into us? Unlikely I know but I wouldn't say 'never' - especially as the football club does not own the ground.

West Ham are moving because they can't redevelop the Boleyn to meet their needs. They have a membership scheme because of the demand they have. The Olympic may well not be the answer but they need a bigger ground. We didn't even need McCabes Kop expansion plans.

 

[Sean Thornton]

once again "rent" in this case is purely for accounting purposes
if you need more info ask Starbucks or Alan Carr about creative accounting

You can ask Jimmy Carr, you still don't know. Are you saying the transactions aren't bona fide arms length and at market value? Do you know who the FC pays any rent to or who actually holds the freehold for accounting purposes?

 

[Bladepicker]

W



West Ham are moving because they can't redevelop the Boleyn to meet their needs. They have a membership scheme because of the demand they have. The Olympic may well not be the answer but they need a bigger ground. We didn't even need McCabes Kop expansion plans.

They could redevelop the Boleyn and they are two bad seasons away from not selling out.

Man City didn't sell out. If we got back to the prem and pushed on, we would need to redevelop.

I am not for one iota suggesting we should move from Bramall Lane, but to say we NEVER will is untrue. No one can be sure of future circumstance.

 

[Lord Bos of Eckington.]

its not leasehold its freehold
we , ie the club ie mccabe owns it

if mccabe charges "rent" its purely for tax , accounting purposes
as he would be asking himself for rent

We do have a situation of a landlock and ransom strip at the back of the kop ( which used to be used for training many years ago ) and now is parking / slope behind the actual kop , is owned by a ex chairman.

BDTBL will finish up in a trust fund , if not already, so it cannot ever be sold off as prime real estate , when McCabe calls it a day.

One area of the club , we are actually in good hands , after over the years , poor decisions on the management front

UTB

 

[The_Green_Man]

Balls all this talk of Kavin McCabe! I should own a share of the ground for what I have paid on season tickets and stuff in my lifetime!

Seen this kind of thread before and they always go tits up. Hotel or Chengdu Blades anybody?

 

[blade too long]

You can ask Jimmy Carr, you still don't know. Are you saying the transactions aren't bona fide arms length and at market value? Do you know who the FC pays any rent to or who actually holds the freehold for accounting purposes?

mccabe , being the owner holds the freehold
if he sells the ground he will sell the freehold ,its the only thing of value

rent is purely for staff pensiom funds , so hes actually feeding the shop staffs pension
the bgroundsmans pension

its something other clubs dont do they dont give a shit about their staff , we do

 

[stringjunior]

From the June '13 accounts:

"The fine facilities at the Club’s disposal, namely the Stadium at Bramall Lane and Academy at Shirecliffe, are retained by the Group following the sale of 50% of our interest in SUFC. Naturally the Club will continue to have the use of these Group assets through long term lease agreements with the aim to see reunification of the assets once the Club re-achieve Premier League status."

 

[BushBlade]

W



West Ham are moving because they can't redevelop the Boleyn to meet their needs. They have a membership scheme because of the demand they have. The Olympic may well not be the answer but they need a bigger ground. We didn't even need McCabes Kop expansion plans.

They may have a big demand for the London derbies and the big North West clubs but they're the only pl club that has to advertise games in the Standard.

According to the latest reports the costs of the stadium are being paid by the taxpayer (the equivalent costs at the Etihad being paid by Man City) and are almost as much as the rent West Ham are paying. I understand they also get to keep the costs of the Boleyn Ground disposal.

Sorry, you've touched a nerve here. It's scandalous.

 

[Bladesman]

Would I be correct in thinking that this piece of prime city centre real estate is owned solely by McCabe and the Scaroborough Property Group?

Leads me to think that now Sheffield United football are tenants of the Scarborough Property Group, how much would the going rate for a lease on a modern, 33,000 seater, ground located in a prime, city centre location? Can't be cheap can it?

Are you beightonblade in disguise?

 

[blade too long]

I reckon we will redevelop the kop immediately we return to the championship
its financial sense

 

[Sean Thornton]

They could redevelop the Boleyn and they are two bad seasons away from not selling out.

Man City didn't sell out. If we got back to the prem and pushed on, we would need to redevelop.

I am not for one iota suggesting we should move from Bramall Lane, but to say we NEVER will is untrue. No one can be sure of future circumstance.

Not to the capacity they think they need. Like White Hart Lane it's surrounded by housing etc. They won't sell out much at the new stadium it's too big but that's not the point that's under discussion.
I never mentioned Man. City because I don't know much about their move. I never said never about BL either.

 

[BushBlade]

I reckon we will redevelop the kop immediately we return to the championship
its financial sense

I would have thought we need to be in the PL before we get regular crowds of above 30k.

 

[Sean Thornton]

I reckon we will redevelop the kop immediately we return to the championship
its financial sense

To spend money on something we won't fill? Rather than players to try to get us to the next level?