Planning application for new training ground facilities

[Alistair20000]

These costs quoted are they incl or excl VAT

No need to worry about VAT. Should be recoverable in full.

 

[grecian-near-hell]

No need to worry about VAT. Should be recoverable in full.

Yes but with the sums quoted is the building costing £3m or is it costing £2.5m + VAT. Bit of a difference in requirement.

 

[Alistair20000]

Yes but with the sums quoted is the building costing £3m or is it costing £2.5m + VAT. Bit of a difference in requirement.

VAT can be reclaimed quarterly so no real problem with cash flow

 

[grecian-near-hell]

VAT can be reclaimed quarterly so no real problem with cash flow

Yes, but is the whole project costing £3m or £2.5m. Regardless of when VAT is due, to the common punter they pay say £20 for something, so it costs them £20, however the vendor only gets £16.66 of that with the rest going to VAT. In this case the media have reported that the building is costing £3m, so is that the common punter costs or the costs after reclaiming VAT. If the common punter costs then the club will be £500k better off than being reported, that's all i wondered about!

 

[Hants_red]

The Club tend to quote prices as ex-vat

 

[Alistair20000]

Yes, but is the whole project costing £3m or £2.5m. Regardless of when VAT is due, to the common punter they pay say £20 for something, so it costs them £20, however the vendor only gets £16.66 of that with the rest going to VAT. In this case the media have reported that the building is costing £3m, so is that the common punter costs or the costs after reclaiming VAT. If the common punter costs then the club will be £500k better off than being reported, that's all i wondered about!

It would be usual to quote the net of VAT cost if you are able to fully recover the VAT. If you are unable to recover the VAT you would state the cost plus VAT.

That said I now appreciate the point of your query and apologies for missing it. Not sure if we know the up to date figure.

 

[PeteUSA]

Still not very happy that we're eating into a 25 year lease agreement on the training ground. I would have thought we could have negotiated a longer term deal than that given the amount of money we're about two spend. Could that place ever have houses built on it down the road, or is there some sort of green space restriction?

 

[Martin Lawrence]

Still not very happy that we're eating into a 25 year lease agreement on the training ground. I would have thought we could have negotiated a longer term deal than that given the amount of money we're about two spend. Could that place ever have houses built on it down the road, or is there some sort of green space restriction?

Don't worry too much about the lease Pete. It is no big deal. With security of tenure, it is unlikely to ever be a massive issue.

 

[Colesman Ballz]

The C & F is a sports facility. Under current Planning Law it cannot be redeveloped unless a replacement facility is provided that is at least equally accessible.

 

[Antony Moxey]

The C & F is a sports facility. Under current Planning Law it cannot be redeveloped unless a replacement facility is provided that is at least equally accessible.

That's as maybe, but under current ownership law once the lease runs out can't the Hills basically tell us to f*** off and simply let the place go to seed?