TorquayFans.com | Torquay United Fans Forum

I'm sure TUST will have looked at this but isn't the covenant on the ground the most crucial factor. If the council can be forced to maintain this then the land is of no value to GI. The Council therefore gain less by selling it or TUST have a greater chance of being able to buy it.

Dazza wrote: 11 Apr 2017, 19:23 Sorry but thats not right I'm afraid. Practically all land has a value - its the amount of that value that is likely to dictate what you pay for it.

But if you can't sell it at that valuation ~ which is what you are confusing with 'value' ~ then it is only worth what you can sell it for.

A valuation is not a value; it is an estimation of a value!

Merse is correct.

There are two approaches the Council will take to the valuation of development land:

+ comparison with the sale price of land for comparable development; and/or

+ assessment of the value of the scheme as completed and deduction of the costs of development (including developer’s profit) to arrive at the underlying land value.

It is likely that a valuation would utilise both approaches, and the degree to which either, or both, are relevant depends upon the nature of the development being considered, and the complexity of the issues.

Gullscorer wrote: 11 Apr 2017, 16:52 I seem to remember someone saying somewhere on this forum that the value of something is whatever the purchaser is actually paying for it..

I think you mean "The value of something is what someone is willing to pay for it".

Yep, that's it.

Just seen a report on BBC breakfast about Brightons current success. Guy said that Brighton fans have suffered so much over the last 30 years. Try being a TUFC fan mate, my god!

What happened to Brighton because of Bill Archer is a very good analogy ~ and hopefully not a portent ~ for any Torquay United supporter to take note of.