Would you take, say, Quatari cash injection to allow transfer competition?

[mick cooper]

You forgot Darlington and their monstrous white elephant arena. However, I'd like to believe that;

a) Our commercial and sponsorship deals would be heavily(though not completely) weighted towards immediate payment of the stadium costs (much like Arsenal's Emirates deal), and

b)once the stadium's up and running, a portion of our income would be set aside for debt servicing. Doesn't have to be a massive amount, mind, but a portion of it surely. With the near-doubling of matchday revenue, coupled with the likely larger commercial deals in place, we should at the very least see a quick return to the level we're at now, and eventually (I'm talking six to nine years after completion, if the current estimates of the loans necessary and the value of the sponsorship deal are correct) a move to the next level of competition.

No I didn't forget Darlington, or Doncaster the etc meant I couldn't be arsed.

Whichever way you present it, there will be a period of developmental parsimony, which will inevitably affect team development

 

[mick cooper]

I quote from my previous post;

'Yet if the same happened to us, we'd be dancing in the streets?'

The question mark at the end defines it, I think. I was asking a question; would we really be that hypocritical? I'd like to believe that most on here would be too proud to do o.

As for my request of you to calm down, it wasn't 'excitement' I was aiming at. Rather, you seem to be a wee bit too angry, for whatever reason.

Again, I agree with you. The prospect of a Mansour blasting to the title with unearned riches terrifies me. Supporting Spurs would then mean nothing, since it would simply mean 'supporting' a billionaire's bank account.

That wasn't how it read to me, so I answered accordingly.

I also pointed out that I wasn't angry, just saddened at the prospect

 

[DubaiSpur]

firstly, the 'developmental parsimony' would probably be much the same as the parsimony we've been living with for the past two and a bit years, I think. So, I feel we'll stay where we are, in and around the top five, probably sixth at worst. So it probably wouldn't have THAT much of an effect, per se.

As for the angry bit, fair enough, you did point it out. But you did seem angry to me when you replied, hence the initial appeal to calm down. Apologies if my reading of your posting style's wrong, it's probably just because your avatar somewhat unsettles me with those cold, dead eyes of his.

 

[Wriggly]

Erm.....I was agreeing with you?

It IS hypocritical to criticize Chelski and City for their unearned splurges, but cheer when we do the same. Ergo, we shouldn't want it to happen.

Calm down, mate.

Wtf are you on about ? How is it hypocritical. We have earned the right to splurge, they didnt. A large sack of cash didnt land on our fudgein laps ffs. We are a proper ran business and spend our profits, we dont go and collect a fudging free giro and spend money we dont have.

Hypocritical ? fudge me.

 

[Superhudd]

If the injection was for naming rights then thats Ok.. anything else is wrong

No asterisk by Tottenham achievements please.

I hope everyone uses the asterisk... makes them clubs unclean.

 

[Spursalot]

Wtf are you on about ? How is it hypocritical. We have earned the right to splurge, they didnt. A large sack of cash didnt land on our fudgein laps ffs. We are a proper ran business and spend our profits, we dont go and collect a fudging free giro and spend money we dont have.

Hypocritical ? fudge me.

Not sure if serious....


He said we shouldn't want a billionaire to come in and back us, if we did, it would be hypocritical. Which would be right after the amount we have bashed city and Chelsea..

 

[Superhudd]

From now on when I write Chelsea* or Emirates Marketing Project*

I'm adding it.. Unclean qunts

Funny looks like an arse-hole... how apt.

 

[mick cooper]

firstly, the 'developmental parsimony' would probably be much the same as the parsimony we've been living with for the past two and a bit years, I think. So, I feel we'll stay where we are, in and around the top five, probably sixth at worst. So it probably wouldn't have THAT much of an effect, per se.

As for the angry bit, fair enough, you did point it out. But you did seem angry to me when you replied, hence the initial appeal to calm down. Apologies if my reading of your posting style's wrong, it's probably just because your avatar somewhat unsettles me with those cold, dead eyes of his.

I think its my style of expressing myself, rather than any fault of yours, I was just telling you that the answer was meant to express how the idea saddens rather than angers me.

The only thing that really angers me is the selective vision employed by CFC and Emirates Marketing Project fans, who seem to think that their success has been earned in some way. To me its no better than saying "I'm a paedophile and proud of it" ie latching onto something reprehensible and saying its a matter of pride.

 

[Boonie]

It's a moot point anyway, since no club will be able to do what Chelsea or Emirates Marketing Project have done now that FFP rules have kicked in.

However, if a massively rich benefactor:

a) bought the club
b) cleared the debt incurred on the new training ground and stadium preparation
c) paid for the new stadium
d) paid for local transport improvements
e) paid for further property developments that could contribute yet more to the club's income
f) secured a massive stadium and shirt sponsorship deal through their own contacts

.....then I would welcome such a new owner with open arms.

Perhaps ENIC should go on Dragons Den.

 

[Rorschach]

It's a moot point anyway, since no club will be able to do what Chelsea or Emirates Marketing Project have done now that FFP rules have kicked in.

However, if a massively rich benefactor:

a) bought the club
b) cleared the debt incurred on the new training ground and stadium preparation
c) paid for the new stadium
d) paid for local transport improvements
e) paid for further property developments that could contribute yet more to the club's income
f) secured a massive stadium and shirt sponsorship deal through their own contacts

.....then I would welcome such a new owner with open arms.

For me this is no different than what City is doing. You are just spending the 'free money' on something else, infrastructure not players.

 

[DubaiSpur]

I think its my style of expressing myself, rather than any fault of yours, I was just telling you that the answer was meant to express how the idea saddens rather than angers me.

The only thing that really angers me is the selective vision employed by CFC and Emirates Marketing Project fans, who seem to think that their success has been earned in some way. To me its no better than saying "I'm a paedophile and proud of it" ie latching onto something reprehensible and saying its a matter of pride.

Very true, that. Agreed, point well made.

 

[DubaiSpur]

For me this is no different than what City is doing. You are just spending the 'free money' on something else, infrastructure not players.

Which them goes directly into the players, since the new stadium's meant to fund their purchase.

 

[Klinsmania]

No. I would hope that FFP is properly enforced so the likes of City/Chelscum can't spend ridiculous sums of money and so that the likes of us and Everton can compete properly on a level playing field. If any City fan says that this championship isn't tainted slightly by the fact that they've spent ?ú1b in three years to achieve it then they are trumping. There would be far greater glory in a team achieving this success without going out and buying it.

 

[Superhudd]

Bayern Munich president Hoeness fuming at Abramovich's Chelsea 'oil mafia'By Matt Barlow
PUBLISHED: 10:30, 16 May 2012 | UPDATED: 20:53, 16 May 2012
Comments (48) Share
Bayern Munich president Uli Hoeness has attacked Roman Abramovich’s ownership of Chelsea.

Hoeness branded Abramovich one of the ‘oil mafia’ who take money from the public at petrol pumps to fund their football clubs.

He cited this as one reason why Bayern must beat Chelsea on Saturday and contrasted the club’s reliance upon their Russian billionaire with Bayern’s solid financial foundations.

‘I get angry every week when I go to buy petrol,’ fumed Hoeness. ‘The oil mafia takes money out of my pocket to invest it in footballers. For me this stinks to high heaven and I include Mr Abramovich in all this. We need to beat clubs like Chelsea on the field of play. Chelsea are a club with their backs to the wall as a result of their patchy league season. If they lose they won’t be in the competition next year.

‘If Bayern win it, we will make around ?ú20million. That is what the game is all about: sporting success based on sound economic sense. Mr Abramovich has put ?ú900m into Chelsea. If he pulls the plug on them, you’ll be able to pick the club up for the price of a puzzle magazine from a newsstand.


‘I think it’s important for everyone at Bayern to feel that the club belongs to them. They must not have any fear that we will sell out to a Russian or Arabian consortium.

‘When the financial fair play rules come in it will be a golden era for Germany’s clubs.’


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...amovichs-Chelsea-oil-mafia.html#ixzz1v88MQ9s8

Clubs such as Bayern and Man Utd will make sure FFP works

 

[Spursalot]

Bayern Munich president Hoeness fuming at Abramovich's Chelsea 'oil mafia'By Matt Barlow
PUBLISHED: 10:30, 16 May 2012 | UPDATED: 20:53, 16 May 2012
Comments (48) Share
Bayern Munich president Uli Hoeness has attacked Roman Abramovich’s ownership of Chelsea.

Hoeness branded Abramovich one of the ‘oil mafia’ who take money from the public at petrol pumps to fund their football clubs.

He cited this as one reason why Bayern must beat Chelsea on Saturday and contrasted the club’s reliance upon their Russian billionaire with Bayern’s solid financial foundations.

‘I get angry every week when I go to buy petrol,’ fumed Hoeness. ‘The oil mafia takes money out of my pocket to invest it in footballers. For me this stinks to high heaven and I include Mr Abramovich in all this. We need to beat clubs like Chelsea on the field of play. Chelsea are a club with their backs to the wall as a result of their patchy league season. If they lose they won’t be in the competition next year.

‘If Bayern win it, we will make around ?ú20million. That is what the game is all about: sporting success based on sound economic sense. Mr Abramovich has put ?ú900m into Chelsea. If he pulls the plug on them, you’ll be able to pick the club up for the price of a puzzle magazine from a newsstand.


‘I think it’s important for everyone at Bayern to feel that the club belongs to them. They must not have any fear that we will sell out to a Russian or Arabian consortium.

‘When the financial fair play rules come in it will be a golden era for Germany’s clubs.’


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...amovichs-Chelsea-oil-mafia.html#ixzz1v88MQ9s8

Clubs such as Bayern and Man Utd will make sure FFP works

=D>

 

[nw7 yid]

If the injection was for naming rights then thats Ok.. anything else is wrong

What makes that OK?

I think that giving up the name of your club's stadium for commercial reasons is 'selling out'.

 

[Spursalot]

What makes that OK?

I think that giving up the name of your club's stadium for commercial reasons is 'selling out'.

Selling advertising is 'selling out'?

I see no difference between a name on a shirt and a name on a stadium. Plus we wouldn't be 'giving up' a stadium name, our new stadium is un-named.

 

[Raziel]

No. I would hope that FFP is properly enforced so the likes of City/Chelscum can't spend ridiculous sums of money and so that the likes of us and Everton can compete properly on a level playing field. If any City fan says that this championship isn't tainted slightly by the fact that they've spent ?ú1b in three years to achieve it then they are trumping. There would be far greater glory in a team achieving this success without going out and buying it.

Two points

- FPP will never be implemented in anything like an effective manner
- Blackburn/City/Cheat$ki/Barca/Real, how many clubs do we put asterisks next to?

 

[mick cooper]

Selling advertising is 'selling out'?

I see no difference between a name on a shirt and a name on a stadium. Plus we wouldn't be 'giving up' a stadium name, our new stadium is un-named.

its going to be 25 metres closer to White Hart Lane

without sponsorship, I'm guessing it will be called White Hart Lane.

Tottenham, we are Tottenham, super Tottenham from the Finger Lickin Good stadium.

and repeat

 

[Raziel]

its going to be 25 metres closer to White Hart Lane

without sponsorship, I'm guessing it will be called White Hart Lane.

Tottenham, we are Tottenham, super Tottenham from the Finger Lickin Good stadium.

and repeat

Idealistic, but it's going to happen ....

Sport is business now, and no amount of chest thumping, pledges or protests can/will change that.