Given our unofficial nickname, would any Arab investor want to linked with the Yids?

hoddlewaddle:

Given our unofficial nickname, would any Arab investor want to linked with the Yids?

It's quite likely that many potential sponsors won't be aware of the connection.

Even if they are, I doubt that it will concern them greatly. If they are interested at all in paying the vast sum required to put their name on our new stadium and our shirt, it will be because they are seeking a global presence. In other words, pandering to local Arab sentiment (which, to be honest, is likely to be equally as ignorant of or unconcerned by Spurs' Jewish connection) won't be a part of the equation.

The only thing that will matter to them is that they will be closely associated with one of the most prestigious clubs in, currently, the most prestigious and most globally followed domestic league in world football.

hoddlewaddle:

Given our unofficial nickname, would any Arab investor want to linked with the Yids?

Even if they knew the nickname, they would probably have no problem with it.

The Arabs, well most of them, do not hate jews at all. Their problem is with Zionists or Israelis (like me), they're not antisemite.

spurs229:

hoddlewaddle:

Given our unofficial nickname, would any Arab investor want to linked with the Yids?

Even if they knew the nickname, they would probably have no problem with it.

The Arabs, well most of them, do not hate jews at all. Their problem is with Zionists or Israelis (like me), they're not antisemite.

plus i highly doubt any sane Spurs Chairman would associate with anti semite sponsors. I know Levy likes to make a gaffe, but that would be beyond absurd. 

DHSF:

we have a 160m fan following?

 

that cannot be true right?

Who knows. In China though the Premiership attracts audiences of up to 350 million people. Not sure how these figures are put together or if they count online viewing etc. In the Uk in Dec 2008 there was a survey of support for Premier League clubs and we palced 3rd with just under 10%:

1. Liverpool – 14.3

2. Manchester United – 11.8

3. Tottenham Hotspur – 9.7

4. Arsenal – 9.6

5. Newcastle United – 5.8

6. Manchester City – 5.3

7. West Ham United – 4.9

8. Aston Villa – 4.4

9. Chelsea FC – 3.6

10. Everton FC – 3.1

Taking into account the Chinese viewing figures alone and using a similar formula it would mean that potentially we have up to 35 million fans in China alone. Now the term 'fan' naturally would in this case refer to an individual being asked what club they support/like/follow. I think the official Premier League viewing is about 650 million people so again it could be argued that we could have 60-65million of this total. What percentage of worldwide fans watch these official broadcasts is tricky to gauge but if you assumed that there would be twice as many fans worldwide as the number who watch the Premiership officially then you are already looking at 120-130million potential fans. The sample size for the UK poll last year was approx 3000 people. The number of Premier League fans worldwide is growing year on year as the broadcasters sell the packages further a field.

.

Clarky:

DHSF:

we have a 160m fan following?

 

that cannot be true right?

Who knows. In China though the Premiership attracts audiences of up to 350 million people. Not sure how these figures are put together or if they count online viewing etc. In the Uk in Dec 2008 there was a survey of support for Premier League clubs and we palced 3rd with just under 10%:

1. Liverpool – 14.3

2. Manchester United – 11.8

3. Tottenham Hotspur – 9.7

4. Arsenal – 9.6

5. Newcastle United – 5.8

6. Manchester City – 5.3

7. West Ham United – 4.9

8. Aston Villa – 4.4

9. Chelsea FC – 3.6

10. Everton FC – 3.1

Taking into account the Chinese viewing figures alone and using a similar formula it would mean that potentially we have up to 35 million fans in China alone. Now the term 'fan' naturally would in this case refer to an individual being asked what club they support/like/follow. I think the official Premier League viewing is about 650 million people so again it could be argued that we could have 60-65million of this total. What percentage of worldwide fans watch these official broadcasts is tricky to gauge but if you assumed that there would be twice as many fans worldwide as the number who watch the Premiership officially then you are already looking at 120-130million potential fans. The sample size for the UK poll last year was approx 3000 people. The number of Premier League fans worldwide is growing year on year as the broadcasters sell the packages further a field.

.

I find it highly unlikely that 10% of PL fans follow Spurs.  There are loads of different ways of estimating total support, all of which have flaws.  The 160m estimate seems to have picked the methods that was most favourable to us (no doubt the one that Levy and Barber used in their business case for the new stadium).

On a thread on here a few months ago, another poster suggested looking at the breakdown of fans who played the official PL fantasy football game as an indication of size of support.  It looks like this:

Man United - 525k

Liverpool - 344k

Arsenal - 247k

Chelsea - 160k

Tottenham - 89k

Newcastle - 61k

Villa - 41k

Everton - 40k

West Ham - 38k

Man City - 33k

Fulham - 21k

Sunderland - 20k

etc.

 

Total is 1,730k which gives us just over 5% of the total following.

 

Obviously there will be people playing this game who don't actually 'support' any of the clubs (e.g. fans of lower league clubs), but if they have stated a preference for Tottenham then I reckon they'd count as a Tottenham fan in terms of the definition of support that led to the 160m estimate.

The fantasy football website is also heavily weighted towards fans based in England (roughly 50% of all users come from England).  I'd guess that this would favour Tottenham.  From experience, the Sky 4 clubs dominate support more abroad than at home due to differences in levels of exposure and lack of local ties to less successful clubs.  So I'd say that estimating that 5% of all PL fans follow Tottenham is generous.

Tottenham Hotspur are set to build the first eco-friendly football stadium, according to Daily Star Sunday.

The Spurs board are set to announce plans for a new stadium to be built in north London, and are aiming to spend £10 million of the estimated £400 million cost of the stadium on making it green.

The plans for the new stadium are still very much in the preliminary stages, with no concrete idea in place, but the Spurs hierarchy are keen to turn their new ground into one of the most iconic green spots in the world.

This is set to annoy the Arsenal board, who missed out on the chance to make the Emirates Stadium eco-friendly when it was completed in 2006.

The new stadium is set to be completed in the next few years, and will be one of the favourites to host World Cup matches in 2018, if the Football Association's bid is successful.

One player who could well grace the proposed new stadium is Spurs transfer target Marouane Chamakh, who appears to be in a two-way tussle between Spurs and Arsenal.

The Morocco international has been long linked with a move to north London, and is set to leave Girondins de Bordeaux after they won last season's Ligue 1 title in search of a new challenge.

nw7 yid:

Clarky:

DHSF:

we have a 160m fan following?

 

that cannot be true right?

Who knows. In China though the Premiership attracts audiences of up to 350 million people. Not sure how these figures are put together or if they count online viewing etc. In the Uk in Dec 2008 there was a survey of support for Premier League clubs and we placed 3rd with just under 10%:

1. Liverpool – 14.3

2. Manchester United – 11.8

3. Tottenham Hotspur – 9.7

4. Arsenal – 9.6

5. Newcastle United – 5.8

6. Manchester City – 5.3

7. West Ham United – 4.9

8. Aston Villa – 4.4

9. Chelsea FC – 3.6

10. Everton FC – 3.1

Taking into account the Chinese viewing figures alone and using a similar formula it would mean that potentially we have up to 35 million fans in China alone. Now the term 'fan' naturally would in this case refer to an individual being asked what club they support/like/follow. I think the official Premier League viewing is about 650 million people so again it could be argued that we could have 60-65million of this total. What percentage of worldwide fans watch these official broadcasts is tricky to gauge but if you assumed that there would be twice as many fans worldwide as the number who watch the Premiership officially then you are already looking at 120-130million potential fans. The sample size for the UK poll last year was approx 3000 people. The number of Premier League fans worldwide is growing year on year as the broadcasters sell the packages further a field.

.

I find it highly unlikely that 10% of PL fans follow Spurs.  There are loads of different ways of estimating total support, all of which have flaws.  The 160m estimate seems to have picked the methods that was most favourable to us (no doubt the one that Levy and Barber used in their business case for the new stadium).

On a thread on here a few months ago, another poster suggested looking at the breakdown of fans who played the official PL fantasy football game as an indication of size of support.  It looks like this:

Man United - 525k

Liverpool - 344k

Arsenal - 247k

Chelsea - 160k

Tottenham - 89k

Newcastle - 61k

Villa - 41k

Everton - 40k

West Ham - 38k

Man City - 33k

Fulham - 21k

Sunderland - 20k

etc.

 

Total is 1,730k which gives us just over 5% of the total following.

 

Obviously there will be people playing this game who don't actually 'support' any of the clubs (e.g. fans of lower league clubs), but if they have stated a preference for Tottenham then I reckon they'd count as a Tottenham fan in terms of the definition of support that led to the 160m estimate.

The fantasy football website is also heavily weighted towards fans based in England (roughly 50% of all users come from England).  I'd guess that this would favour Tottenham.  From experience, the Sky 4 clubs dominate support more abroad than at home due to differences in levels of exposure and lack of local ties to less successful clubs.  So I'd say that estimating that 5% of all PL fans follow Tottenham is generous.

Certainly a creative route to take but everyone knows we count less geeks amongst our fans than many other glory hunter attracting clubs. Also you have failed to take into account one of the very basic and unarguable facts about Fantasy Football and that is that in the 'fans leagues' we often are in the top 2 of every competition going. I certainly know it was the case each year I used to win my leagues before I got bored. This said it is argued that the gloryhunting fans of other clubs have taken out multiple teams in a vain attempt to increase their chances of usurping the average Spurs fan. Naturally the inherent genetic flaw ensures that no number of additional teams actually improves their statistical chances of beating a team picked by a Spurs fan.

For these reasons alone I think the Fantasy Football route in determing Premier League support is one to be ignored.

http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2008/07/Premiership_Football_Clubs_Online_Interest

As posted by Spur of the moment

http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2008/07/Premiership_Football_Clubs_Online_Interest

But I deleted it as the thread was knackered.

 

 

Anyway, surely thats just a league table about which fans have the most spare time. I can say that I very very rarely visit the official site. Probably at most twice a season.

unknown:

As posted by Spur of the moment

http://www.comscore.com/Press_Events/Press_Releases/2008/07/Premiership_Football_Clubs_Online_Interest

But I deleted it as the thread was knackered.

 

 

Anyway, surely thats just a league table about which fans have the most spare time. I can say that I very very rarely visit the official site. Probably at most twice a season.

Maybe you just deleted it because it shows us behind those four pains in the arse. 

No I deleted it because I couldn't make a reply, had to delete it. I'll bring it back if you want...

watch....

Top 10 Premiership Club Sites* Ranked by Average Monthly U.K. Unique Visitors (000) During Premiership Season** Age 15+, Home & Work Locations Aug 2007 – May 2008 Source: comScore World Metrix
Premiership Club Site	Average Monthly Total U.K. Unique Visitors (000)
Premierleague.com	1,182
Manutd.com	912
Liverpoolfc.tv	887
Arsenal.com	718
Chelseafc.com	402
Tottenhamhotspur.com	319
MCFC.co.uk (Manchester City)	204
WHUFC.com (West Ham)	203
Evertonfc.com	194
Portsmouthfc.co.uk	93
Fulhamfc.co.uk	74

Bloody typical its ok now, must have been a glitch with the software.

unknown:

Bloody typical its ok now, must have been a glitch with the software.

Thanks anyway. 

I sent an e-mail to Paul Barber. Here is my e-mail followed by his reply.

"Dear Mr. Barber

The renders of the stadium plans that were shown to the general public back in April showed great ambition by yourself and the rest of the board, it made me very pleased to see that the people in charge of the club are doing their upmost to wake up this giant that has been asleep for too long.

I write, once again, to ask a few questions as I need to quench what seems to be an undying thirst.

Why did the club decide not to go ahead with Sir Alan Sugar's original plan to rebuild the East stand to increase the capacity to 44,000 which was given planning permission back in September 2001?

Back in April many renders were released of the stadium plans, are those the final plans or are there any adjustments needed to be made before the club applies for planning permission?

When will the club apply for planning permission for the stadium project?

When does the club plan to move into the 2/3 completed stadium?

Why is a curvy upper teir so important to design when you could easy have the back row closer to the pitch with a flat upper in a 60,000 capacity than a curvy one in a 58,000 capacity?"

Dear Mr Curwen

Thank you for your e-mail.

I was not a member of the Board back in 2001 and I do not know any of the details of the plans you describe, so I am afraid I do not know the specific answer to your first question. Intuitively, I suspect however that the likely return from such a small increase in capacity did not justify the likely costs of the project.

We are now close to submitting our request for planning permission. It is always possible for the design to vary between now and the time the stadium is built, possibly as a result of the outcome of the permission we are seeking.

It is impossible to predict accurately when we might move to the new stadium as so much will depend on the timetable following planning permission being (hopefully) granted and the site being cleared from the North side so that construction can start. And then there's the small issue of funding the construction!

Your final question would be far better directed at an architect! I can however tell you that our team has delivered the maximum possible capacity given the constraints of our particular site and they have still managed to get our first row of seats more than 5 metres closer to the goal line than those at Emirates and almost 13 metres closer than Wembley. It should be magnificent.

We will continue to do our best to keep fans updated through www.tottenhamhotspur.com whenever the opportunity arises for us to do so.

Thanks for writing to us.

Regards, Paul

Paul Barber
Executive Director
Tottenham Hotspur Football Club

It's a good e-mail and I'm the club glad are acting as soon as possible whilst trying to be sensible, not make a decision too quickly.

I met Paul Barber here in Beverly Hills a few years back, he's a nice bloke.

Going from 36K to 44K isn't really a small increase in capacity, it's a 22% increase!!!  There was a picture on here a few months back with Leed's big stand superimposed over the East and West Stands at WHL, the capacity was up near 55K without touching the North and South stands. 

hoddlewaddle:

Given our unofficial nickname, would any Arab investor want to linked with the Yids?

our nickname used to be Spurs.........

I read in the London Lite today that our project is up against the Goon's for the second stadium in London.

ginola99:

I read in the London Lite today that our project is up against the Goon's for the second stadium in London.

what's that ?

metalgear:

ginola99:

I read in the London Lite today that our project is up against the Goon's for the second stadium in London.

what's that ?

Olympics?

My bad, sorry. The 2018 World Cup.

ginola99:

My bad, sorry. The 2018 World Cup.

That would be cool. Would love the world cup at White Hart Lane, can see why we are going for the "green roof initiative" now.

jimmyb:

CAS:

StandUpIfYouHateA*****l:

Still don't get how we're going to fill it or fund it without massively impacting on our transfer policy.

 

League games this season we have sold 98.9% of all tickets, now taking it we had some poor away support down at The Lane this season, I'd say that was pretty impressive giving some of the football we've played.

A lot will depend on pricing of seats for the new stadium but very few of our Home games get as far as 'On General Sale'.

Think we'd easily get 50k per game and sellout the bigger games adding a minimum of about £12m a year to our receipts even if the prices stayed where they are now (which they won't) plus extra Corperate and Other Sales you could easily see that figure rise to around £20m a year extra without including any Cup games.

 

Cost of Ground £300m

Additional Financing Charges over that 15 years £100m

Sale of Naming Rights £150m (15 years Ground @ £8m a year + Shirt Sponsorship 5 years @ £6m (currently getting more than that))

So net cost to Spurs £250m over 15 years, add back the 5 years of Shirt Sponsorship making it £280m. This figure Spurs would need to take in additon to current reciepts to stay on a level playing field.

£20m a year for 15 years = £300m and that with no price rises so IMO funding is not a real issue.

Agreed in principle but:

1. I reckon that £300 million could be slightly on the low side. Depending on the quality of finish that Spurs want, £350 million seems more realistic.

2. It seems as though Spurs will try to minimize the amount of debt finance.

3. Spurs could get anything from £50-150 million from a 10-15 year seats rights deal, if they can successfully sell the idea to the corporate types.

4. Spurs could raise £50 million or more from a rights issue.

5. Depending on the level of risk Spurs are willing to take on, they could make a significant amount from property sales. The supermarket will be built before the stadium and the housing after. Overall, I guess, property sales could raise a further £50-100 million.

6. If Spurs do have to raise a significant level of debt finance, then I would expect them to take out a longer term loan or bond than 15 years. I reckon 20-25 years.

7. I'd estimate an initial 15 year stadium naming rights deal of anything between £5-10 million per annum.

8. The new stadium will, like the death star, probably have 8-9K corporate seats. That's some 5,000 more than the current WHL. However, even if Spurs manage to sell out all the new corporate seats, we have to remember that a significant proportion of corporate seats will already have been pre-sold as part of the seats rights deal.

9. If the final capacity is, say, 58,000, I'd estimate that Spurs could average 54,000 for Premiership games. That's 18,000 more than we're getting at present - 5,000 of which will be extra corporate "customers".

Okay..........back-of-a-beer-mat time:

Spurs generally sell 3,500 corporate tickets for games at the Lane. Assume that 2,000 "club level" seats have been bought (for 10-15 years) as part of the seats rights deal and that some corporate seats will generally remain unsold. So corporate / club level income could be increased in the new stadium by 2,000 club level tickets at, say, £3000 each. £6 million per annum extra in corporate revenue as a consequence of the new stadium.

Assume that Spurs sell a further 10,000 normal tickets per game at £35, on average. And assume a poor year in the cups and only twenty home games in all. That would make a total of £7 million.

Spurs would also benefit because of an inevitable growth in merchandising and because of the increased value of the stadium's catering concessions etc. Finally, the new stadium would likely have a greater non match day use than the current stadium - possibly with major events like (non England) international games and gigs. At a conservative estimate, that little lot could realise a further £5 million per annum.

Add all of that to the lowest estimate for naming rights (£5 million per annum) and you have a total of £23 million.

Let's now assume that Spurs have to borrow £200 million (even after property sales have been completed) on a 20 year loan. Also assume a relatively high interest rate of 8%. That would leave Spurs with a debt and interest repayment committment of £20 million per annum.

Obviously, this is all very amateur guesstimating but, even assuming the lower estimates for seats rights, naming rights and property sales and, by contrast, assuming a punishing interest rate, Spurs will still be better off with the new stadium. And let's not forget, the club already generally makes operating profits of £30 million per annum.

you've got to add in property management costs (the whole estate) and the increased costs of maintaining a larger stadium with more  and larger facilities.

so00 they started yet?