• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

ENIC

DTA said:
Why would the hotel be scrapped? Makes absolutely no sense!

levy being stepped down? Haha by who? Only Lewis has the power to do that.
Click to expand...

A PR move, that will have some meaning too. Levy will still be heavily involved, but with less day to day involvement. Which makes sense. This season, I don't think there will be much of a difference. Going forward he might be working 4 days a week with the onus on others to start pulling the strings, and eventually Levy could become more of traditional Chairman of the Board.
 
Mikey10 said:
I’m not sure if anyone has watched tonight’s LWOS, but Lee McQueen says he is certain on the following:

- We started interviewing for managers before the EL Final
- We approached Alonso in December but he was clear that he was only interested in Real
- Frank has now had four interviews with the club
- Thomas Frank will be the new Spurs manager
- Donna Cullen didn’t choose to step down, she was stepped down
- Scott Munn will go shortly
- Paratici will return
- There is currently no Middle East investment coming in
- Levy will be stepped down shortly
- Ange being stepped down is therefore not a Daniel Levy decision
- Peter Charrington, an ENIC troubleshooter, has been brought in to sort out the club and will be interim chairperson for the foreseeable
- The hotel projects will be scrapped. Money will be diverted into the footballing business.

McQueen says he’s not an ITK but is simply passing on what he’s heard from a “rock solid” source.

We will see, but that’s a lot to put out there if you’re not sure on it.
Click to expand...

Erm isn't levy chair of enic aswell? So he brought in his own troubleshooter?
 
DubSpur said:
There's no way Lewis is going to step Levy down. He's made Levy a fortune, that will be his main concern.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure Lewis is even all that aware that he owns Spurs anymore, or knows someone called Daniel Levy.

From the bits of news I've seen, we're now in a trust, which is accessible by Lewis's kids, in particular his daughter. Wouldn't be surprised if that's the person who is now the nominal majority owner of Spurs - in that case, she might well have different views. But, all speculation.
 
SpurMeUp said:
A PR move, that will have some meaning too. Levy will still be heavily involved, but with less day to day involvement. Which makes sense. This season, I don't think there will be much of a difference. Going forward he might be working 4 days a week with the onus on others to start pulling the strings, and eventually Levy could become more of traditional Chairman of the Board.
Click to expand...

Levy is all in until he's out, I doubt he spends 4 hours a week not trying to improve us, including when he's asleep.
 
SpurMeUp said:
A PR move, that will have some meaning too. Levy will still be heavily involved, but with less day to day involvement. Which makes sense. This season, I don't think there will be much of a difference. Going forward he might be working 4 days a week with the onus on others to start pulling the strings, and eventually Levy could become more of traditional Chairman of the Board.
Click to expand...

It's a move that will play well with the fans if indeed there is a change in club leadership - 'Levy cared about the real estate more than the club, we're different, that money goes into the team.'

And people keep saying the fans don't matter, but this is a delicate time in terms of football governance in the UK. One way or another, the concept of a strong regulator is weaving its way through the halls of power - there have been setbacks for sure, but it's an idea whose time has come politically, and fans vote too.

Might do a lot of good for any new owners (be they ENIC-affiliated or otherwise) to curry goodwill with the fanbase.

It's actually reasonably similar to how club presidents in Spain interact with their socios - it's part sport, part politics.

All ifs, buts and maybes right now, though.
 
DubaiSpur said:
I'm not sure Lewis is even all that aware that he owns Spurs anymore, or knows someone called Daniel Levy.

From the bits of news I've seen, we're now in a trust, which is accessible by Lewis's kids, in particular his daughter. Wouldn't be surprised if that's the person who is now the nominal majority owner of Spurs - in that case, she might well have different views. But, all speculation.
Click to expand...
Where are you getting that from about his mental abilities?? Around the trial date he looked in good health for his age.
I'd say if anything that you're not all that aware of anything about his health.

His daughter is one of those running the trust. I'd be fairly confident that Lewis is still pulling the strings. He doesn't seem the type to just put his feet up and let others run what he's built.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
Is that really the case? I wasn't aware of that. Why would that be a requirement (presumably it isn't for any of the other venues)?
Click to expand...
It might have just been the case that UEFA didn't require us to have a hotel, just that if we were building it, it needed to be finished so not to jeopardise their tournament plans/schedules?
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
It might have just been the case that UEFA didn't require us to have a hotel, just that if we were building it, it needed to be finished just to not jeopardise and tournament plans/schedules?
Click to expand...

Just to say the money for the hotel is ringfenced with loans and 3rd party investment, no hotel and that money is off the table. Would literally be fraud to take money and spend it on players and wages.

They might delay it and look at refinancing their loans and workign on their financial position, but they literally cant take money for the hotel and spend it on players

As for the Euros, not saying the hotel was obligatory but infrastructure would be, not sure if they consider Tottenham as London interms of heads on beds adequacy, so would probably have played some part


Anyway thats def me for the summer, I will laugh in my morning coffee reading people take one upmanship battles on who is the better fan on the Ange departs thread.........golden
 
Last edited:
ricky2tricky4city said:
It might have just been the case that UEFA didn't require us to have a hotel, just that if we were building it, it needed to be finished so not to jeopardise their tournament plans/schedules?
Click to expand...
That would make sense. I read @Gutter Boy's "contractually obliged to provide it" as if it were a part of the venue facilities we had committed to make available. Which would be odd considering the gap between the number of people it could accommodate vs the number of spectators attending.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
That would make sense. I read @Gutter Boy's "contractually obliged to provide it" as if it were a part of the venue facilities we had committed to make available. Which would be odd considering the gap between the number of people it could accommodate vs the number of spectators attending.
Click to expand...
Yes, it did read like that. Hence me giving it some thought as like you it didn't really add up.
 
Is it true that ENIC waited until the day Ange's contract rolled into year 3, to sack him, so that the payout would be less? It would make sense e.g. if announcing it two days before would mean a larger payout, it is right that they waited. Just wondering, no daggers. I would be annoyed if they didn't.
 
Bullet said:
Is it true that ENIC waited until the day Ange's contract rolled into year 3, to sack him, so that the payout would be less? It would make sense e.g. if announcing it two days before would mean a larger payout, it is right that they waited. Just wondering, no daggers. I would be annoyed if they didn't.
Click to expand...
I'd have thought you would just have to pay up whatever was left on the contract, regardless of when the firing happened.
Sounds like another anti-Levy conspiracy theory.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back