• 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

Daniel Levy - Chairman

Modric THFC said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1245267938011156482


Look at all the other clubs showing us up.

Of course the club can afford to pay our low paid employees the £500k or whatever a month their collective salary is. We'll be spunking multiple of that on agents fees in the last week of the transfer window no doubt.

We're being shown up by Arsenal, little Bournemouth, Brighton, Burnley, Palace, both Liverpool clubs, both Manchester clubs and even the Dildo Brothers.
Click to expand...

I am interested to see how this plays out. No one knows if the government will be able to extend the furlough scheme. No one knows what will happen with players wages (although I am sure there will be an agreement made). Maybe by doing this now, the club might be able to recommence some payments over the summer, rather than lay staff off completely. Let's see what happens at other clubs once the season is (officially) over. I would be surprised if we are the only club with impacted staff.
 
DubaiSpur said:
True, but I can't defend what we're doing, though. Arsenal have done the right thing, we have not. West Ham have done the right thing, we have not. Brighton, Burnley, Crystal Palace...

...this is wrong, mate. And as for the point you made yesterday re: being a net contributor in terms of taxes, so what? I would suspect the majority of middle class people are (and above), the majority of viable businesses are - almost all of them less financially loaded than super-rich fudging Tottenham Hotspur.

We can do without. We don't have to stiff the taxpayers and screw our own staff.

We can be better. We don't have to go down this squalid route, and be like Sports Direct's Mike Ashley. This shouldn't be what we, as a club, think is acceptable behaviour.
Click to expand...

We are not stiffing the tax payer, the profit that the club makes with its profit which brings in huge revenues contributes over 20m a year in tax to the British system which aids the British tax payer a hell of a lot and so it should. So for the first time in 20 years the clubs using it back, so what?

You have a romantic notion that a football club is not a company, thats cool, I don't and I feel ok about it.
 
This is defensible but let Levy make the argument. He is the beneficiary.

From my point of view the furlough is not a charity it’s to support the economy and survival of business - and businesses should and have been encouraged to use it.
 
All businesses should use the Govt scheme if they have to. We are paying out huge sums on stadium debt repayments and player wages. Levy is doing exactly the right thing - from a PR viewpoint the Directors should have taken a 40% cut, but he has to protect the business, ad make no mistake, with debts of £600m or whatever, we are a business.
 
Finney Is Back said:
Is anybody worried that us doing this indicates that we might be in a tighter spot with the finances than we had previously thought?
Click to expand...
No not at all
I look at it as a club planning for the league not commencing anytime soon
Also we as a club pay tax which is kinda unique in football terms and our infrastructure as a club has a high dependency on the natural use of it. The staff employed for that will be doing nothing now and as the guy said on Twitter yesterday the furloughing approach means their benefits get protected too
I strongly believe that more clubs would be doing this if they were viable businesses
Could you imagine Chelsea doing this with their losses for example?
And of course the BIG driver is to get the players to pull their weight money wise
 
Just listened to talksport clip
The PFA has a meeting a week again with the league... nothing has happened other than some message about decisions need to be made
To me it’s clear the message was fudge off we ain’t taking a pay cut
Hence why the clubs run by actual business people have said well we will get that out there by doing what we need to do to raise the issue
Sure that people will disagree but over a week for the PFA to make a comment of note???
 
Bedfordspurs said:
No not at all
I look at it as a club planning for the league not commencing anytime soon
Also we as a club pay tax which is kinda unique in football terms and our infrastructure as a club has a high dependency on the natural use of it. The staff employed for that will be doing nothing now and as the guy said on Twitter yesterday the furloughing approach means their benefits get protected too
I strongly believe that more clubs would be doing this if they were viable businesses
Could you imagine Chelsea doing this with their losses for example?
And of course the BIG driver is to get the players to pull their weight money wise
Click to expand...
Again, there is no requirement for a company to be a net payer of tax to use the furlough. Every club could take this approach if they wanted to. However it seems that so far only 3 have done so, it is interesting that so far 17 of the 20 clubs have not gone down this route. I assume that the other clubs do not think that the benefit is worth the adverse publicity?

Have we seen anything yet to say that the club will be topping up the other 20% of the wages so that the employees are not worse off?

What is the link between furloughing a bunch of low paid employees and the players pulling their weight money wise?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back