ENIC

[tommysvr]

Your are right but your last bit is contradictory to that. 150m isn’t that much if you’re looking to splash the cash on typically big name signings but is enough for plenty of clever good signings. That’s about 4-5 Kulus. Kostic is quality and available around 12m, there’s plenty of decently priced very good players around that we can hoover up if we recruit well and with Paritici I have complete confidence in maximising the quality we can get in with our budget….

Agree with this, and more important than a superstar player is the right player for our system. If Conte is committed then we can sign WB rather than FB. Midfielders that suit his style etc. No more blowing £50m on a player because they're ripped up a league. Buy them to suit how we play, like Bentancur and Kulu.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Agree with this, and more important than a superstar player is the right player for our system. If Conte is committed then we can sign WB rather than FB. Midfielders that suit his style etc. No more blowing £50m on a player because they're ripped up a league. Buy them to suit how we play, like Bentancur and Kulu.

And take freebies if they suit too… eriksen please

 

[Finney Is Back]

Depends on competition, headwinds and hard yards being worth it.

...and there has been plenty of all 3 of them, but hey he's stuck at it. Kudos

Majority owner has seen the value of his asset value go up from £80m to £3b(?) in 21 years, with the value still appreciating at pace. He has had pretty much zero hard yards until just the other day (the first actual investment made into the business).

I don’t think there is an investment fund on earth that would’ve sold Spurs over these past 15 years unless it had got into financial difficulties and needed liquidity.

 

[metalgear]

We got romero, kulu and lolo for around £100m (once we pay for kulu). Imagine another 4/5 of that calibre?

Better if you consider we will recoup some funds through sales. If our recruitment is as good as before.

Sent from my SM-T865 using Fapatalk

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

Majority owner has seen the value of his asset value go up from £80m to £3b(?) in 21 years, with the value still appreciating at pace. He has had pretty much zero hard yards until just the other day (the first actual investment made into the business).

I don’t think there is an investment fund on earth that would’ve sold Spurs over these past 15 years unless it had got into financial difficulties and needed liquidity.

There's a string of owners at other clubs that would suggest otherwise. Plenty have given up and exited. And they didn't even have a long drawn out battle to build a stadium. But yeah, it's been plain sailing

Levy is excellent at what he does, and that includes being dertermined and resilient. That's why the majority owner hasn't sold, because of the part owner sailing the ship.

 

[Bishop]

Which teams are risking losing big?

Liverpool, United & Arsenal spend within their means and City & Chelsea are bankrolled - there's no risk with any of those clubs - empty soundbite from Klopp

80m on VVD was a risk, 56m on Allison was a risk. This is what he's referring to. If those signings had missed they didn't have another 136m just lying around to spend big again.

Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Fapatalk

 

[Raziel]

£150m doesn't actually go that far.
Word of warning - it's only 2.5 Ndombele's.
It's pretty much what the Bale money would be now.
Our record with windfalls or big money signings isn't very good.

- Regardless of if you have £20M or £2B, how you spend it is the most important thing

- However, it's £150M more than we would have had, it's on top of any money available as usual (CL revenue expected), and on top of player sales. In addition that simply needs to cover a portion of the spend (these will not be cash up front buys)

- My opinion (just that) is the approach will be
6-8 players required
2-3 free pickups
2 pickups in last year(s) of contract (<£20M)
1-2 gambles/lesser known (<£20M)
2 expensive players (~£60M)

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

- Regardless of if you have £20M or £2B, how you spend it is the most important thing

- However, it's £150M more than we would have had, it's on top of any money available as usual (CL revenue expected), and on top of player sales. In addition that simply needs to cover a portion of the spend (these will not be cash up front buys)

- My opinion (just that) is the approach will be
6-8 players required
2-3 free pickups
2 pickups in last year(s) of contract (<£20M)
1-2 gambles/lesser known (<£20M)
2 expensive players (~£60M)

The one point worth noting on the announcement is the funding can be taken in tranches up to the end of the year (not season).

So it's a one window opportunity in regards to transfers.

Unless they remove that condition.

 

[DubSpur]

The one point worth noting on the announcement is the funding can be taken in tranches up to the end of the year (not season).

So it's a one window opportunity in regards to transfers.

Unless they remove that condition.

They can take up the funding but not use it all before the end of the year, keep some until Jan transfer window.

 

[Finney Is Back]

There's a string of owners at other clubs that would suggest otherwise. Plenty have given up and exited. And they didn't even have a long drawn out battle to build a stadium. But yeah, it's been plain sailing

Levy is excellent at what he does, and that includes being dertermined and resilient. That's why the majority owner hasn't sold, because of the part owner sailing the ship.

Sorry but Lewis (the majority owner) has made a HUGE amount on his investment with absolutely zero hard yards. His asset value has gone up pretty much every year since ownership (perhaps the Covid period aside). The asset value almost went through the roof with ESL as well (and that is probably still to come in some shape or form). If you can show me an investment fund that would sell such an asset then I’ll make sure I put them on my ‘do not invest’ list

Levy (our minority owner) has, by and large, been a good chairman and been paid FTSE 100 CEO money and top/second highest pay in PL to reward him for being a good chairman (as well as also turning himself from a smallish millionaire to almost a billionaire via his stake in the club).

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

They can take up the funding but not use it all before the end of the year, keep some until Jan transfer window.

I don't think it will be a problem. It's not like it's outsider funding, it's literally the owners speculating to accumulate....if it going well (and spent well) they're hardly going to curtail it.

 

[monkeybarry]

Your are right but your last bit is contradictory to that. 150m isn’t that much if you’re looking to splash the cash on typically big name signings but is enough for plenty of clever good signings. That’s about 4-5 Kulus. Kostic is quality and available around 12m, there’s plenty of decently priced very good players around that we can hoover up if we recruit well and with Paritici I have complete confidence in maximising the quality we can get in with our budget….

It's not contradictory in the slightest.
Your point actually highlights why. Bentancur and Kulu were signed because we needed to be wise.
Our record when we have money burning a hole in our pocket is generally very poor.
Romero is an exception.
Hugo too.
Otherwise I struggle to think of too many big money signings we got right. But lots we didn't.

Hopefully we'll take the approach to look for Verts, Toby, Kulu, Son type signings instead of the Ndombele, Lo Celso, Sanchez, Soldado ones.

Add in a couple of Bale and Dele types ones and it'll be a good balance.

 

[Finney Is Back]

£150m doesn't actually go that far.
Word of warning - it's only 2.5 Ndombele's.
It's pretty much what the Bale money would be now.
Our record with windfalls or big money signings isn't very good.

I disagree that it doesn’t go far…. If we assume that we already had the cash flow to make Kulusevski and Romero permanent and meet our transfer payment commitments for players already purchased then one could use £150m as follows (without even factoring in any sales):

1. GK. Forster (£0)
2. RWB. Spence (£15m)
3. LWB. Kostic (£12m)
4. CB. Nd!cka (£30m)
5. CM. Bissouma/Palhinha/Phillips/De Jong (£30-£60m)
6. AM. Eriksen (£0)
7. CF/WF. Deepay/De Kettelaere (£15-30m)

5 or 6 players that immediately fight for a first team place.

if selling players on top of that and using those funds to add to the budget then Nd!cka could instead be Bastoni, Deepay/De Kettelaere could become Nunez or Lautaro Martinez and Kostic could become Carrasco.

 

[monkeybarry]

I disagree that it doesn’t go far…. If we assume that we already had the cash flow to make Kulusevski and Romero permanent and meet our transfer payment commitments for players already purchased then one could use £150m as follows (without even factoring in any sales):

1. GK. Forster (£0)
2. RWB. Spence (£15m)
3. LWB. Kostic (£12m)
4. CB. Nd!cka (£30m)
5. CM. Bissouma/Palhinha/Phillips/De Jong (£30-£60m)
6. AM. Eriksen (£0)
7. CF/WF. Deepay/De Kettelaere (£15-30m)

5 or 6 players that immediately fight for a first team place.

if selling players on top of that and using those funds to add to the budget then Nd!cka could instead be Bastoni, Deepay/De Kettelaere could become Nunez or Lautaro Martinez and Kostic could become Carrasco.

You've just perfectly highlighted my point.
Those are shrewd signings.
Our history when we have a windfall is not shrewd.
Hopefully we do it sensibly this time. It looks like we will.
I'd add a bit to all those values - clubs know we have money.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

Sorry but Lewis (the majority owner) has made a HUGE amount on his investment with absolutely zero hard yards. His asset value has gone up pretty much every year since ownership (perhaps the Covid period aside). The asset value almost went through the roof with ESL as well (and that is probably still to come in some shape or form). If you can show me an investment fund that would sell such an asset then I’ll make sure I put them on my ‘do not invest’ list

Levy (our minority owner) has, by and large, been a good chairman and been paid FTSE 100 CEO money and top/second highest pay in PL to reward him for being a good chairman (as well as also turning himself from a smallish millionaire to almost a billionaire via his stake in the club).

@Raziel said there were various points they c.ould of sold up, and thats fair comment.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

You've just perfectly highlighted my point.
Those are shrewd signings.
Our history when we have a windfall is not shrewd.
Hopefully we do it sensibly this time. It looks like we will.
I'd add a bit to all those values - clubs know we have money.

Since Pochs last summer window, our business has largely been poor.
BUT since Paratici has arrived it's been largely good. And thats who has the reigns at the moment, so we proceed with a modicum of trust (hope)

In a roundabout way the £150m is like a reset. It smooths over all the brick business we have done and allows us (City/Chelsea stylee) to forget about the duds we bought. To be honest, it (the equity injection) felt like the only way the Spurs/Conte project made sense, ie it had to happen.

 

[braineclipse]

Since Pochs last summer window, our business has largely been poor.
BUT since Paratici has arrived it's been largely good. And thats who has the reigns at the moment, so we proceed with a modicum of trust (hope)

In a roundabout way the £150m is like a reset. It smooths over all the brick business we have done and allows us (City/Chelsea stylee) to forget about the duds we bought. To be honest, it (the equity injection) felt like the only way the Spurs/Conte project made sense, ie it had to happen.

Since well before the last window under Pochettino too imo. If anything it got a bit better when Mourinho got here, but still not at the level we've seen so far with Paratici and Conte.

Can only hope they maintain their good success rate with more money to spend. Both relatively big money deals and cheaper/shrewder deals should be targeted imo.

 

[Craig_J]

I think the most positive thing we can take from this investment, besides the obvious of what it could do to our playing squad, is that we have a chairman who is very much aware of his own short comings and failures and that he isn't afraid to admit when his planning has produced poor results. He's a lot more open and a lot less closed off then a lot of people give him credit for, and compared to a lot of other owners, who generally make the same mistakes and stubbornly refuse to change their approach.

We saw signs of this in our All Or Nothing documentary when Levy said he's aware he has a reputation of being stingy. He knows under Poch an opportunity was missed after the Champions League final defeat to back the manager more seriously, and that it led to us regressing - costing us so much more money to fix than would have been spent backing him, and lowering our standing in the footballing world pretty seriously.

He's appointed Paratici as he knows he can oversee the footballing side of business better than he ever can. He appointed Nuno, but wasn't afraid to pay him off early when initial signs were not promising, and hire Conte to come in and try and get us back on track. He's then put his money where his mouth is and trusted our Italian duo to handle ENIC's own money carefully. He's finally 'daring to do' and taking a calculated risk now that we have a manager who's proven his competency over the past season.

Have to say huge fair play to Levy for improving his approach over the years. Particularly when the stadium debt would have provided him with a very easy way of fighting off accusations of being tight without putting his hand in his own pocket.

Stands us in good steed that we have a chairman who's prepared to learn from past mistakes.

 

[DubSpur]

We saw signs of this in our All Or Nothing documentary when Levy said he's aware he has a reputation of being stingy. He knows under Poch an opportunity was missed after the Champions League final defeat to back the manager more seriously, and that it led to us regressing - costing us so much more money to fix than would have been spent backing him, and lowering our standing in the footballing world pretty seriously.

He did back him after the CL final. The issue wasn't the backing Poch got, but the players he spent the money on.

 

[Gutter Boy]

He did back him after the CL final. The issue wasn't the backing Poch got, but the players he spent the money on.

Or that he sacked the manager about 8 weeks after he'd given him £100m+ to spend, and brought in a manager that played the complete polar opposite style.

I still think it was a sliding doors moment, and that Lo Celso and Ndombele could have been big hits under a nurturing personality, possession-based system coach.