• 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

Mikey10 said:
The most worrying thing today was that it was easy to see what was going to happen after 5 minutes. The players looked flat from the off, the passing was sloppy, and all of the second balls were being won by Leeds.

For me, that’s now a pattern under three managers for a huge chunk of this squad.

Which suggests to me that it’s not the managers who are the main problem.
Click to expand...

Yes its fine blaming managers for our decline ( and its true to a extent) but a lot of these players have to take the main blame on their shoulders, they are just going through the motions and have been for a while.
 
DubSpur said:
Mason is barely in the door, it's a stretch saying it's under 3 managers. The two biggest culprits of sloppy passing today were PEH and Lo Celso. Lo Celso didn't play that much under Poch and PEH wasn't there.
Click to expand...

Kane’s passing was terrible.
Son’s passing was brick.
Reggie’s passing was awful.

It was right through the team.

Most other teams get a new manager bounce. We flatline.
 
Mikey10 said:
Kane’s passing was terrible.
Son’s passing was brick.
Reggie’s passing was awful.

It was right through the team.

Most other teams get a new manager bounce. We flatline.
Click to expand...
Kane's passing wasn't terrible. A couple of tough long passes didn't come off, but we've got used to him pulling off some ridiculous passes that when he's slightly off it it's noticeable.
Son's passing is not one of his strengths and he's been going through another of his poor patches for months. Reggie is another that wasn't here under Poch.
 
I spoke to a friend at a hedge fund earlier. He said that typically you would cap lending at around 3 to 4 times EBITDA. He did say that football is different from normal businesses but that gross debt at 3 to 4 times turnover is wreckless in any business.
 
Last edited:
SpurMeUp said:
To the entitled lot who think we should be cradling trophies [emoji471] already, here’s a short psychometric questionnaire:

What will you do if we don’t get any gleaning metal soon?

What will you do if we do under Levy?

What appx year did you started supporting Spurs? Were you in it for the trophies then?

Do you except alternative owners to Levy could (are likely) to be a lot worse? From the incompetence of a Randy Learner to the milking machine of the Glaziers, or the dirty money of semi-criminal billionaire.

When you play games is it fun to cheat, to look up the answers or get the cheat code?



I honestly think the various Covid frustrations combined with us coming to the end of a lengthy period of progress has led to some being a miffed. I can understand it, but blaming Levy for your frustrations may not be valid or fair.


Sitting on my porcelain throne using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app
Click to expand...

Be disappointed as football is ultimately about winning and trophies come along with winning consistently.

Be grateful and happy. Not sure why anyone would think otherwise?

1991. I was 6. Ironically my first memory of Spurs is watching us win the FA cup that year but that’s not why I support spurs. My dad was a die hard fan and indoctrinated me at a young age. I don’t know if you can connect the dots at that age and pick a team because they are successful.

Yes absolutely new owners could do worse. Its a gamble as a lot of things in life are. But a lot of people don’t seem to grasp or accept that we could perhaps be better off with new owners. I’m not quite at that stage yet but I totally understand why people think it’s maybe time for a change.

I don’t see how spending money we have earned through success and hard work could be classed as cheating. We’ve played by the rules and adhered to the FFP laws. At this point if we spent a considerable sum of money, say £200m on transfers, wages etc it will be levelling the playing field.

The buzzwords on GG seem to be “cry”, “crying” and “entitled” but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to believe it may be time for a different approach, even if that is with the current regime. There are things we could do differently when it comes to the football operations that may or may not improve the squad.
 
Crying certainly does seem to be someones word of the week..

;)

zbh5yKW.jpg
 
Last edited:
Finney Is Back said:
I spoke to a friend at a hedge fund earlier. He said that typically you would cap lending at around 3 to 4 times EBITDA. He did say that football is different from normal businesses but that gross debt at 3 to 4 times turnover is wreckless in my business.
Click to expand...

Well, not really. In a listed business then yes, anything over those levels would be a problem. Leveraged buy-outs will get to 6x-7x EBITDA, sometimes higher depending on the sector. Given we're a private company then comparing us to a public company would be wrong...the main challenges in raising debt for a football will be (1) convincing the lenders of the certanty of cashflows and (2) the up and down nature (success and failure) of transfers
 
 
  • Like
Reactions: DTA
Jurgen the German said:
Be disappointed as football is ultimately about winning and trophies come along with winning consistently.

Be grateful and happy. Not sure why anyone would think otherwise?

1991. I was 6. Ironically my first memory of Spurs is watching us win the FA cup that year but that’s not why I support spurs. My dad was a die hard fan and indoctrinated me at a young age. I don’t know if you can connect the dots at that age and pick a team because they are successful.

Yes absolutely new owners could do worse. Its a gamble as a lot of things in life are. But a lot of people don’t seem to grasp or accept that we could perhaps be better off with new owners. I’m not quite at that stage yet but I totally understand why people think it’s maybe time for a change.

I don’t see how spending money we have earned through success and hard work could be classed as cheating. We’ve played by the rules and adhered to the FFP laws. At this point if we spent a considerable sum of money, say £200m on transfers, wages etc it will be levelling the playing field.

The buzzwords on GG seem to be “cry”, “crying” and “entitled” but I don’t think it’s unreasonable to believe it may be time for a different approach, even if that is with the current regime. There are things we could do differently when it comes to the football operations that may or may not improve the squad.
Click to expand...

Football is all about the wait. I would argue that football is not ultimately about winning trophies. If it was why would so many support teams who don't win anything? What makes football so gratifying is that goals don't come easy. Sometimes you don't get any in a game. But when you do, it means something. Most clubs don't have more than an infinitesimal chance of a major trophy. The excitement is any side could win a trophy. Upsets happen and against the odds any team can win 11 players against 11 others. Compare our chances of winning a trophy now to 20 years ago, and it is hard not to say we are in a better position: evidenced by us being in a couple of finals, and flirting with the top of the league. Even in this disaster of a season we were top of the pile in December.

The reason this is so fascinating is because Spurs becomes a reflection of ourselves. An embodiment of our own success or lack of. And at the moment Covid has derailed all sorts of things, putting even more importance on Spurs' success. This combined with our malaise has led to the Levy out vibe - imo.

There are studies that measure people's happiness. What they find is the things that people think would make them happy, actually only give them a very short-term hit (same applies to things people think will make them unhappy). Winning the lottery gives you a short-term rush but doesn't actually affect your longer-term happiness. That soon levels out to the medium. So if it is not trophies, what is important? Being entertained, having an affinity with the club and its ethics, affinity with the team, other fans, and being part of the community, these are all more important to me than winning a trophy.
 
SpurMeUp said:
Football is all about the wait. I would argue that football is not ultimately about winning trophies. If it was why would so many support teams who don't win anything? What makes football so gratifying is that goals don't come easy. Sometimes you don't get any in a game. But when you do, it means something. Most clubs don't have more than an infinitesimal chance of a major trophy. The excitement is any side could win a trophy. Upsets happen and against the odds any team can win 11 players against 11 others. Compare our chances of winning a trophy now to 20 years ago, and it is hard not to say we are in a better position: evidenced by us being in a couple of finals, and flirting with the top of the league. Even in this disaster of a season we were top of the pile in December.

The reason this is so fascinating is because Spurs becomes a reflection of ourselves. An embodiment of our own success or lack of. And at the moment Covid has derailed all sorts of things, putting even more importance on Spurs' success. This combined with our malaise has led to the Levy out vibe - imo.

There are studies that measure people's happiness. What they find is the things that people think would make them happy, actually only give them a very short-term hit (same applies to things people think will make them unhappy). Winning the lottery gives you a short-term rush but doesn't actually affect your longer-term happiness. That soon levels out to the medium. So if it is not trophies, what is important? Being entertained, having an affinity with the club and its ethics, affinity with the team, other fans, and being part of the community, these are all more important to me than winning a trophy.
Click to expand...

I get what you’re saying, but I don’t think a lot of people’s desire for us to win trophies is because of Covid. I also appreciate many clubs will never win trophies and it is about the journey relative to the club you support.

My point is, the journey, and the next step for Spurs is to start winning. We have come so close and it looked like it could realistically start happening. Then we fell back.
 
SpurMeUp said:
Football is all about the wait. I would argue that football is not ultimately about winning trophies. If it was why would so many support teams who don't win anything? What makes football so gratifying is that goals don't come easy. Sometimes you don't get any in a game. But when you do, it means something. Most clubs don't have more than an infinitesimal chance of a major trophy. The excitement is any side could win a trophy. Upsets happen and against the odds any team can win 11 players against 11 others. Compare our chances of winning a trophy now to 20 years ago, and it is hard not to say we are in a better position: evidenced by us being in a couple of finals, and flirting with the top of the league. Even in this disaster of a season we were top of the pile in December.

The reason this is so fascinating is because Spurs becomes a reflection of ourselves. An embodiment of our own success or lack of. And at the moment Covid has derailed all sorts of things, putting even more importance on Spurs' success. This combined with our malaise has led to the Levy out vibe - imo.

There are studies that measure people's happiness. What they find is the things that people think would make them happy, actually only give them a very short-term hit (same applies to things people think will make them unhappy). Winning the lottery gives you a short-term rush but doesn't actually affect your longer-term happiness. That soon levels out to the medium. So if it is not trophies, what is important? Being entertained, having an affinity with the club and its ethics, affinity with the team, other fans, and being part of the community, these are all more important to me than winning a trophy.
Click to expand...

I don’t believe the hunger for trophies stems from covid. We have become a team over the last 10-15 years that has flirted with success only to fall short at the final or penultimate hurdle, under multiple managers. The only constant is ENIC as most of the players have come and gone and the managers have changed as outlined above. I get what you’re saying about the journey and I don’t entirely disagree. I just feel when you have a very good team that is capable of potentially winning trophies you have to strike whilst the iron is hot and nick trophies which underpin success. If you’re asking me if I would rather win the league cup or FA cup but get relegated a few years later like Wigan or Swansea? Of course not. I guess a lot of these discussions for me go down a similar road to a lot of the Poch debates. They both have some wonderful qualities, are they the men to take us to the next level? Both were adept at getting us to a certain point and keeping us there.

We had a very good team in the 80s, albeit in a different era with a totally different landscape but we backed up our successful teams with trophies. I don’t think anyone has any doubt whatsoever over the future of the club financially, we are in safe hands in that respect. But are ENIC willing take a gamble and do what it takes to push us to the next level? That doesn’t mean cheating. They want to maximise their investment, I get it, they are businessmen. But I don’t believe you are successful purely by making business decisions, especially when it is in direct odds with the football side of things.

The question is often posed “do you accept we may be worse off if we get different owners?” And that is a fair argument. Be careful what you wish for and all that. But I would counter that point by asking...do you accept we could end up with owners who are more willing to spend their own money to give us a better chance of winning trophies? We only seem to be presented with two choices; 1. Stick with ENIC and keep doing what we are doing 2. ENIC sell up and we end up with an owner with a horrible human rights record. It’s not an either or. We could ultimately end up with owners who do things the right way but let football run the football side of things and increase the wages to turnover ratio to get us closer to our rivals whilst not bankrupting the club.
 
@Jurg it does look like Enic have enhanced what we can spend as a club. Seeing the many failures of owners who have 'gambled' and borrowed or put in their own money - it doesn't work out that well a lot of the time. Villa under Learner, Risdale + Leeds are classic examples but there are many, Valencia etc. Would you want to throw the dice with Spurs and potentially jeopardise our success, when we currently have a stable and sustainable path?

There are few people that can 1. spend 2b to buy Spurs and 2. have another 1b or more they'd pump into the club 3. who can circumventing the fair play financial rules of the day 4. who like football and 5. are fans of Spurs. Is there anyone who meets these criteria you can think of? Say you were all of these things - one can dream - could you justify spending 3b on a game? When there are so many other deserving things in this world that could use the resources? So, in the real world then, it is unlikely we would get new owners who don't wish to make a profit and wish to spunk billions into Spurs.
 
Last edited:
Finney Is Back said:
I spoke to a friend at a hedge fund earlier. He said that typically you would cap lending at around 3 to 4 times EBITDA. He did say that football is different from normal businesses but that gross debt at 3 to 4 times turnover is wreckless in my business.
Click to expand...

Spurs turnover is over 450M (without full stadium kick in), debt is to everyone's best guess somewhere in the ~1B range, the vast majority being long term, low interest. So not even 3X.

Now is actually the best time in history to take loans.

People can pot shot Levy for many things with some justification, but lets be clear, he never fudges up when it comes to money .. (fudging guy made a profit on buying/selling the cranes we used to build stadium)
 
Raziel said:
Spurs turnover is over 450M (without full stadium kick in), debt is to everyone's best guess somewhere in the ~1B range, the vast majority being long term, low interest. So not even 3X.

Now is actually the best time in history to take loans.

People can pot shot Levy for many things with some justification, but lets be clear, he never fudges up when it comes to money .. (fudging guy made a profit on buying/selling the cranes we used to build stadium)
Click to expand...

Has anyone calculated what the stadium revenue and profit are (relative to OWHL)? Would be interesting. Is circa £5m a home game in the right ballpark?
 
BrainOfLevy said:
I'm very open to the fact that we may get worse owners. I'm also very willing to argue that we won't *necessarily* get 'worse' owners, we might get owners more willing to invest some of their own cash to help us grow further. I'm unsure ENIC's plan is ever really to do that.

That's what it comes down to, a stick or twist. Now that we have the stadium, I am more minded to twist. Before the stadium I was very happy with ENIC's plan, because I wanted us to be on a more stable footing, not be reliant on owners.
Click to expand...
It appears that you have convinced yourself that our current owners are incapable of delivering 'act 2' ?

I think the burden of losing, or at least, not winning is so great that you have abandoned one of your admirable principles and also your ability to be fair?

If the last 3 year's had been smooth off the pitch, then we would be approaching the stage of scratching our heads and wondering if we are moving forward with these owners. I'd say they deserve at least 5 years (probably from now) to see if they can deliver 'act 2', they simply deserve that from the delivery of 'act 1'. That is fair, is it not?.

Wanting 'to do things the right way' is a principal of mine, not just with THFC, but applied to my daily life.
So apologies in advance,if you were just applying it to THFC and the way the club is run, but if what I describe is you as a person as well, I'd worry that a lack of a shiny pot (as let's face it, that's all that's lacking) has had such a deep effect.

As for new owners, the only option, due to the state football has got itself into, is a sugar daddy. If you want a new owner to pump £200m+ in for team development but still looks at it as an investment that will eventually give him a return, then no-one of that type will look at football and think the risk/reward ratio of football is worth it. (Especially compared to other investments).
 
Last edited:
SpurMeUp said:
There are few people that can 1. spend 2b to buy Spurs and 2. have another 1b or more they'd pump into the club 3. who can circumventing the fair play financial rules of the day 4. who like football and 5. are fans of Spurs.
Click to expand...
plus 6. pass the fit and proper person test (cough Bin Zayed/Saudi Sportswashing Machine :eek:).
 
SpurMeUp said:
Has anyone calculated what the stadium revenue and profit are (relative to OWHL)? Would be interesting. Is circa £5m a home game in the right ballpark?
Click to expand...

Not sure we have full season numbers, what I did see

- It's generally accepted that United is about £5M per match day
- There was some data showing that for a few months of running at capacity we had highest matchday revenue in league (so higher than United)
 
Lilbaz said:
The big hope for the prem is that they could do a streaming service for games at say £10 a month (media have dubbed the idea premflix). Watch whatever game you want. This hasn't been set up yet. Also may effect match day attendance so will probably be trialled with the overseas market first.
Click to expand...
This is very much being trialled right now.:cool:
 
Raziel said:
Not sure we have full season numbers, what I did see

- It's generally accepted that United is about £5M per match day
- There was some data showing that for a few months of running at capacity we had highest matchday revenue in league (so higher than United)
Click to expand...

Who knows if the levels of fan spending would sustain as the stadium became less novel. People might get in and out quicker, but I don't think so. The club can invest in enhancing areas all around the concourse - making more comfortable pre and post-match spaces. There is also more that can be done to streamline service in the 30mins before games and during HT. Plus all the corporate areas. Provided Levy reinvests into the facilities the stadium should give the club around £5m more than OWHL a game. So an extra 100m a year is relatively conservative. Other events, cup runs extra...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back