Some of the posters key posts in order on SC:
"That’s really odd, when I posted it there was a section at the end of Sam Wallace’s article saying Lewis was bored with Spurs and wanted to sell for £2bn, that the club was being touted around the City. That part of the article now seems to have been removed.
The article is correct thought, the club is on the block and the price is 2bn, I heard that over a month ago from someone very close to the most likely buyer."
-----
"The most likely buyer is US based and came very close to buying us a few years ago "
---
[In response to a point raised that our competitors have a higher turnover than Spurs]:
"No they don't, they used to but they don't anymore, not since the beginning of last season where we had 60-80k at Wembley every week. It is clear as day that ENIC have used the fans as a cash cow to build a property empire that they can flog to the highest bidder. Staggering to me that most of our fanbase still refuse to see this."
[Reply comes in that City, United, Chelsea and Liverpool having higher turnovers]:
United are in a different league and likely always will be, City and Chelsea yes but our turnover is now pretty similar to Liverpool, our spending on players and wages clearly isn’t.
----
[In response to a poster saying that ENIC HAD invested money into club since purcahse, e.g. clearing debt, buying land, building training complex etc]:
"It is a fact, ENIC haven’t put in any money after they bought the club other than a highly dubious share issue where they totally screwed the minority shareholders, some of whom were willing to buy out ENIC. There is ample “evidence” you know things like accounts filed with Companies House to show all the capital investments have been funded by cash flow from operations I.e. payments by the fans - whether in person or armchair - and latterly a large amount of debt."
---
[Further posts in replies and back-and-forth with various posters]:
"ENIC’s intention since day one has been to sell once they built a new stadium and that is what they are actively trying to do now. The club has been on the block at £2bn all summer, they just aren’t finding any takers at that price and quite frankly as fans we should be petrified if they do because any owner paying that is going to have to sweat the asset in a massive way and that means wringing out more money from us not putting assets on the pitch."
---
[This one in reference to training ground and stadium]:
"All paid for with operating cash flow and debt. All capital assets that fatten up the club for sale.
Everyone points to the training centre. It has been up and running for several years now. Do Spurs have the best youth players ? No. Which clubs do ? Chelsea and Emirates Marketing Project. Why ? Because even at youth level money - wages, signing on fees - talks and spending on bricks and mortar doesn’t.
I continue to be amazed at just how many fans are taken in by the ENIC con trick, spending our money on property to enable them to sell the club while spending none of our money on improving the team/squad. Lots of promises of jam tomorrow to offset the pain today when in fact the jam won’t be for us the fans it will be for them as shareholders.
Wake up Spurs fans we are being totally ripped off by ENIC and told to thank them for it. If you can’t see that after the last transfer window then I despair.
For anyone questioning how this post belongs in this thread just consider whether anyone seriously thinks ENIC will release any funds for transfers in January."
---
"Put simply I’m in a horrible dilemma. I think ENIC are terrible owners who are taking our cash - either at the stadium or our army of armchair fans - and using it to build a property portfolio while starving the football squad of the investment it needs. This should lead me to want them to sell but given the price they are demanding - £2bn - the only type of owner we get will be even more focussed on getting a return on their asset which again will only come from monetising us the fans.
To rub salt in the wound ENIC are selling us a lie by suggesting that once the stadium is built we will compete in the transfer market. We won’t compete with them as owners. Just look at the training ground, a big capital investment, wotld class, but what have we done to populate it with world class youth ? Nothing, we are constantly surpassed in the race for the best youth by Emirates Marketing Project and Chelsea because at youth level fees and wages dominate.
I don’t know about others but I’d rather see a Bale on the pitch than a cheese room in the stadium."
----
[In reply to a post saying stadium ussues/delays have effected our summer transfer dealings]:
"I’m sorry but I disagree. Leaving to the side for one second that over half the capital outlay has nothing to do with the stadium itself, any capital asset should be financed over the useable life of the asset. To use a simple analogy if I buy a house I take out a 25 year mortgage I don’t say I can’t afford food for the next 3-5 years because I need to pay off all the money I owe on the house. Of course in the case of stadium financing long term sponsorship deals are a key part of the equation. As Chairman of the club Levy really only had 2 key tasks this summer, ensure the stadium was delivered and put in place long term finance and sponsorship to fund it, he flunked both."
---
[In reply to a poster who has a long-back-and-forth defending ENIC; i've picked out one key post:]
"Again you are referring to the past, evident in your reference to the period since they took over. It is quite simplistic and a little insulting to suggest that the volume of comments on this thread which express concern about ENIC’s ownership solely relate to the last transfer window. There is a litany of failed moves in the transfer market that reflect a general risk aversion on ENIC’s part. I think many, including myself, gave them the benefit of the doubt while our revenues lagged those of our major rivals. However, as that gap has clearly narrowed materially in the last year the excuses that can be offered for their risk aversion simply fall away.
There are many strategies that can be employed in improving the squad but we really don’t seem to employ many of them, possibly being solely reliant on the “Poch will wave his magic wand” strategy. Sell high and buy low is a great business strategy but it no longer works in football or certainly not at the echelons we are not competing at where I think sell a little cheaply and buy a little expensively might better reflect what you need to do. As I said previously I’d really like to see us establish ourselves as the buyer of the best young talent in the world, yes some will fail but if our scouting is good we should expect more successes than failures. All of a life is a balance of risk taking and I just feel ENIC have the risk dial turned way down and that is holding us back. I could dissect all of our transfer windows since the calamity of 2016 but I don’t think that would be productive."
-----
Sorry for the long posts. Would love to hear people's views both in agreement and also debunking some of the above. Fascinating either way to me as i say...
