• 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

I wonder if Brexit and the suggested huge loss of jobs in the city will have an effect on possible corporate revenue
 
DeleHarry said:
I wonder if Brexit and the suggested huge loss of jobs in the city will have an effect on possible corporate revenue
Click to expand...

I would think certainly, just like the worse recession of our time 2008 the global crisis money markets crashing and the bankers reined in their spending and sat at home with their coats on and the heating off. Oh no actually they did not, tickets to sporting events like Wimbledon, the Masters, The F.A. cup final continued to rocket in both the "cheap" seats and in corporate. We are headed for a recession as we do every 10 years, but the price of things will keep going up.
 
Finney Is Back said:
You are vastly underestimating the revenue generation of the new stadium, especially in relation to the corporate £.

Firstly it is worth pointing out that at the existing stadium it has been reported that the 3,000 corporate seats generate equal revenue to the other 33,000 ‘ordinary’ seats. Now consider that the new stadium has provision for an extra 5,000 corporate seats on top of the number we have at WHL, but also remember that the new stadium will have vastly improved corporate facilities which will be the best in London, not only that but our corporate facilities will also have the added attraction of regular NFL games, that will be hugely attractive for the US Banks, Insurance and Tech companies. Therefore corporate prices at hte new stadium will be significantly higher than the like for like prices at WHL. I would envisage that the 8,000 corporate seats will probably generate more than 4 times the revenue of the current corporate offering at WHL.

You are also failing to consider stadium naming rights. Again the NFL games are a benefit here as a stadium sponsor will be getting exposure from both football, and American football (and also further exposure from the various concerts, boxing matches, etc). I would envisage that stadium naming rights will come in somewhere between £10-£20 million per season.

I think your £25 million estimate of additional revenue is likely to be surpassed by more than 100%. Personally I envisage that the new stadium will add somewhere between £60 and £100 million to THFC’s turnover. If we assume we continue to operate our existing 50% wages/turnover ratio then that allow us to add £30-£50 million to our wage bill.... Or put another way that enables the club to take on 4 to 7 Hernandez’s on top of the existing squad.

I could be wrong here but I think that capital projects are usually considered to be good value if they pay for themselves over 12 years. Ours looks like it will cost a total of about £750 to £800 million. If we assume the higher figure then £66 million of additional revenue per year would make it good value. I think we will realise at least that much revenue and therefore realise that value.
Click to expand...

My very basic calculations weren't meant to argue that the stadium wasn't a good investment but I'm not sure it's going to be the game changer that lots of us hope. We are a club who get run like a business and not a toy. I'm fine with that but when there's clubs around doing what PSG are about to do it means there simply isn't a level playing field. Financial Fair Play has become a joke.
 
awesome dawson said:
My very basic calculations weren't meant to argue that the stadium wasn't a good investment but I'm not sure it's going to be the game changer that lots of us hope. We are a club who get run like a business and not a toy. I'm fine with that but when there's clubs around doing what PSG are about to do it means there simply isn't a level playing field. Financial Fair Play has become a joke.
Click to expand...
Indeed. My response to you was to try to show that the stadium would be a game changer for us as it will mean between 60 and 100 million pounds worth of extra revenue per year, with only around £14 million of interest each year on the debt. That is a huge uplift for us in terms of revenue that will be able to be spent on the playing squad.
 
Finney Is Back said:
Indeed. My response to you was to try to show that the stadium would be a game changer for us as it will mean between 60 and 100 million pounds worth of extra revenue per year, with only around £14 million of interest each year on the debt. That is a huge uplift for us in terms of revenue that will be able to be spent on the playing squad.
Click to expand...

When you say 14m interest, would that be on top of repayments and if so how much will they likely be?
 
billyiddo said:
When you say 14m interest, would that be on top of repayments and if so how much will they likely be?
Click to expand...

Without wanting to butt into this discussion, given the business that Levy is transforming us into (higher revenues, various other revenue streams such as NFL/concerts etc, long-term contracted revenue from naming rights etc), I'd argue that lenders would entertain Spurs running with a much higher amount of leverage going forwards compared to previously. As such, we wouldn't necessarily need to repay the £400m debt at all - I could see us taking it down to say £200m-£250m over the next 10-15 years or so but I don't think we'll see it aggressively paid down at all, particularly whilst interest rates are where they are today
 
awesome dawson said:
My very basic calculations weren't meant to argue that the stadium wasn't a good investment but I'm not sure it's going to be the game changer that lots of us hope. We are a club who get run like a business and not a toy. I'm fine with that but when there's clubs around doing what PSG are about to do it means there simply isn't a level playing field. Financial Fair Play has become a joke.
Click to expand...

Financial Fair Play always was a joke, it was a symbolic move to keep the governments/EU from looking to closely at what is blatantly unfair business practice, and a way to protect the status quo, the last people to the elite status always want to make sure no one else makes the jump, so it is designed not to curb top spenders but to limit new members to the top spenders club.

Re our stadium, I think everyone vastly underestimates Levy, as @Finney Is Back said, the big change in match-day revenue is not the additional seats, but the additional corporate facilities. Add NFL, non match-day revenue for events, increased sponsorship, things like the Asia deal that just happened, growth due to higher profile with Nike, our revenue will grow substantially over next 5 years.

The biggest challenge is what is the team that walks out on to the pitch on the first game of new stadium. If we can manage to keep the core of this team & Poch, be able to start the first season at new WHL off the back of another relatively successful season (ideal would be CL group qualification and a cup), we would have a lot of momentum to put us well placed to permanently challenge the bigger teams.
 
AdamB said:
Without wanting to butt into this discussion, given the business that Levy is transforming us into (higher revenues, various other revenue cat videos on youtube such as NFL/concerts etc, long-term contracted revenue from naming rights etc), I'd argue that lenders would entertain Spurs running with a much higher amount of leverage going forwards compared to previously. As such, we wouldn't necessarily need to repay the £400m debt at all - I could see us taking it down to say £200m-£250m over the next 10-15 years or so but I don't think we'll see it aggressively paid down at all, particularly whilst interest rates are where they are today
Click to expand...
Agreed. It is entirely possible that we will mainly just service the debt. Something else to consider is that we have made around £400 to £450 million of payments on the stadium and training ground over the last 7 to 10 years and done so out of club funds prior to any stadium revenue being realised without taking on extra debt.... Let's make it a round number and call it £50 million per season. We could either keep paying that same amount to service the £400 million of debt that we will enter the new stadium in and do so within a measly 8 years, or just add it to our transfer funds.... personally I would expect a mixture of the two. In essence though the club are likely to see improved cash flow to the tune of perhaps as much as £90 to £130 million fron next season onwards. A huge injection.
 
Last edited:
awesome dawson said:
My very basic calculations weren't meant to argue that the stadium wasn't a good investment but I'm not sure it's going to be the game changer that lots of us hope. We are a club who get run like a business and not a toy. I'm fine with that but when there's clubs around doing what PSG are about to do it means there simply isn't a level playing field. Financial Fair Play has become a joke.
Click to expand...
It's not a compete game changer comparing us to the financially doped clubs or the "super clubs".

But if we want any realistic hope to step it up another level from where currently are it's a necessary step. It's a rather large piece of the puzzle that has to be there. And it could lead to changes that will be game changing.
 
They tell a story at Manchester United that probably sums up why the previous regime at Old Trafford had a policy never to do business with Tottenham Hotspur and Sir Alex Ferguson once remarked that hip surgery was more enjoyable than trying to find common ground with Daniel Levy when it came to money. It goes back to Luka Modric’s final season at White Hart Lane when Ferguson was tipped off that the Croat would be keen on a move to Manchester to fill the void left by Paul Scholes’s retirement. In ordinary circumstances, Modric would have been the ideal fit. These, however, were not ordinary circumstances. Ferguson had never forgotten what it was like dealing with Levy in the protracted transfer saga he referred to as “the Dimitar Berbatov carry-on” and when he raised the matter with David Gill, United’s chief executive, the two men agreed they didn’t have the stomach to go though the same again. As good as Modric was, they simply couldn’t countenance another negotiation involving the Spurs chairman.

As football administrators go, it is certainly difficult to think of anybody else with Levy’s reputation for driving the people with whom he is negotiating to the point of spontaneous combustion. Ferguson, to put it into context, regarded Modric as one of the finest passers in the business and, five years on, probably still thinks the same. Yet he and Gill preferred to watch the player join Real Madrid rather than reopen lines of communication with Spurs. Gill had been there before with Levy and, to borrow a line from Billy Wilder: “I’ve met a lot of hardboiled eggs in my time, but you’re 20 minutes.”

https://twitter.com/x/status/896512857935929344

Yes, Manchester United LET Modric go to Real Madrid. The rest of the article isn't much better.
 
The story about Levy agreeing to the commission with the agent as long as he bought an exec box at the lane is hilarious.

But yeah, overly simplistic article other than that. Taylor is usually good on Man United stuff but he doesn't know much about Spurs. Good info graphic going round that we pay the 12th best wages in the world. This idea that somehow Stoke and Bournemouth are outspending us on wages just isn't true.

No doubt we will have to pay more when we get into the new stadium and no doubt players have performed well. But they were also rewarded for their third place finish with improved contracts and whose to say wouldn't have been rewarded again when the window closes for their runners up spot. They can't all start claiming they are suddenly all worth PSG wages because they've had just one more season since their prior rewarded where they've also done well. There has to be consistency and the smart players hopefully realise they have performed so well because they've been given a platform which enables them to flourish. The fact that a lot of them are suddenly top tier and potentially world class isn't an accident, and they certainly weren't before they got to Spurs.
 
BrainOfLevy said:
The story about Levy agreeing to the commission with the agent as long as he bought an exec box at the lane is hilarious.

But yeah, overly simplistic article other than that. Taylor is usually good on Man United stuff but he doesn't know much about Spurs. Good info graphic going round that we pay the 12th best wages in the world. This idea that somehow Stoke and Bournemouth are outspending us on wages just isn't true.

No doubt we will have to pay more when we get into the new stadium and no doubt players have performed well. But they were also rewarded for their third place finish with improved contracts and whose to say wouldn't have been rewarded again when the window closes for their runners up spot. They can't all start claiming they are suddenly all worth PSG wages because they've had just one more season since their prior rewarded where they've also done well. There has to be consistency and the smart players hopefully realise they have performed so well because they've been given a platform which enables them to flourish. The fact that a lot of them are suddenly top tier and potentially world class isn't an accident, and they certainly weren't before they got to Spurs.
Click to expand...

I was chatting to a Geordie lad sat night who works in sport science

He has friends working behind the scenes at various clubs and a Tottenham too

At Tottenham everyone is on a bonus system pretty much like F1... but it's relevant to when the play in the case of
players. He was told it was as high as 50% of their wages so someone on £65k could get £100k if the played and we won

That might explain why Rose is unhappy as he isn't getting his match bonus
 
Jordinho said:
They tell a story at Manchester United that probably sums up why the previous regime at Old Trafford had a policy never to do business with Tottenham Hotspur and Sir Alex Ferguson once remarked that hip surgery was more enjoyable than trying to find common ground with Daniel Levy when it came to money. It goes back to Luka Modric’s final season at White Hart Lane when Ferguson was tipped off that the Croat would be keen on a move to Manchester to fill the void left by Paul Scholes’s retirement. In ordinary circumstances, Modric would have been the ideal fit. These, however, were not ordinary circumstances. Ferguson had never forgotten what it was like dealing with Levy in the protracted transfer saga he referred to as “the Dimitar Berbatov carry-on” and when he raised the matter with David Gill, United’s chief executive, the two men agreed they didn’t have the stomach to go though the same again. As good as Modric was, they simply couldn’t countenance another negotiation involving the Spurs chairman.

As football administrators go, it is certainly difficult to think of anybody else with Levy’s reputation for driving the people with whom he is negotiating to the point of spontaneous combustion. Ferguson, to put it into context, regarded Modric as one of the finest passers in the business and, five years on, probably still thinks the same. Yet he and Gill preferred to watch the player join Real Madrid rather than reopen lines of communication with Spurs. Gill had been there before with Levy and, to borrow a line from Billy Wilder: “I’ve met a lot of hardboiled eggs in my time, but you’re 20 minutes.”

https://twitter.com/x/status/896512857935929344

Yes, Manchester United LET Modric go to Real Madrid. The rest of the article isn't much better.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I read the first paragraph and think "well done Daniel Levy". Excellent work in ensuring that one of our rivals at the top end of the table won't even go after our best players. While I'm sure that Daniel Taylor would like us to sell our best players so that he can write two stories.... one about Man Utd's ambition and power and one about Tottenham being a selling club, not having ambition, etc.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
I was chatting to a Geordie lad sat night who works in sport science

He has friends working behind the scenes at various clubs and a Tottenham too

At Tottenham everyone is on a bonus system pretty much like F1... but it's relevant to when the play in the case of
players. He was told it was as high as 50% of their wages so someone on £65k could get £100k if the played and we won

That might explain why Rose is unhappy as he isn't getting his match bonus
Click to expand...

Poor old Danny - now I know this I'm gutted for the lad.
 
Jordinho said:
They tell a story at Manchester United that probably sums up why the previous regime at Old Trafford had a policy never to do business with Tottenham Hotspur and Sir Alex Ferguson once remarked that hip surgery was more enjoyable than trying to find common ground with Daniel Levy when it came to money. It goes back to Luka Modric’s final season at White Hart Lane when Ferguson was tipped off that the Croat would be keen on a move to Manchester to fill the void left by Paul Scholes’s retirement. In ordinary circumstances, Modric would have been the ideal fit. These, however, were not ordinary circumstances. Ferguson had never forgotten what it was like dealing with Levy in the protracted transfer saga he referred to as “the Dimitar Berbatov carry-on” and when he raised the matter with David Gill, United’s chief executive, the two men agreed they didn’t have the stomach to go though the same again. As good as Modric was, they simply couldn’t countenance another negotiation involving the Spurs chairman.

As football administrators go, it is certainly difficult to think of anybody else with Levy’s reputation for driving the people with whom he is negotiating to the point of spontaneous combustion. Ferguson, to put it into context, regarded Modric as one of the finest passers in the business and, five years on, probably still thinks the same. Yet he and Gill preferred to watch the player join Real Madrid rather than reopen lines of communication with Spurs. Gill had been there before with Levy and, to borrow a line from Billy Wilder: “I’ve met a lot of hardboiled eggs in my time, but you’re 20 minutes.”

https://twitter.com/x/status/896512857935929344

Yes, Manchester United LET Modric go to Real Madrid. The rest of the article isn't much better.
Click to expand...

Daniel Levy briefing the THFC Board ahead of negotiations with Utd : "Fellow board members, it's only David Gill". :)

CEO of one of the world's most successful and highest revenue-generating clubs, and you don't 'have the stomach' to enter a commercial negotiation for a player you'd otherwise love to have?
I think that story reflects far more badly on Utd than on Levy and I'd not be happy as a Utd fan reading that.
 
Jordinho said:
They tell a story at Manchester United that probably sums up why the previous regime at Old Trafford had a policy never to do business with Tottenham Hotspur and Sir Alex Ferguson once remarked that hip surgery was more enjoyable than trying to find common ground with Daniel Levy when it came to money. It goes back to Luka Modric’s final season at White Hart Lane when Ferguson was tipped off that the Croat would be keen on a move to Manchester to fill the void left by Paul Scholes’s retirement. In ordinary circumstances, Modric would have been the ideal fit. These, however, were not ordinary circumstances. Ferguson had never forgotten what it was like dealing with Levy in the protracted transfer saga he referred to as “the Dimitar Berbatov carry-on” and when he raised the matter with David Gill, United’s chief executive, the two men agreed they didn’t have the stomach to go though the same again. As good as Modric was, they simply couldn’t countenance another negotiation involving the Spurs chairman.

As football administrators go, it is certainly difficult to think of anybody else with Levy’s reputation for driving the people with whom he is negotiating to the point of spontaneous combustion. Ferguson, to put it into context, regarded Modric as one of the finest passers in the business and, five years on, probably still thinks the same. Yet he and Gill preferred to watch the player join Real Madrid rather than reopen lines of communication with Spurs. Gill had been there before with Levy and, to borrow a line from Billy Wilder: “I’ve met a lot of hardboiled eggs in my time, but you’re 20 minutes.”

https://twitter.com/x/status/896512857935929344

Yes, Manchester United LET Modric go to Real Madrid. The rest of the article isn't much better.
Click to expand...
Imagine that if it was the other way round. Poch identifies the perfect replacement for our best player, but doesn't pursue it as neither he nor Levy can be arsed with the negotiation.
That story - although probably gonad*s - does SAF no favours.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back