• 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

New takeover rumours

nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
After all the brick Ive given Chelsea and City about how meaningless their (unearned) success is it would be grossly hypocritical for me to change that view if it happened to Spurs.

I would enjoy the star players and winning football I am sure, but any success would be hollow and not something I would shout about.

I am incredibly proud of the fact we have got where we are by our own means, and would be bitterly disappointed if that were taken away.

I would also hate to see somewhere like this place turn into Bluemoon
Click to expand...

mmm

Chelsea were in deep brick from a profligate policy of overspending money they didn't have on players they couldn't afford to pay. Emirates Marketing Project were brick beyond reason and struggling to stay afloat. They truly were lottery winners
We however are a financially sound company, riding high in the league, with a playing staff bought by money earned by the club, on a sensible salary structure.

The gulf between the other teams and us is palpable

HOWEVER - I personally will be gutted if someone from outside of the UK bought the club (outright) as an ego fuelled toy, off the back of some mafia money earned in Goatsville USSR.

If he wants to invest - then fine, but that can be done without selling our soul, and being renamed and shamed, playing in the Kazakhstan Airways Arena, Tottenham.
 
I don't see what the big deal is.

We have always known that it was more likely than not that ENIC - an investment company - would eventually sell up.

And if they're going to do so, then give me an Abramovich or Mansour any day over a Glazer, Hicks or Gillette. Thing is, with Tottenham already highly valued and something of a cash cow (once the new stadium is built), we're far more likely to attract the latter than the former. So be careful what you wish for, guys and gals.

If you hate the idea of Spurs buying success, then think of it like this: there couldn't possibly be a better time to be taken over by a foreign billionaire. Because they would not be able to do what Abramovich and Mansour have done.

What they would be able to do, however, is pay for the new stadium. Imagine that: a new 60K stadium; an extra ?ú50 million of income per annum; and no eye watering debt repayments and interest to eat into that self generated income. Nowt wrong with that. Nothing embarrassing or unethical. Nothing unsporting - especially by comparison to the huge advantages that our closest rivals would have long enjoyed.

And if the rumour is to be believed ( though I'm not saying that it is), we'd even keep our Daniel and continue to be run soundly, ethically and astutely.

Win / win.
 
Last edited:
jimmyb said:
I don't see what the big deal is.

We have always known that it was more likely than not that ENIC - an investment company - would eventually sell up.

And if they're going to do so, then give me an Abramovich or Mansour any day over a Glazer, Hicks or Gillette. Thing is, with Tottenham already highly valued and something of a cash cow (once the new stadium is built), we're far more likely to attract the latter than the former. So be careful what you wish for, guys and gals.

If you hate the idea of Spurs buying success, then think of it like this: there couldn't possibly be a better time to be taken over by a foreign billionaire. Because they would not be able to do what Abramovich and Mansour have done.

What they would be able to do, however, is pay for the new stadium. Imagine that: a new 60K stadium; an extra ?ú50 million of income per annum; and no eye watering debt repayments and interest to eat into that self generated income. Nowt wrong with that. Nothing embarrassing or unethical. Nothing unsporting - especially by comparison to the huge advantages that our closest rivals would have long enjoyed.

And if the rumour is to be believed ( though I'm not saying that it is), we'd even keep our Daniel and continue to be run soundly, ethically and astutely.

Win / win.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. One of our assets is that we are a well run, profitable club and most importantly we have enormous potential to tap into. I do understand the unease about the way billionnaires have distorted things but it is also a reality that cannot be ignored. As you say we are a prime club for takeover, and so long as we are managed in the way you suggest I am happy with that. Besides which we don't need what Emirates Marketing Project needed, we aren't the same club as them, or even Chelsea were pre-Abramovic.
 
If it's a choice between Abramovich or Mansour and Glazer or Hicks and fudging Gillette, then give me a glorious death, personally. Every day, something happens to make life a little less meaningful as it is. My very soul is being chipped away at with this talk.
 
mudshark said:
If it's a choice between Abramovich or Mansour and Glazer or Hicks and fudging Gillette, then give me a glorious death, personally. Every day, something happens to make life a little less meaningful as it is. My very soul is being chipped away at with this talk.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong I would prefer the status quo, and for us to be able to build up as we have been doing. But I do think it is inevitable that we will be sold sooner rather than later. Out of interest if a hard-core billionnaire Spurs fan came along, bought the club and paid for the new stadium and invested heavily would that be okay? Just genuinely interested about where the line is for some. But please note I recognise why the list of names you mentioned are not particularly enthusing.
 
Last edited:
It's kind of a loaded question, really, because the situation has already become so warped, you're automatically looking for something to redress the balance. IF I thought that someone might come in who could provide that redress while upholding what I regard as the club's core values, and if the FFP rules actually manage to achieve anything in the spirit of what they were conceived for, then yes, I suppose. Other than that, I could get pretty depressed about the future of the club, and the game as a whole, tbh.
 
Last edited:
jimmyb said:
I don't see what the big deal is.

We have always known that it was more likely than not that ENIC - an investment company - would eventually sell up.

And if they're going to do so, then give me an Abramovich or Mansour any day over a Glazer, Hicks or Gillette. Thing is, with Tottenham already highly valued and something of a cash cow (once the new stadium is built), we're far more likely to attract the latter than the former. So be careful what you wish for, guys and gals.

If you hate the idea of Spurs buying success, then think of it like this: there couldn't possibly be a better time to be taken over by a foreign billionaire. Because they would not be able to do what Abramovich and Mansour have done.

What they would be able to do, however, is pay for the new stadium. Imagine that: a new 60K stadium; an extra ?ú50 million of income per annum; and no eye watering debt repayments and interest to eat into that self generated income. Nowt wrong with that. Nothing embarrassing or unethical. Nothing unsporting - especially by comparison to the huge advantages that our closest rivals would have long enjoyed.

And if the rumour is to be believed ( though I'm not saying that it is), we'd even keep our Daniel and continue to be run soundly, ethically and astutely.

Win / win.
Click to expand...

I think we fundamentally agree, my only issue is that of ownership.
I want the club to remain in majority ownership by British people or management companies

If a rich sugar daddy wants a slice of the club, then why doesn't he buy a brand new stadium, and rent it on a 999 year lease at a peppercorn rent?

at that point I'd say he can call the stadium Borat Bridge if he likes.

or is given 25% of the ownership and the opportunity to do the above

- just not the whole 9 yards and the opportunity to dictate the clubs policy
 
mick cooper said:
I think we fundamentally agree, my only issue is that of ownership.
I want the club to remain in majority ownership by British people or management companies

If a rich sugar daddy wants a slice of the club, then why doesn't he buy a brand new stadium, and rent it on a 999 year lease at a peppercorn rent?

at that point I'd say he can call the stadium Borat Bridge if he likes.

or is given 25% of the ownership and the opportunity to do the above

- just not the whole 9 yards and the opportunity to dictate the clubs policy
Click to expand...

I know what you mean.

It is kinda nice to think that we are one of the very few major English clubs still in English hands.
 
jimmyb said:
Chill, Winston.

It's an interesting discussion regardless of whether or not there's an iota of truth in the rumour.
Click to expand...

Agree it is an interesting discussion. One thing that I am amazed at is the belief that these financial fair play rules will work. Emirates Marketing Project have already established a method of fudging these rules with the campus, and will find other ways of doing so. When such money is involved, the billionaires will try and find numerous different ways of safeguarding their investment and get return by success in europe.

For me, getting a sugar daddy is just not right. We are close to showing the right way to achieve success, so why do we need a billionaire owner?
 
jimmyb said:
I don't see what the big deal is.

We have always known that it was more likely than not that ENIC - an investment company - would eventually sell up.

And if they're going to do so, then give me an Abramovich or Mansour any day over a Glazer, Hicks or Gillette. Thing is, with Tottenham already highly valued and something of a cash cow (once the new stadium is built), we're far more likely to attract the latter than the former. So be careful what you wish for, guys and gals.

If you hate the idea of Spurs buying success, then think of it like this: there couldn't possibly be a better time to be taken over by a foreign billionaire. Because they would not be able to do what Abramovich and Mansour have done.

What they would be able to do, however, is pay for the new stadium. Imagine that: a new 60K stadium; an extra ?ú50 million of income per annum; and no eye watering debt repayments and interest to eat into that self generated income. Nowt wrong with that. Nothing embarrassing or unethical. Nothing unsporting - especially by comparison to the huge advantages that our closest rivals would have long enjoyed.

And if the rumour is to be believed ( though I'm not saying that it is), we'd even keep our Daniel and continue to be run soundly, ethically and astutely.

Win / win.
Click to expand...

main issues for me, and I pretty much agree with you are:

1) Levy staying is by no means certain. He is Enic, along with Joe Lewis. Prising him from Enic is a battle and a half, especially if hes behind any takeover talks.

2) The club has to run sustainably, for the future and the current set up is doing very well. While I agree it may last, I would if I had a say (!) insist upon not spending Xbillions, but simply offering better than clubs with no history. City offering ?ú300k a week to Yaya Toure is not where id like to see us heading, because ultimately I think that route will undermine good business practice - we should offer competitive contracts, not blow everyone else away and fill up the squad with people who dont get on the pitch.
 
I can remember when I first started supporting Spurs other kids use to moan we were buying the league. We were always setting new records for buys Mackay, Jones & Greaves. We were luck then that the owners invested in the team unlike most other clubs were the money went straight into their pockets. We must face up to the way things are now, I don't like it but if we want to spend more time in the sunshine we can only achieve this buy paying inflated prices and wages to players. I truely believe in 20 years there will not be a premeir league as we now know it. The Euro League will take the big clubs and there will be a feeder league for them, the rest will have to scrape along on crowds of under 15 thousand in domestic leagues. Luckily I wont be her to see it
 
K.D.D.D.D.Soc said:
I can remember when I first started supporting Spurs other kids use to moan we were buying the league. We were always setting new records for buys Mackay, Jones & Greaves. We were luck then that the owners invested in the team unlike most other clubs were the money went straight into their pockets. We must face up to the way things are now, I don't like it but if we want to spend more time in the sunshine we can only achieve this buy paying inflated prices and wages to players. I truely believe in 20 years there will not be a premeir league as we now know it. The Euro League will take the big clubs and there will be a feeder league for them, the rest will have to scrape along on crowds of under 15 thousand in domestic leagues. Luckily I wont be her to see it
Click to expand...

I think the current situation is not the same as in that era. We spent within our means and were not being bankrolled by an owner. It was the club's money that was being spent. The current state of play is that Emirates Marketing Project can afford to have players like Tevez and Adebayor not playing. They can afford to pay ?ú200k a week in wages to a single player. They are completely at the mercy of some Arab that has no affinity for the club, doesn't understand the history, probably doesn't understand the game and is only doing this as another means of showing off his wealth.

If we ever get to the scenario you describe, I for one will have lost faith in this beautiful game, and I dare say I won't be the only one. I used to have a real passion for the England team. Now I couldn't really give a brick. This is because these players are mercenaries and don't have as much pride of playing for their country as people like Hoddle, Robson, Pearce and even John Barnes! If England didn't provide extra sponsorship potential for the players, how many of them would even be interested?
 
America's 34th richest man to buy Spurs (report)

Tottenham are close to being sold in a ?ú450million takeover, according to a report.

The story says Philip Anschutz, owner of American entertainment giants AEG and the 34th richest man in the USA with a ?ú4.4 billion fortune, has been in talks with Spurs' current majority owner, Joe Lewis, for weeks.

A deal is not far away, continues the report, which claims Anschutz - who already owns David Beckham's Major League soccer side LA Galaxy - would keep current Spurs chairman Daniel Levy in place to run the club.

AEG owns London's O2 Arena and the MEN Arena in Manchester.

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/new...schutz-according-to-report-article866417.html
 
Thanks for the link. Does not surprise me that these kind of rumours are circulating. Pretty sure a similar rumour was about a few weeks ago albeit with a different mooted owner. Doesn't say where these reports come from though and it is the mirror...
 
AEG - does it stand for American Entertainment Giant?

As long as the club continues to be run as it is now I'm not too bothered about who the owner is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back