Sandman
Dean Austin
Wow! so we are like 37m in the Black on Transfers over that period. That is quite amazing really.
-
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
THE TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR TRANSFER EVERYONE LOOK AT ME TOTALISER EXTRAVAGANZA
- Thread starter Superhudd
- Start date
markysimmo
Johnny nice-tits
A well earned pat on the back for Levy from Enic for this after all profits are all that matters, glory is so overrated
parklane1
Vic Buckingham
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
I guess that includes the £15-20m we are up this window at the minute, which we will surely spend this month?
afsoc4life
Vedran Corluka
I like this thread and I also like Daniel Levy. Perhaps I should seek to do an internship with him so that I can apply his teachings and ways in my home country.
a spur from swansea
Naybet
Didn't realise we're running a car dealership.......thought we were a football club.
It's not as if Spurs have spent some £160m on the training ground, stadium property acquisition and stadium planning and site preparation in that time, eh? Nor is it as if Spurs will have to spend a further £400m odd on stadium costs over the coming three years. Nor is it as if lenders will need to see tight financial controls at the club in order to agree to Spurs' borrowing requirements. Nor is it even as if the stadium is important, for that matter. To hell with long term thinking, I say.
spurs' magna carter
Ronnie Rosenthal
Wow.
I think this supports quite well the argument of some that we need to spend more but it also supports Levy just as well, fook net spend yet we're always in the top 6, compare that to the unbearable opposite of the Sugar years (shudders).
Edit: Jim is right. At the end of the day we simply cannot afford, let alone risk, plowing money into the squad whilst trying to build one of the most expensive club/Sports team stadium in the World.
Superhudd
Simon Davies
All fair and dandy Jimmy, but the stadium is as much, if not more the benefit of Enic than it is the fans, especially like West Ham owners one could argue they are getting a stadium for free (not Enics money), as Levy said.. the transfer build would not be sacrificed in building the stadium. He lied did he not when you compare transfer spend against say other teams in our league finish.
Saying that maybe the net spend is somewhat misleading and should be put into context with transfer spend and outgoing player fees.. would we compare well with the top 6 clubs on player spend and just happen to really have struck gold with incomings.. Bale money. Maybe the context needs looking into.
Last edited:
Gazzasrightboot
Pascal Chimbonda
The thing is, it is very easy spending the club's money. Buy players = buying success. It's proven at Chelsea and Emirates Marketing Project. Unproven at Liverpool. To everyone that is saying the club needs to "show ambition", I ask what club has done that successfully that you would like us to emulate?
Gazzasrightboot
Pascal Chimbonda
That's not stricly true Superhudd. He said that there will be enough transfer money made available to keep us competitive. That's very different to saying that he will continue to have net deficit on transfer spend.
As for who the stadium will be for benefit for, I think that is really unfair. Anything they do will be for Enic's benefit as they own the club. So spending on 5 £20m players will be the same? More of the fans will be able to see Spurs play live, we will have a stadium that will be the envy of a lot of people, and it gives us a revenue stream that will make us bigger. They are acting in the best interests of the club. To criticise them for this on the basis that it is more for their benefit is just being critical for the sake of it. Ultimately, their exit strategy is about increasing the value of this club. That increased value is for all our benefits.
Superhudd
Simon Davies
I agree.. but fans don't see it that way do they. All they care about it what is put in front of them come kick off.
I argue this all the time on here about the money side and that Enic should be inputting more money to increase there asset. To make life easier for everyone.
We as fans cannot criticize IMO West Ham owners when in all sense our owners (OK not taxpayers money) are getting the same end game.. a free stadium.
If Enic did pay there share of the pain then maybe we could have better players come kick off.
Due to FFP If owners wanted to spend there own money they could do so by spending it on Stadium and facility infrastructure. Thus meaning that clubs could improve the proper way.
I argue this all the time on here about the money side and that Enic should be inputting more money to increase there asset. To make life easier for everyone.
We as fans cannot criticize IMO West Ham owners when in all sense our owners (OK not taxpayers money) are getting the same end game.. a free stadium.
If Enic did pay there share of the pain then maybe we could have better players come kick off.
Due to FFP If owners wanted to spend there own money they could do so by spending it on Stadium and facility infrastructure. Thus meaning that clubs could improve the proper way.
Last edited:
spurs' magna carter
Ronnie Rosenthal
Regardless as to whether or not the new stadium is a bargaining chip in ENIC's negotiations during the sale of the club the revenues and spending power it will bring will be enormous.
Purely from a revenues perspective it will be the next step for us. Yes it in itself won't change everything over night, just look at Schalke for example sInce they built the Veltins Arena, still the nearly men of Germany football, and the same with the Goons so far.
This stadium isn't key to our future, it's key to our competitive future. If you don't have a Sugar Daddy the next best thing is a revenue busting stadium, just like the one we have planned.
Purely from a revenues perspective it will be the next step for us. Yes it in itself won't change everything over night, just look at Schalke for example sInce they built the Veltins Arena, still the nearly men of Germany football, and the same with the Goons so far.
This stadium isn't key to our future, it's key to our competitive future. If you don't have a Sugar Daddy the next best thing is a revenue busting stadium, just like the one we have planned.
Gazzasrightboot
Pascal Chimbonda
Well, some fans do see it that way. But I take your point. The difficulty I have is that the other side of the fan base that just care about what is put in front of them come kick off, are not thinking of the future. They want success, and they want it now. That is fine, but they seem to forget that all this costs money. It's not their money, so they don't care. Owners of our club will come and go. They are custodians and their responsibility is not to give us immediate success. Their responsibility is to provide sustained success and protect the club for years to come.
ENIC have put in a lot of money and continue to do so! They put in an extra £40m in a non-interest loan that is unsecured and does not need to be paid back in addition to the increased share offering. To ask them to dip into their pockets (no matter how deep they are) is unfair. It's their money, their kid's inheritance so if they don't think it is the right way of spending their money that is their decision. We cannot expect them to be a bottomless pit. It only makes life easier for the supporters. The same supporters that criticise every move they make, continually call them out because they're not an Abramovich or Sheikh Mansour.
You're absolutely right, we cannot criticise West Ham's owners for their deal for their stadium. It is an absolute steal. What we can do is criticise the government for allowing Tax payers money to subsidise a private enterprise. It is shocking that the government is giving a hand out in this way. But that is a different conversation. They are getting a sub-standard stadium and I bet a lot of their fans won't be happy with their shiny new stadium.
Gazzasrightboot has already answered the first part of your post very well. For the time being, at least, ENIC's best interests and Spurs' happen to coincide. It therefore makes no sense to criticise or begrudge ENIC for increasing the value of their asset by building a new training centre and a new stadium.
Agreed with you re the second paragraph, though. Net spend is only half the story. Fact is, we have still spent more on incoming players (£232,650,000) over the past 5 years than all but five clubs - with Arsenal having only spent a tad over £20m more than us in that time (£253,625,000). The next highest spenders have been Southampton (£163,600,000), followed by Saudi Sportswashing Machine (£124,000,000), Aston Villa (£121,850,000) and West Ham (£106,900,000).
Superhudd
Simon Davies
Investment is always the best way to better an asset. Money makes money.
I am not saying a new stadium is not all the things you say.. it can be. Just saying why shouldn't Enic pay its share of the pain. Why should they get a free stadium.
I get that is great that Enic are able to do it from the clubs earning capacity but why do they get to live in Bemuda playing golf every day after a morning swim in an infinity pool. Seems to me, only one side during this process is having all the fun.
Gazzasrightboot
Pascal Chimbonda
They have paid their share. They bought the club. They put in extra money through a further share issue. In the past 18 months they put in an extra £40m.
They get to live in Bermuda playing golf every day after a morning swim in an infinity pool because they have earned that right. They earned their own money and can do as they please with it. They have chosen to buy a football club with that money and have not extracted much in the form of a return. They could have easily done an Ashley or Glazer and take returns out of the club. Money that was earned by the club. Instead they have for a long time ensured that all the money the club earns is reinvested in the club. That is good ownership imho. They are making this club self-sustaining meaning that it is not going to be reliant on any owner to exist.
Superhudd
Simon Davies
I think the key part there is non-interest loan. Why does it need to be a loan if they don't expect it back. I don't think its unfair to ask someone to make an investment to better there asset. Its generally how the world works... unless your a Glazer lol.
Gazzasrightboot
Pascal Chimbonda
I think it is unfair to ask someone to make an investment to better their asset. Can I ask that you please invest in a Ferrari, or better your house as it would give me an immense amount of pleasure to know that you and Mrs Hudd are living in luxury.
As for why it is a non-interest loan it is a vehicle to put money into the club. Gifting the money would be treated in the same way in the accounts and it is just their way of structuring that transfer. Without getting too technical, in the accounts this is not treated as a debt. It is treated as an increase in their investment i.e. equity. It's just that this form of equity gives them less rights than their existing shares. However, that makes not one iota of difference because they have all the control over Spurs anyway. What they could have done is treat it as debt and just have it as an intercompany loan which would have increased our debt. They did not choose this.
Firstly, ENIC have put some of their own money in. £40m of it a little over a year or so ago; £15m five years before that; and £11m five years before that. £66m in total, give or take. Not a huge amount in the context of what has happened at Chelsea and City, granted, but not an inconsiderable sum either.
Secondly, I don't understand where you get the idea that ENIC are getting a stadium for free. You might as well complain that the shareholders of Tesco get a new superstore for free whenever one is built; or that the owners of BMW get a new cash cow for free whenever the company invests a large sum in research and development for a highly successful and profitable new model. Spurs are getting a stadium. ENIC own Spurs (or, the vast majority of it, at least, having probably invested a total of some £120-150m in the club) and their job over the past fourteen years has been to run it better than previous regimes and thereby improve it.
They have subsequently managed the club well enough to take it from mid table obscurity / periodic relegation scraps to perennial top 4-6 while also transforming the academy from one of the worst in the Premier League to one of the best in Europe. They have also built a new, £60m training centre that is widely recognised as one of the best in Europe and have progressed plans for what will become the best club stadium in England to the point of the commencement of construction. All of which while keeping the club in rude financial health.
So if and when they sell the club for a vast profit, it will be their payment for both their investment and their good management. Nothing free about it.
P.S. All of which is not to say that mistakes haven't been made or that more still won't be made.