Alan Sugar Autobiography

[PT]

"What You See Is What You Get".

Has anyone got it?

Read it?

it is a quite compelling read regarding this tycoon's barnstorming rise to the top of the electronics industry with Amstrad (Alan Michael Sugar Trading).

In particular, the mid section of the book relates to his acquisition of THFC alongside Terry Venables. This episode throws light on the tribulations of our Club in the eighties and early ninties, taking on board the 12 point penaly imposed on THFC by the FA.

Mr Sugar goes on to explain the intricasies of the Ardiles tenure as Head Coach and the dealings with unsrupulous agents in attracting the likes of Dumitrescu and Popescu, along with Klinnsmann to our mighty club.

As I say, it is a terrific read, if only to track the astonishing evolvemnt of the elctronics and computer industries, taking in to account the birth of BskyB along the way.

Do pick up a copy.

*nb I am not on commission.

 

[StartingPrice]

Does sound interesting.
I always felt that Spurs fans, in particular, were too quick to believe El Tel's version of events without critique. And have said often that if it wasn't for Sir Alan's financial rectitude, we could have ended up with other clubs who tried to keep up with United (in particular) by spending first (such as Citeh, Leeds, and, to a lesser extent, clubs like Sheff Weds).

 

[PT]

Lord Sugar is quite scathing when it comes to relating the story of the acquisition and if his side of the process is the genuine article, Venables comes out of it with little credance.

 

[Dundalk_Spur]

I got it and read it over Xmas, great read.

 

[StartingPrice]

Lord Sugar is quite scathing when it comes to relating the story of the acquisition and if his side of the process is the genuine article, Venables comes out of it with little credance.

I'm sure it wasn't quite as B&W as he paints it, either.

 

[Jimmypearce7]

Are we all sucking up to him now he is on the telly? He played a vital role in saving the club but then lacked the vision or ambition to do anything with it.
He took over at the birth of the Premier League, with Spurs having a great chance to be part of the elite forming at the top but we missed the boat and are still trying to catch up, despite the ambition that Daniel Levy has shown since he took over.

 

[Bill_Oddie]

Lord Sugar is quite scathing when it comes to relating the story of the acquisition and if his side of the process is the genuine article, Venables comes out of it with little credance.

Venables is a nasty, corrupt shit. Magnificent footballer in his day, I'm sure, but given the choice of whose story would be closer to the truth it's no contest.

 

[Gilzeanking]

Are we all sucking up to him now he is on the telly? He played a vital role in saving the club but then lacked the vision or ambition to do anything with it.
He took over at the birth of the Premier League, with Spurs having a great chance to be part of the elite forming at the top but we missed the boat and are still trying to catch up, despite the ambition that Daniel Levy has shown since he took over.

this

 

[StartingPrice]

Are we all sucking up to him now he is on the telly? He played a vital role in saving the club but then lacked the vision or ambition to do anything with it.
He took over at the birth of the Premier League, with Spurs having a great chance to be part of the elite forming at the top but we missed the boat and are still trying to catch up, despite the ambition that Daniel Levy has shown since he took over.

this

No.

I said exactly what I have said above, back when it all kicked off and Sir Alan was Public Enemy No1 with a lot of Spurs fans. It didn't amke me very popular with my fellow Yods.

And I don't actually particularly like Sir Alan, either, just said (and saying) it exactly as I saw (and see) it.

 

[Wiener]

He played a vital role in saving the club but then lacked the vision or ambition to do anything with it.
He took over at the birth of the Premier League, with Spurs having a great chance to be part of the elite forming at the top but we missed the boat and are still trying to catch up, despite the ambition that Daniel Levy has shown since he took over.

My thoughts exactly. He had the cash when few did, but once he took over he failed completely to make the most of the club's potential. Look what Levy has achieved in less time than Sugar. We were going nowhere with Sugar.

 

[dontcallme]

Alan Sugar should never have been public enemy number one but he shouldn't be revered by Spurs fans either. The Premier League brough more money to the game than ever before and the clubs who were successful had prolonged success like never before as a result.

Alan Sugar failed to make us successful and we've been playing atch-up ever since.

I'm sure he has some good points to make in his book, which I'll read in the summer, but there are two sides to every story.

It's easy to read someone's autobiography and sympathise with them but read something from the other side before giving an average chairman your love and praise.

 

[PT]

Amstrad were making sky dishes for Mr Murdoch's Sky venture which took off like no tomorrow. As chairman of Spurs Sugar found himself compromised when in discussions for the renewal of the fee that Sky paid the FA for televising Premier games. At the time the fee agred was £4.5m.

Alan Sugar told the attending Club chairmen that they should go for no less than £150m which was laughed at.

The bottom line was that was the sum paid by Sky for renewal.

Sugar may be a lot of things but he also set the ball rolling for Clubs to wallow in and thorw cash about like there was no tomorrow.

 

[StartingPrice]

The club Sir Alan inherited was not in good shape. He insisted it be run within it's means...a policy Dan Levy has continued, and from which we are now reaping the rewards. Now that UEFA (apparently) have finally got the Gonads to reward clubs who pursue this policy, it is of increasing benefit.
The alternative would have been to throw good money after bad, almost definitely still not catch up, as United, for example, already had the jump on us in every way (including financial clout), and then have the bottom drop out in a massive way. He was astute and resolute enough not to do that.

 

[dontcallme]

The club Sir Alan inherited was not in good shape. He insisted it be run within it's means...a policy Dan Levy has continued, and from which we are now reaping the rewards. Now that UEFA (apparently) have finally got the Gonads to reward clubs who pursue this policy, it is of increasing benefit.
The alternative would have been to throw good money after bad, almost definitely still not catch up, as United, for example, already had the jump on us in every way (including financial clout), and then have the bottom drop out in a massive way. He was astute and resolute enough not to do that.

I don't disagree with any of that, Sugar ran our club very astutely.

However, Levy very quickly proved how a club could live within its means and still be progressive.

Throughout the Sugar era we bought players slightly past their peak, for relatively high fees and no sell-on value. Players like Ferdinand, Sinton, Ginola etc were brought in. Some were great, some were average and some were poor. But none of them sold at any sort of profit and our club stabilised but didn't progress.

Once Levy took the bull by the horns he sold our older players and bought the likes of robinson, Carrick, Ziegler, Routledge, Lennon, Defoe, Mido etc. Some were sold for a small profit, some were sold for a large profit (Carrick, Berbatov) and some became long serving first team players for us. We went from a mid-table/occasional relegation fighting Prem team to a financially strong club pushing for CL football within 5 years under Levy.

Sugar and Levy both kept the club stable but Sugar not thinking forward really stagnated our club.

He wasn't a terrible chairman but fortunately we're now seeing what it is like under a great one.

 

[CosmicHotspur]

I wonder if Terry Venables will read the book.

I once said that some players seem to have been born to wear the Spurs strip. I knew Terry and he was always fun, a life and soul kind of guy, but I never really accepted him as a player or as a manager at the Lane, despite any success he had.

Somehow his face and his profile never fitted for me at Tottenham.

 

[StartingPrice]

I don't disagree with any of that, Sugar ran our club very astutely.

However, Levy very quickly proved how a club could live within its means and still be progressive.

Throughout the Sugar era we bought players slightly past their peak, for relatively high fees and no sell-on value. Players like Ferdinand, Sinton, Ginola etc were brought in. Some were great, some were average and some were poor. But none of them sold at any sort of profit and our club stabilised but didn't progress.

Once Levy took the bull by the horns he sold our older players and bought the likes of robinson, Carrick, Ziegler, Routledge, Lennon, Defoe, Mido etc. Some were sold for a small profit, some were sold for a large profit (Carrick, Berbatov) and some became long serving first team players for us. We went from a mid-table/occasional relegation fighting Prem team to a financially strong club pushing for CL football within 5 years under Levy.

Sugar and Levy both kept the club stable but Sugar not thinking forward really stagnated our club.

He wasn't a terrible chairman but fortunately we're now seeing what it is like under a great one.

I agree.
I'm certianly neither an Alan Sugar fan, nor an apologist...just believe in saying it as I see it.
He wouldn't sanction massive money purchases to keep up with United. That left us with nearly player, nowhere near players, and slightly past their peak very good players (like Poyet), that the big clubs (of the day) were prepared to let leave.
Dan levy came in and has clearly made the identification and development of exceptional young talent a lynchpin of his strategic vision. It is a far more realistic means of competing at the very top than that pursued by Sir Alan, who, I believe did have some awareness that this was the way forward - but in effect this seemed to boil down to employing the PleatMeisterEek

 

[PT]

Sugar himself admits in the book that he was in at the deep end when it came to running a football club with its idiosynchrocies and traditions. He put a stop to paying agents and spin off bods large sums of cash in brown envelopes as part of any negotiation and then fought in the courts for the disolvement of the draconian 12 point deduction and omission form the FA Cup - and won.

I think that if he applied his intuitive creation that he used to great effect with Amstrad to his other acquisition of THFC, and he had the inside knowledge from day one, he would have been a great Chairman / owner.

 

[Bill_Oddie]

I wonder if Terry Venables will read the book.

I once said that some players seem to have been born to wear the Spurs strip. I knew Terry and he was always fun, a life and soul kind of guy, but I never really accepted him as a player or as a manager at the Lane, despite any success he had.

Somehow his face and his profile never fitted for me at Tottenham.

I was hoping you'd post in here, Cosmic. And your comments intrigue me. Can I ask if you can go further into why you never fully accepted TV?

I know a bit about the bloke but have never met him. However, he is so despised by Palace, Leeds, Boro and Pompey fans, plus those who have dealt directly with him. His involvement at Portsmouth (where he almost forced the club into administration more than fifteen years ago - so they'd never even have made the Premier League) was despicable and were it not for him Brighton and Hove Albion would be a different club today.

He seems such a charismatic, likeable and knowledgeable individual and yet the truth as I've heard it is quite different. Indeed, the following:

Sugar himself admits in the book that he was in at the deep end when it came to running a football club with its idiosynchrocies and traditions. He put a stop to paying agents and spin off bods large sums of cash in brown envelopes as part of any negotiation and then fought in the courts for the disolvement of the draconian 12 point deduction and omission form the FA Cup - and won.

...surely is all about TV.

 

[spursandbarca]

alan sugar is a miserable sod, who is so full of himself it isnt funny.

he is also full of crap with some the stuff about his upbringing from what people have told me as well

 

[Wiener]

I don't disagree with any of that, Sugar ran our club very astutely.

However, Levy very quickly proved how a club could live within its means and still be progressive.

Throughout the Sugar era we bought players slightly past their peak, for relatively high fees and no sell-on value. Players like Ferdinand, Sinton, Ginola etc were brought in. Some were great, some were average and some were poor. But none of them sold at any sort of profit and our club stabilised but didn't progress.

Once Levy took the bull by the horns he sold our older players and bought the likes of robinson, Carrick, Ziegler, Routledge, Lennon, Defoe, Mido etc. Some were sold for a small profit, some were sold for a large profit (Carrick, Berbatov) and some became long serving first team players for us. We went from a mid-table/occasional relegation fighting Prem team to a financially strong club pushing for CL football within 5 years under Levy.

Sugar and Levy both kept the club stable but Sugar not thinking forward really stagnated our club.

He wasn't a terrible chairman but fortunately we're now seeing what it is like under a great one.

I would argue that he invested his initial investment was to some degree astute. However I would argue that he did not run the club astutely. He seemed to have no idea how to bring success to the club. I would argue he only just avoided being a terrible chairman as we managed to just managed to stay in the top flight.