Club Finances - Swiss Ramble

Cornpattbuck

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2013
Messages
4,295
#22
I might be alone, but I find the investment in infrastructure from us compared to others fascinating. I know the stadium will be a huge part of this cost, but it looks like building a legacy from the foundations up to me and I think it's overlooked by some.
 

RichieS

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2004
Messages
8,988
#23
I might be alone, but I find the investment in infrastructure from us compared to others fascinating. I know the stadium will be a huge part of this cost, but it looks like building a legacy from the foundations up to me and I think it's overlooked by some.
*insert comment about ENIC and real-estate here*
 

Dundalk_Spur

The only Spur in the village
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
4,380
#27
A couple of things, the companies, I mean clubs with all the financial clout pay no tax. Buy lots of shiny new toys but no tax. If that was you or me running our business like that the tax man would be looking very closely. Also makes a complete mockery of FFP.

Secondly the swiss ramble guy is a gooner and a lot of his gooner mates are upset at not spending the cash they had and very salty about our "shitty" world class stadium.
 

mpickard2087

I'm right, You're wrong.
Joined
Jun 13, 2008
Messages
20,160
#28
The main interest I take from those various figures are that it's an illustration as to how (to varying degrees) poorly a lot of the lower clubs are run and that once again we see evidence of how conditioned, whether it be fans/media/players/coaches/owners, football is to quick fixes and just throwing money about in order to make a smidgen of difference in that next season. It's all built largely on sand.

Look at numerous clubs there with next to no investment in infrastructure (ok, some like Sunderland/Stoke had new stadiums around the late 90's just before these figures measure, but still no investment since......) and growing 'the club' and how it is set up and trying to embed anything that they can benefit from in the longer term.

And then, to pick on Sunderland and Stoke again, you get the truly disastrously run clubs who repeatedly spend these crazy amounts on players with no resale or residual value, and then wonder why they run into problems, owners get bored and bail out etc, and relegation then deservedly comes along........

Then, despite all the stick over the years, you see the one team that from those figures/colours obviously bucks the trend and has done things quite differently, had a plan and stuck to it and thought long term, and at times maybe even been cautious in what it has done, is the one that has managed to break into the upper echelons alongside the money clubs and stay there over repeated seasons now. Funny that.......
 

RichieS

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2004
Messages
8,988
#30
The main interest I take from those various figures are that it's an illustration as to how (to varying degrees) poorly a lot of the lower clubs are run and that once again we see evidence of how conditioned, whether it be fans/media/players/coaches/owners, football is to quick fixes and just throwing money about in order to make a smidgen of difference in that next season. It's all built largely on sand.

Look at numerous clubs there with next to no investment in infrastructure (ok, some like Sunderland/Stoke had new stadiums around the late 90's just before these figures measure, but still no investment since......) and growing 'the club' and how it is set up and trying to embed anything that they can benefit from in the longer term.

And then, to pick on Sunderland and Stoke again, you get the truly disastrously run clubs who repeatedly spend these crazy amounts on players with no resale or residual value, and then wonder why they run into problems, owners get bored and bail out etc, and relegation then deservedly comes along........

Then, despite all the stick over the years, you see the one team that from those figures/colours obviously bucks the trend and has done things quite differently, had a plan and stuck to it and thought long term, and at times maybe even been cautious in what it has done, is the one that has managed to break into the upper echelons alongside the money clubs and stay there over repeated seasons now. Funny that.......
Haven't you been on here since the transfer window opened? WE'RE DOING IT ALL WORNG!!!

Edit: SO WRONG THAT I CAN'T EVEN SPELL "WRONG"!!!!
 

Armstrong_11

Spurs makes me happy, you... not so much :)
Joined
Aug 3, 2011
Messages
6,794
#31
interesting read.....

kinda surprise about the taxes... liverpool and chelsea pay zero? or is it just that the figures are not available? or is their earnings zero or negative so they are not liable for taxes since they are making a loss and not a profit?

and if a club is currently not making money, shouldn't it be banned from spending money on players? :ROFLMAO:
 

davidmatzdorf

Front Page Gadfly
Joined
Jun 7, 2004
Messages
12,029
#35
I think the latest was that we had increased our limit on the revolving credit facility to £400m. I don't think we'll have a complete picture on the cost until a year's time when everything has been re-financed with long-term debt. I could be wrong though.
The refinancing will either not happen until the housing and hotel have been built and sold, or, if it is advantageous, it will happen once when the stadium is completed and then again after the whole NDP has been completed. The plan relies upon profits from the housing reducing the long term debt.
 

Everlasting Seconds

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2014
Messages
11,001
#36
I think this goes a long way to debunk the "punching above our weight" myth. In fact sports positioning/financial positioning, we are indeed "punching" more or less on par with our assumed ability, but THFCs priorities for spendings its financial strengths are somewhat different than for other clubs.
 

kmk

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
1,661
#37
We are punching our weight, compared to the rest of the top 6 in the past 3 years.

Our revenue has been a lot lower than the others, yet we have finished in the top 3.
 

hellava_tough

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2005
Messages
6,150
#38
The reason FFP hasn't applied to City is because they threatened to bankrupt UEFA, with an appeal lawsuit:


There seems little UEFA can do at this point; they've been shaken down by a country.

So, yeah, FFP is meaningless if you can "hire the 50 best lawyers in the world".
 

ToDarrenIsToDo

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2017
Messages
968
#39
Only just been made aware of this thread. Fascinating and gives so much clarity regarding the plannning Spurs have been carrying out long before the stadium started rising from the rubble of WHL. £493m invested by 2017 when we were still playing at the old ground. Very pro-active by the club it seems
 
Top