ENIC...

[thebenjamin]

I don't really see the value in trophies won just because your club gets bought out or a massive cash injection from somewhere. You as a club haven't really achieved anything, you've just spent someone else's money - where's the achievement there?

But that's literally almost every football club's trophies. Liverpool were bankrolled by the pools in the 80s. Spurs were known as the chequebook club in the 60s because we had more money than everyone else. Unless you are an institution like Bayern or Real, the only way to achieve sustained success is if the club spends someone's money.

 

[Albertbarich]

But that's literally almost every football club's trophies. Liverpool were bankrolled by the pools in the 80s. Spurs were known as the chequebook club in the 60s because we had more money than everyone else. Unless you are an institution like Bayern or Real, the only way to achieve sustained success is if the club spends someone's money.

Weren't Real bankrolled by a fascist dictator?

 

[dontcallme]

An idea when Stratford was being mooted I loved was setting up a fan version of Spurs in the non leagues.

Something like Hotspur of Tottenham.

I'd have loved that

I definitely think I’d have enjoyed supporting a local, lower league side more than Spurs.

But the only place I have settled long enough is Richmond and it’s all rugby here. I hate rugby more than the worst human rights abusers.

 

[McFlash]

There have been some really salient, informative posts in here so can we please try to aim for that sort of discussion, rather than the arguments and claims of "whataboutery", "mental gymnastics" and other current buzzwords.

This is a big topic and one I'm still wrestling with myself, knowing that the club needs investment and change, while coming to terms with the idea that if I accept it coming from Qatar, I'm probably being a massive hypocrite.

I've been pretty vocal about the likes of city, chelsea and newcastle in the past so this is all a little uncomfortable but is completely out of my control.

Spurs have been my club for over 40 years, through thick and thin, so I'm stuck with them whatever happens.
If I have to do some mental gymnastics to get my head around it all...well...where's my leotard! ?

 

[Gassin's finest]

Perhaps mine is a tiny minority view, but I’d be almost equally unhappy about any club including my own being bought by any country , no matter how spotless its behaviour.

I wasn’t happy back when Jack Walker bought the league title for Blackburn Rovers. It wasn’t a club getting wealthy as a result of its ability to attract more supporters, leading to greater spending power. It was external wealth taking the game away from supporters.

This has since become a much bigger issue with Chelsea and Man City, and now probably Newcastle, simply using national resources ( not football-generated income) to buy trophies. This is why the trophies are devalued.

The human rights records are a different issue, which we can debate separately, in my view, because as has been said, no nation is spotless. But no nation is a football club!

If the nations involved happen to have a dubious human rights record, all the more reason to object, but from my point of view, the main problem is a sporting problem; it is simply that ”success” is no longer anything directly to do with sport. it’s almost exclusively to do with entirely non-sporting wealth.

I think that this reflects the overall attitude I have to top flight football in genral. I feel this current discussion has a strong venn crossover with this old thread:

Following Spurs (Football) & Your Mental Health

Hi all, this was something I've been thinking about for a few years. I've broken this down into a few sections as it's obviously a nuanced and complex topic. Having reread my post before submitting, it doesn't at all cover everything I feel, but touches on some of the main points with varying...

www.spurscommunity.co.uk

I feel like revisiting this thread after today. Recent weeks have considerably shaken my already jaded outlook on the professional game and how it's run. Owners at all levels are trying to use the tradition of the community Club to profit. The authorities are the same, whether jostling for pay offs and seniority, or implementing a game breaking VAR model. And the Super League miasma has outed this duplicity, gate keeping and corruption found throughout those in charge of our game. And with my faith in the people running this club in question, and the obvious lack of interest from those on the pitch, I'm very down about Spurs in particular.

I love football; From playing it, to watching it, to supporting it and to (hopefully) coaching it. But for the first time in my life I am seriously considering stepping away from any investment in the professional game. Because I find myself disliking everything about it.

 

[Stuart Leathercock]

Leaving QSI out of this for a bit...
Spurs are already worth 3bn+ , none of it came because owner invested money. We organically grew from 20m club to 3bn.

If a takeover comes for 4bn, I view it as a investment done in interms of value we have created till now. If this was any business, this would be welcomed by all.

My problem with money in football is - how it transforms a club with debt & problems, overnight into heavyweights. This is my problem with likes of Chelsea or City who got rich because they were lucky not because they were competent

Indeed. The opportunity was there for several years for ENIC to inject capital (i.e. to fund transfers while the stadium was being built). Even if they had injected capital equating to 25% of their investment gain on THFC we would likely have ended up in a great position. We would've been a completely commercially viable club with REAL, non-internal sponsorships and been able to easily stay the right side of the FFP line (instead of being miles behind it). The fact that this didn't happen proved to me what ENICs only priority was with THFC and that was for Lewis and Levy to accumulate as much wealth as possible.

 

[Gassin's finest]

I definitely think I’d have enjoyed supporting a local, lower league side more than Spurs.

But the only place I have settled long enough is Richmond and it’s all rugby here. I hate rugby more than the worst human rights abusers.

Down the road from Brentford. They're living the dream now.

 

[dontcallme]

Down the road from Brentford. They're living the dream now.

I’m moving out of Richmond this month so might find a local side in my new area.

 

[Dakes]

One of the arguments put forward in favour of this kind of investment is that we will fall behind without it cause they'll invest in other clubs if we reject the offer. Looking at the regimes that are frowned upon, how many would follow this route of sportswashing? The regimes are generally those in the Middle East with Shariah Law and oil/gas money. How many of them are there that can invest in Premier League clubs? I ask because there's arguments that if all other clubs do it, we could get left behind.

Just looking at the map of the region we have:

1. Saudi Arabia
2. United Arab Emirates
3. Qatar
4. Iran
5. Iraq
6. Oman
7. Yemen
8. Syria
9. Lebanon

I'm clueless about the geopolitical situations of most of these. The first 3 seem the most likely to invest in football clubs. The rest seem too messed up (wars, poverty) to even consider such a move, as far as I know.

Of the three likely candidates, two already invested in EPL clubs and they can only have a majority stake in one club competing in European competition.

Based on these factors, it seems that only very few EPL clubs can get this kind of boost and therefore it's not a case where one or two clubs will get left behind. Most clubs will be left behind then.

The other possibility is that other governments outside of the Middle East, who also would like a reputation boost, get in on the act. How many such nations are we realistically looking at? Only Russia and China spring to mind. North Korea?

I'm thinking 5 governments at most, which equates to 5 teams out of the 20 being funded by government dosh.

The rest could be funded by billionaires, which is the more palatable option. These cannot match the government levels of funding, so they will form the second tier or EPL clubs.

It's a very simplistic view and others would be more clued up on details of the countries.

 

[fishhhandaricecake]

Perhaps mine is a tiny minority view, but I’d be almost equally unhappy about any club including my own being bought by any country , no matter how spotless its behaviour.

I wasn’t happy back when Jack Walker bought the league title for Blackburn Rovers. It wasn’t a club getting wealthy as a result of its ability to attract more supporters, leading to greater spending power. It was external wealth taking the game away from supporters.

This has since become a much bigger issue with Chelsea and Man City, and now probably Newcastle, simply using national resources ( not football-generated income) to buy trophies. This is why the trophies are devalued.

The human rights records are a different issue, which we can debate separately, in my view, because as has been said, no nation is spotless. But no nation is a football club!

If the nations involved happen to have a dubious human rights record, all the more reason to object, but from my point of view, the main problem is a sporting problem; it is simply that ”success” is no longer anything directly to do with sport. it’s almost exclusively to do with entirely non-sporting wealth.

Brilliant post

 

[Mark8828]

Very interesting reading but just thinking out loud, could there be the possibility of a “back door way in” via the NFL? It’s been mentioned they want a way into sports on a whole so the first Qatari owned NFL franchise which would be based in the UK? Part owner in the football club to comply with UEFA rules but full owner of NFL franchise with all property side generating massive input into the club to grow the brand, finances and success .

 

[Trix]

That’s naive in the extreme. Firstly you’re not within, you aren’t at the table with them, you have zero leverage over them. The Qatari royal family won’t care what you think and they won’t listen to you. You’re a fucking ant as far as they’re concerned.

Get real.

They clearly do care what ordinary people around the world think that's the whole point of sports washing in the first place.

As I say I've been doing a fair amount of reading and researching over the last couple of days and two things have become very apparent to me. Firstly Qatar's human rights record isn't anywhere near as bad as is often made out in the press and they are often lumped in with other Gulf states which are worse.

Secondly they've come a long way in the last 20 or so years. They've actually made huge strides in this time that it has taken other cultures centuries to achieve. Yes it's still someway behind much of the western world but it has been steadily improving, but to change an entire way of life and generations of thinking is not as easy as just changing a few laws. As I say it's someway behind much of the western world but it is unquestionably improving and It might take them some time to catch up but they are moving in the right direction.

Like I say I'd prefer someone else but I have to say it's worth looking into how much they have changed/are trying to change as I've personally jumped on the press driven bandwagon previously that everything regarding the Saudi states are evil and bad, without looking at everything else that goes with it.

FWIW I also don't necessarily believe they are doing all this out of a sudden sense of justice or empathy either, but more out of necessity to fit in both financially and politically.

 

[Stamford]

But that's literally almost every football club's trophies. Liverpool were bankrolled by the pools in the 80s. Spurs were known as the chequebook club in the 60s because we had more money than everyone else. Unless you are an institution like Bayern or Real, the only way to achieve sustained success is if the club spends someone's money.

people conveniently forget this

 

[dontcallme]

But that's literally almost every football club's trophies. Liverpool were bankrolled by the pools in the 80s. Spurs were known as the chequebook club in the 60s because we had more money than everyone else. Unless you are an institution like Bayern or Real, the only way to achieve sustained success is if the club spends someone's money.

Where did our money come from? Genuinely asking as I don’t know and we did outspend clubs.

I don’t think anyone is against clubs spending money. But money from billionaires spending their own money is different to clubs spending money they’ve earnt through sport.

 

[michaelj70]

Their sportswashing isn't going to work on us when we fail to win anything still. That will teach them.

Funniest thing heard in a long while and true

 

[ukdy]

Is there any need for such a snide, bitchy little comment. Clearly I was joking.

Wait a minute. You realise that not only is this The Internet, but a forum, and a Spurs one at that, and sarcasm, and bitchy comments are a pre requisite!?

For the purposes of transparency, this was a sarcastic and snide comment. Not bitchy. Have a fantastic day.

 

[Tucker]

One of the arguments put forward in favour of this kind of investment is that we will fall behind without it cause they'll invest in other clubs if we reject the offer. Looking at the regimes that are frowned upon, how many would follow this route of sportswashing? The regimes are generally those in the Middle East with Shariah Law and oil/gas money. How many of them are there that can invest in Premier League clubs? I ask because there's arguments that if all other clubs do it, we could get left behind.

Just looking at the map of the region we have:

1. Saudi Arabia
2. United Arab Emirates
3. Qatar
4. Iran
5. Iraq
6. Oman
7. Yemen
8. Syria
9. Lebanon

I'm clueless about the geopolitical situations of most of these. The first 3 seem the most likely to invest in football clubs. The rest seem too messed up (wars, poverty) to even consider such a move, as far as I know.

Of the three likely candidates, two already invested in EPL clubs and they can only have a majority stake in one club competing in European competition.

Based on these factors, it seems that only very few EPL clubs can get this kind of boost and therefore it's not a case where one or two clubs will get left behind. Most clubs will be left behind then.

The other possibility is that other governments outside of the Middle East, who also would like a reputation boost, get in on the act. How many such nations are we realistically looking at? Only Russia and China spring to mind. North Korea?

I'm thinking 5 governments at most, which equates to 5 teams out of the 20 being funded by government dosh.

The rest could be funded by billionaires, which is the more palatable option. These cannot match the government levels of funding, so they will form the second tier or EPL clubs.

It's a very simplistic view and others would be more clued up on details of the countries.

I think once a status quo of state run clubs develops. The billionaires will lose interest. They won’t be able to compete so what’s the point, aside from if they can some how get value on their investments which would be increasingly difficult to do imo.

Like you say though it’s only a handful of clubs that will end up getting this state funded investment. The geopolitical situation in the Middle East is such that these countries feel they need to legitimise themselves on the world stage etc. they’ve got relatively new found wealth from oil and gas, but before that and once it’s all gone they’re just deserts. They all know this, and they want to ensure they have a future beyond fossil fuels.

 

[Gassin's finest]

I’m moving out of Richmond this month so might find a local side in my new area.

I have Raynes Park Vale, and I suppose Wimbledon around my gaff.

 

[Wick3d]

They clearly do care what ordinary people around the world think that's the whole point of sports washing in the first place.

As I say I've been doing a fair amount of reading and researching over the last couple of days and two things have become very apparent to me. Firstly Qatar's human rights record isn't anywhere near as bad as is often made out in the press and they are often lumped in with other Gulf states which are worse.

Secondly they've come a long way in the last 20 or so years. They've actually made huge strides in this time that it has taken other cultures centuries to achieve. Yes it's still someway behind much of the western world but it has been steadily improving, but to change an entire way of life and generations of thinking is not as easy as just changing a few laws. As I say it's someway behind much of the western world but it is unquestionably improving and It might take them some time to catch up but they are moving in the right direction.

Like I say I'd prefer someone else but I have to say it's worth looking into how much they have changed/are trying to change as I've personally jumped on the press driven bandwagon previously that everything regarding the Saudi states are evil and bad, without looking at everything else that goes with it.

FWIW I also don't necessarily believe they are doing all this out of a sudden sense of justice or empathy either, but more out of necessity to fit in both financially and politically.

I always thought the Qatari investing in football was more to do with geopolitics, given that every other arab state hates them. This level of exposure in the world for such a tiny nation provides them with a great deal of security and power.

For example, the rich, or even the media, never mention what happens in Dubai. That place was built using human slavery; they routinely confiscated workers' passports and held them hostage.

I'm not too fond of this type of investment; it ruins the competitive nature of the sport. However, history will show you that the mega clubs of today are where they are today due to investment at one point in time that propelled them forward. A lot of the adverse reactions are initiated by them as they don't want another player at the big table, diluting their share of the money. You see it in every sport at the moment.

 

[Tucker]

They clearly do care what ordinary people around the world think that's the whole point of sports washing in the first place.

As I say I've been doing a fair amount of reading and researching over the last couple of days and two things have become very apparent to me. Firstly Qatar's human rights record isn't anywhere near as bad as is often made out in the press and they are often lumped in with other Gulf states which are worse.

Secondly they've come a long way in the last 20 or so years. They've actually made huge strides in this time that it has taken other cultures centuries to achieve. Yes it's still someway behind much of the western world but it has been steadily improving, but to change an entire way of life and generations of thinking is not as easy as just changing a few laws. As I say it's someway behind much of the western world but it is unquestionably improving and It might take them some time to catch up but they are moving in the right direction.

Like I say I'd prefer someone else but I have to say it's worth looking into how much they have changed/are trying to change as I've personally jumped on the press driven bandwagon previously that everything regarding the Saudi states are evil and bad, without looking at everything else that goes with it.

FWIW I also don't necessarily believe they are doing all this out of a sudden sense of justice or empathy either, but more out of necessity to fit in both financially and politically.

Maybe, and I’ve actually learned a bit about them myself over the last couple of months. They aren’t as bad as the Saudis or the Emirates, they seem like the most progressive of the gulf states in many ways. But it’s a bit like comparing Peter Sucliffe with Harold Shipman. Yeah Shipman killed more people, but you’d still not want to go to Butlins with either of them.

And yes they do care what people think, but it’s more to do with what governments and power brokers think of them. They won’t care what you or I think of their human rights record. Not really. As I said in the post above they’re sportswashing is all about legitimacy and being known on the world stage. Because at some point the gas will run out or Saudi Arabia will decide they want the Qatari peninsula.

But whatever their reasoning I’m not happy about the idea of them being involved with Spurs. I’m not sure what I’ll do if they take over the club or funnel money in or whatever. But it’ll probably lessen my enjoyment of the club and the football. Maybe I’ll just stop watching altogether.

I just hope it doesn’t happen tbh so I don’t have to make that decision.