New Stadium Details And Discussions

[Lilbaz]

I don’t see it ever changing.

It will but we have been putting most of our money into stadium and training ground. Eventually we will have paid for it. Naming rights would be good though.

 

[davidmatzdorf]

I don’t see it ever changing.

In a similar way to people who never saw the old "top 4" changing and never thought Spurs could possibly qualify for the Champions League, because we had "missed our chance". Everything changes.

 

[LexingtonSpurs]

Can’t find the actual article but I found this.

Meh I can’t upload it but it was in mail on Sunday.

Headline- spurs to cash in on video games - new stadium could rake in £3m an event.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....e-4503354/amp/Tottenham-cash-video-games.html

Mate, the stadium is a great deal for Spurs - ENIC specifically. It is not going to move Spurs into the elite revenue clubs.

The devil is in the details of the article - even the Daily Mail understands that.

"Tottenham are hoping to earn up to £3million per event at their new stadium " <> Tottenham will earn £3M

And when you look at the numbers - it does not account for any expenses of hosting said events - a 20% profit margin would probably be pretty good - and that would be about £600K Neither Spurs, nor ENIC, are in the business of running e-events, and are unlikely to start now. What they are likely to do is lease out the stadium to people/businesses who are in the business of putting on e-events. An event, which might draw £3M in revenue is not spending 33% of it on the venue. They will have loads of other expenses, such as all the electronics required, staffing, marketing, prize money allocation, etc.

Be happy with the new stadium - it is currently the best in Europe. Stop trying to make it into something it is not - which is a financial windfall for Spurs. The new money will help - but its not transformative money. Its not oil money. Its not state-owned company money. It basically is enough to keep Spurs in the top-6 (without the new stadium, there would have been a decent chance Spurs slid backwards.

The money Spurs can make in CL prize money alone will dwarf the amount of profits the stadium generates for each of the next 20+ years.

 

[Lilbaz]

Mate, the stadium is a great deal for Spurs - ENIC specifically. It is not going to move Spurs into the elite revenue clubs.

The devil is in the details of the article - even the Daily Mail understands that.

"Tottenham are hoping to earn up to £3million per event at their new stadium " <> Tottenham will earn £3M

And when you look at the numbers - it does not account for any expenses of hosting said events - a 20% profit margin would probably be pretty good - and that would be about £600K Neither Spurs, nor ENIC, are in the business of running e-events, and are unlikely to start now. What they are likely to do is lease out the stadium to people/businesses who are in the business of putting on e-events. An event, which might draw £3M in revenue is not spending 33% of it on the venue. They will have loads of other expenses, such as all the electronics required, staffing, marketing, prize money allocation, etc.

Be happy with the new stadium - it is currently the best in Europe. Stop trying to make it into something it is not - which is a financial windfall for Spurs. The new money will help - but its not transformative money. Its not oil money. Its not state-owned company money. It basically is enough to keep Spurs in the top-6 (without the new stadium, there would have been a decent chance Spurs slid backwards.

The money Spurs can make in CL prize money alone will dwarf the amount of profits the stadium generates for each of the next 20+ years.

When all paid the new stadium brings in an extra £60m a year. Not to be sniffed at and cl football is far from guaranteed each year.

 

[LexingtonSpurs]

When all paid the new stadium brings in an extra £60m a year. Not to be sniffed out and cl football is far from guaranteed each year.

That is not really true - it probably won't be paid for about 20+ years, and by then, there will be new upgrades/updates needed to keep the Stadium up to date.

It is a Great stadium. It will be a great experience, and I think it will lift the club when they are playing. It will help financially.

It just is not a financial windfall. Thats all. This is not a negative, or any kind of knock on the stadium.

 

[CarrickSpurgus]

When WHL was open the Stansted Express from Liverpool St on matchdays used to stop at Northumberland park don't know if it did coming in the other direction but if it does get off at Northumberland Pk and walk, if it doesn't stop then at Tottenham Hale just cross platforms and get a northbound train to NP . If you want to walk it's about a quarter of a mile shorter from the Hale than SS , should be OK walking expect there will be hundreds doing the same.

Thanks buddy , sounds like a better idea ,just the minor detail of securing the match tickets

 

[ToDarrenIsToDo]

When all paid the new stadium brings in an extra £60m a year. Not to be sniffed at and cl football is far from guaranteed each year.

The club has spent nearly £40m per season of its own profits on stadium and training ground builds so in theory it has already spent a decade without its stadium revenue as it's proactively been spent elsewhere.

Now we get £100m per season from the new build, which if we need to pay off £50m in loan and interest repayments will still leave us with £50m more per season than the last 10 years has given us.

Once those debts are paid, let's say over a hopeful 10-15 year period we'll be looking at £100m more per season than we have been getting whilst the revenue from WHL wasn't available for growth away from CAPEX.

£50m more from now on in theory, £100m more once paid off. Either way we are getting £50m more out of in instantly compared to the average available each season for the last decades worth of accounts

 

[Lilbaz]

The club has spent nearly £40m per season of its own profits on stadium and training ground builds so in theory it has already spent a decade without its stadium revenue as it's proactively been spent elsewhere.

Now we get £100m per season from the new build, which if we need to pay off £50m in loan and interest repayments will still leave us with £50m more per season than the last 10 years has given us.

Once those debts are paid, let's say over a hopeful 10-15 year period we'll be looking at £100m more per season than we have been getting whilst the revenue from WHL wasn't available for growth away from CAPEX.

£50m more from now on in theory, £100m more once paid off. Either way we are getting £50m more out of in instantly compared to the average available each season for the last decades worth of accounts

Agree to a certain extent. We don't know how they'll want to try and pay it off. Front loaded, spread it out. Not to mention we still have phase 3 to start. We'll see.

 

[ToDarrenIsToDo]

Agree to a certain extent. We don't know how they'll want to try and pay it off. Front loaded, spread it out. Not to mention we still have phase 3 to start. We'll see.

We still have a lot of the loan that still hasn't been used or taken out. It'll be interesting to see the accounts and P&L from last year when it's all released shortly.

If the club choose to pay it all off quickly it'll struggle for a couple of years, I doubt Levy will go with that and I can see the loan having another 10-15 years to pay off at a more drawn out rate than him adhering to the 2022 deadline for all of it

 

[daryl hannah]

The club has spent nearly £40m per season of its own profits on stadium and training ground builds so in theory it has already spent a decade without its stadium revenue as it's proactively been spent elsewhere.

Now we get £100m per season from the new build, which if we need to pay off £50m in loan and interest repayments will still leave us with £50m more per season than the last 10 years has given us.

Once those debts are paid, let's say over a hopeful 10-15 year period we'll be looking at £100m more per season than we have been getting whilst the revenue from WHL wasn't available for growth away from CAPEX.

£50m more from now on in theory, £100m more once paid off. Either way we are getting £50m more out of in instantly compared to the average available each season for the last decades worth of accounts

Only thing is, ENIC are a property development co. and I don't trust them NOT to plough any residual profits back into land and property in N17.

It would be amazing if we spent any decent money on the team above a zero net spend and CL monies.

 

[JCRD]

So all im getting from reading the last few posts is we aint getting a Leroy Sane cos we dont have the financial windfall

#ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

 

[davidmatzdorf]

That is not really true - it probably won't be paid for about 20+ years, and by then, there will be new upgrades/updates needed to keep the Stadium up to date.

It is a Great stadium. It will be a great experience, and I think it will lift the club when they are playing. It will help financially.

It just is not a financial windfall. Thats all. This is not a negative, or any kind of knock on the stadium.

The way in which we benefit in the short term is not in profit or "windfall" terms, because repayment of capital debt will swallow that for a few years. The new stadium sharply increases the club's turnover. It makes it a bigger business, not necessarily a more profitable one. Some measures of viability are related to turnover, rather than profit. From a footballing perspective, the most notable is that the overall size of the salary bill is supposed to be limited to 52%-55% of turnover. So greater turnover means we can sustain higher salaries, without falling foul of FFP and good business practice. That should make it easier to retain valued players.

We still have a lot of the loan that still hasn't been used or taken out. It'll be interesting to see the accounts and P&L from last year when it's all released shortly.

If the club choose to pay it all off quickly it'll struggle for a couple of years, I doubt Levy will go with that and I can see the loan having another 10-15 years to pay off at a more drawn out rate than him adhering to the 2022 deadline for all of it

I would have thought that any funding for a capital project that has a 3-year remaining term at project completion has to be short-term development finance. That's expensive money: high interest rates, penalties for early redemption, etc. This is why I keep going on about refinancing the development loans after the sales receipts from Phase 3 are available. If the development borrowing facility really expires in 2022, then they may refinance even sooner than that.

Refinancing is what Arsenal did. It's what every developer does, when they have to secure their cash to build their project on the project itself, instead of securing it on other completed assets. You can only get short-term, expensive money secured on an uncompleted project. Once it is finished, you can refinance to much longer term money at lower interest rates and ideally with more flexible redemption terms.

As an aside and a counter-example, one of the few advantages that housing associations have over private developers is that they don't sell off their estates. That means that they can secure long-term funding in great slabs (£25m here, £50m there) when the market is favourable and interest rates are low, all secured on completed stock. The private developer has to tap-dance for expensive, short-term money secured on the uncompleted site, which can only be done after it has planning consent. The HA is thus ready to jump on an opportunity when it is available, rather than having to spend weeks begging the bank and bullshitting the vendor .

Only thing is, ENIC are a property development co. and I don't trust them NOT to plough any residual profits back into land and property in N17.

It would be amazing if we spent any decent money on the team above a zero net spend and CL monies.

ENIC is not a property development company. It invests in businesses where Levy & Lewis think they can add value to the business over the long term. That often involves developing property, but it's not their primary business model. They buy undervalued businesses and add value.

I think we can expect some profits, perhaps from Phase 3, to be diverted into the club's charitable vehicle(s) as part of the overall neighbourhood regeneration scheme. They have already invested as partners with Newlon Housing in local shared ownership developments. Where there are further opportunities to use any land they already own to generate profits, they will surely try to take advantage. But that would be funded with development borrowing, not from the club's general cash and debt. There's no reason such ventures should have any impact on player transfers. It would be a separate company, separately funded.

I agree that we will probably continue with the minimal-net-spend approach to building the team, but it won't have anything to with the development plans, unless they go severely awry. It will be because that's the club's footballing model under Pochettino.

 

[LexingtonSpurs]

From a footballing perspective, the most notable is that the overall size of the salary bill is supposed to be limited to 52%-55% of turnover. So greater turnover means we can sustain higher salaries, without falling foul of FFP and good business practice. That should make it easier to retain valued players.

Yes - but as a business perspective - focusing on top-line, instead of bottom line, is a sure way to run the business into the ground.

For example - although regulations allow for 52-55% of turnover - it would be suicidal business practice to raise both turnover and expenses by the same amount to justify higher wages.

ENIC does not operate in that fashion. They will increase wages when it is financially prudent to do so - based on an increase in profits, not an increase in revenue. (Often an increase in revenue does portend an increase in profits - but not always. Levy will be focused on driving up profitability - not turnover.)

 

[daryl hannah]

I agree that we will probably continue with the minimal-net-spend approach to building the team, but it won't have anything to with the development plans, unless they go severely awry. It will be because that's the club's footballing model under Pochettino.

You mean Lewis and Levy. Whatever is the next excuse? We've already seen all profits from the last 10 years diverted into this stadium - which by the sounds of it, might take another 25 years to pay off. Some of us might be dead by the time we start reaping the benefits of this investment.

What about the football team? Highest prices in the land.

The idea that the stadium hasn't impacted transfers in the last 10 years is a fallacy.

Edit: My only expectation of the club is that the owner make us competitive in the short term aswell.

 

[LexingtonSpurs]

Some of us might be dead by the time we start reaping the benefits of this investment.

I do think that is the wrong way to look at it.

I know I caution about expecting too much of an impact, but there will be an impact. And, I think the financial impact alone will keep Spurs within reach of the top-4 in any given year. Its not enough to compete on money with the financially doped clubs - but its enough to have a talented squad year in, and year out, and that gives Spurs a chance to win.

But, just in watching/reading/listening to the test event yesterday - the buzz in the new stadium was palpable. I think that has an intangible effect on the squad - and the club as a whole. It makes the matchday experience that much better - and I think that enthusiasm matters.

 

[Lighty64]

When all paid the new stadium brings in an extra £60m a year. Not to be sniffed at and cl football is far from guaranteed each year.

the only trouble with no CL, the stadium might not be full for any game below a grade A. that would be 13 league games at least 3 Europa (providing we are at least in that), and any domestic cups

 

[shelfboy68]

You mean Lewis and Levy. Whatever is the next excuse? We've already seen all profits from the last 10 years diverted into this stadium - which by the sounds of it, might take another 25 years to pay off. Some of us might be dead by the time we start reaping the benefits of this investment.

What about the football team? Highest prices in the land.

The idea that the stadium hasn't impacted transfers in the last 10 years is a fallacy.

Edit: My only expectation of the club is that the owner make us competitive in the short term aswell.

We are competitive to a degree in that the club has managed to stay involved in the top four whilst buying no one and building the stadium.
But if your refering to winning league titles and or CL then yes to that effect we come up short because we are not in a position to do so, no way will levy do anything short term if that means it will take us 40 year's before we won anything again then so be it if the long term is profitable.

 

[Shadydan]

We are competitive to a degree in that the club has managed to stay involved in the top four whilst buying no one and building the stadium.
But if your refering to winning league titles and or CL then yes to that effect we come up short because we are not in a position to do so, no way will levy do anything short term if that means it will take us 40 year's before we won anything again then so be it if the long term is profitable.

I didn't even see who posted this to know who it came from lol

 

[Dov67]

a key benefit to the club will be in more than just additional revenue. It will be on how the club is perceived by ourselves as fans, the players, opponents and potential players. It's intangible, cannot by any definition be quantified, but it is hugely important.

no matter how good the team was we could never be thought of as a genuinely elite european club in our old and old fashioned 36k WHL, no matter how much we loved it.

I've looked at 100's and 100's of pictures of the inside of the NWHL over the last few months but none of them did justice to how spectacular it is in the flesh. That Palace game cannot come soon enough. Just hope the players play the game and not the occasion because we cannot afford any more screw ups, but that's for another thread i guess.........COYS !!

 

[Stamford]

You mean Lewis and Levy. Whatever is the next excuse? We've already seen all profits from the last 10 years diverted into this stadium - which by the sounds of it, might take another 25 years to pay off. Some of us might be dead by the time we start reaping the benefits of this investment.

What about the football team? Highest prices in the land.

The idea that the stadium hasn't impacted transfers in the last 10 years is a fallacy.

Edit: My only expectation of the club is that the owner make us competitive in the short term aswell.

The only bit I agree with is that we will be paying the highest prices, so there now has to be investment in the pitch. Really excited to go inside the ground after waking past every day for years