- Apr 1, 2005
- 41,363
- 74,893
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.
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.I don’t see it ever changing.
Mate, the stadium is a great deal for Spurs - ENIC specifically. It is not going to move Spurs into the elite revenue clubs.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.
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.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.
Thanks buddy , sounds like a better idea ,just the minor detail of securing the match ticketsWhen 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.
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
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.
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.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
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.
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
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.
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.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.
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.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.
I do think that is the wrong way to look at it.Some of us might be dead by the time we start reaping the benefits of this investment.
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.
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.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.
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.