ENIC...

We could always go back to the sorry saga shown below, we did win an FA Cup but nearly went bankrupt in th 90's, may not have had great success under ENIC but the finances are under better control.

"By the early 1990s, however, Scholar's Tottenham faced financial troubles due to investment in new players, the construction of a new stand at the club's White Hart Lane ground, and losses in the companies he had created with Tottenham.[4][16][17] Scholar looked to Robert Maxwell to help bail the club out. Maxwell agreed to support a rights issue he soon backed out and instead loaned £1.1 million to the club, with the proviso that the deal be kept secret.[4] When news of the deal came out, Tottenham were left in turmoil and a struggle for power broke out between Scholar and Bobroff. Scholar eventually prevailed and Bobroff was forced to resign. Terry Venables then sought a number of backers in his attempts to buy the club, eventually teaming up with Alan Sugar. Scholar finally sold his shares in the club for £2 million and left in the summer of 1991, a couple of months after the club won the FA Cup for the eighth time. Scholar spoke a couple of weeks later to writer Alex Fynn and predicted that the Sugar-Venables marriage would last a short time, stating "The first year will be the honeymoon, the second will be the divorce". Venables was thrown out of Spurs exactly two years later, in the summer of 1993, contributing to a highly public slanging match and bringing a court case against Sugar, which he lost. Scholar published a book about his time at White Hart Lane, Behind Closed Doors, in 1992 with Mihir Bose as his co-author.[4]"

Dov67 said:

The difference was that Liverpool actually backed their manager at a critical time, and in doing so jumped way ahead of us during the crucial 2018 period.

Not sure of statistic but I think we had finished above them in 7 out of the previous 9 seasons prior to that (or something like that??). Can anyone honestly say when we will next finish above them?

Klopp and/or their recruitment "committee" identified two transformative players and they waited and then paid the price to get those two players - not the cheaper, 2nd and 3rd choice options. Then they won the champions league and premier league.

the big difference is Liverpool knew what was necessary to push them over the line and they went out and did it. When we were in a similar position not only did we not do it, we didn't sign anyone for 518 days!

That's the way Levy runs this club and I don't see that changing. The fact that Newcastle are now the richest club in the premier, means that Levy is even less likely to do what is necessary to get us over the line because its an even bigger gamble now.

Click to expand...

Yes they did back their manager at a critical time. But even though we were ahead of them it's difficult to compare their situation to ours. Our priority during that period was to build a new stadium. Poch said many times his remit was to build a side ready to challenge for champions league places when the stadium opened. Now we all know he massively overachieved. The issue is that during our critical time to strengthen the club was clearly directing all energy and resources to completing the massive stadium project (although the 518 days you mention we did try and sign Frenkie De Jong, Rabiot, Ndombele, Grealish. And in alot of those cases the players were unobtainable but Poch wouldn't accept alternatives like Tielemanns or Maddison).

Liverpool didn't have the distraction of a 1.2 billion stadium project so could fully focus on implementing a plan to improve and win trophies. And on the whole they have had great success with their recruitment - which was mainly funded by selling Coutinho for such a large sum.

If we get ourselves in a similar position again, and look like challenging for big trophies, but fail to capitalise at critical times by strengethening I will be in here criticising ENIC. As there will be no excuses now we have additional revenue coming in from the stadium. The next 5 years is the time to judge the ownership IMO. As everything was leading up to the 'game changing' stadium build that would allow us to compete at the top end of the league.

Comparing us to how much bigger clubs, with larger revenue streams operated, during a time when were hamstrung by building a new stadium is not really a fair comparison imo.

ohtottenham! said:

I really disagree with your take on this. It’s a great question; of course it’s loaded…kind of the actual point. It’s asking for accountability.

The Trust, in theory at least, represents the stakeholders/the fans/Us. Without us, there is no THFC. There is no Board/ENIC/Levy/Shareholders.

The Board/Levy is held to account by the shareholders who demand a return on their investment. They want financial deliverables…tangible results in terms of share value.

The stakeholders/fans with our support/loyalty, provide the whole foundations for the club and we also want tangible results on our own investment.

Our given investment as fans is both non-financial and financial in terms of benefitting the club. Our own desired/expected return on that investment is non-financial…tangible success on the football field!

"Do you think that one trophy in 20 years is an acceptable outcome?" is a great question for all the above reasons. It’s definitely not childish in any way; it's the opposite.

Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong - I think there are a lot of really valid questions in there and much of the same stuff that I would be asking if sat face to face with Levy. I just think there are multiple ways of getting things done and you will tend to find that when addressing smart/successful people you need to be smart about engaging them in order to get results.

I think with the 1 in 20 question, the problem is saying "acceptable outcome". Because obviously if somebody on the board says it is not "acceptable" then the next question is going to be "shouldn't you all resign then you muppets?". So it's not a great question because it is only ever going to receive a swerve.

For me personally, I would want to phrase that question along the lines of "The infrastructure has been great but the trophy haul is really poor. Now that the infrastructure is mainly done what actions are being put in place to increase the trophy haul?". I know it's just semantics at the end of the day, but I really think you get better answers to questions that look forwards rather than looking back.

I do think that as a fan base we are overdue some answers and/or a better insight into the next phase for Spurs under Paratici.

Metalhead said:

Wasn't the issue that the THST wanted the meeting to be a matter of record and ENIC didn't? If that is the case then personally I don't think that the trust were acting in a childish manner. Unfortunately however, ENIC are not answerable to anyone so therefore it only becomes an issue of whether supporters feel that they are getting value for money (admittedly that is subjective) and if not, what recourse the supporters have to protest and realistically, the only answer is not to attend matches or invest money into the club. Historically that is unlikely to happen as clubs know that by and large, fans will continue to turn up.

Click to expand...

fishhhandaricecake said:

The THST have acted like grown ups and got shat all over in previous meetings with Levy and the board so they’ve now moved onto being more aggressive and bullish as after the ESL debacle and our steady decline again due to lack of a strong football plan or identity enough is enough as far as they’re concerned when it comes to Levy & ENIC.

Click to expand...

I was thinking more about the response immediately after the ESL stuff... that the trust would only meet with Lewis and would only do so if the entire executive board were fired or resigned. It's not the right attitude for any organisation who wants to get stuff done (in my view).

As with the above, I think a lot of the questions on the table are completely valid and we should expect some explanations. But you have to be "in the room" in order to get those answers, and particularly if you want to pass on the worries that fans have. Even a meeting with no official minutes being taken is better than no meeting at all. Having an official record isn't going to make them get off their arses and start spending money or whatever.

I'm sure that much of what happens in those meetings never comes to fruition, but it's still important to keep those communication channels open and keep asking the right questions. It's very hard for the trust to truly represent all fans because we all have differing views etc. so there is a balancing act there in terms of how to interact with the club to keep the conversation flowing.

And to be clear, I'm not saying that the fan base should be deferential to these people - just that we shouldn't expect like we can act in any manner we want and have those people be deferential to us. I don't think that's how the world works. As I said before, hopefully there will be a bit of movement from both sides and cooler heads will prevail.

SirHarryHotspur said:

We could always go back to the sorry saga shown below, we did win an FA Cup but nearly went bankrupt in th 90's, may not have had great success under ENIC but the finances are under better control.

"By the early 1990s, however, Scholar's Tottenham faced financial troubles due to investment in new players, the construction of a new stand at the club's White Hart Lane ground, and losses in the companies he had created with Tottenham.[4][16][17] Scholar looked to Robert Maxwell to help bail the club out. Maxwell agreed to support a rights issue he soon backed out and instead loaned £1.1 million to the club, with the proviso that the deal be kept secret.[4] When news of the deal came out, Tottenham were left in turmoil and a struggle for power broke out between Scholar and Bobroff. Scholar eventually prevailed and Bobroff was forced to resign. Terry Venables then sought a number of backers in his attempts to buy the club, eventually teaming up with Alan Sugar. Scholar finally sold his shares in the club for £2 million and left in the summer of 1991, a couple of months after the club won the FA Cup for the eighth time. Scholar spoke a couple of weeks later to writer Alex Fynn and predicted that the Sugar-Venables marriage would last a short time, stating "The first year will be the honeymoon, the second will be the divorce". Venables was thrown out of Spurs exactly two years later, in the summer of 1993, contributing to a highly public slanging match and bringing a court case against Sugar, which he lost. Scholar published a book about his time at White Hart Lane, Behind Closed Doors, in 1992 with Mihir Bose as his co-author.[4]"

Click to expand...

well ENIC are also better than Peter Risdale, the Venkys, Robert Maxwell and the Oyston family. But it's setting the bar very, very low.

vegassd said:

Don't get me wrong - I think there are a lot of really valid questions in there and much of the same stuff that I would be asking if sat face to face with Levy. I just think there are multiple ways of getting things done and you will tend to find that when addressing smart/successful people you need to be smart about engaging them in order to get results.

I think with the 1 in 20 question, the problem is saying "acceptable outcome". Because obviously if somebody on the board says it is not "acceptable" then the next question is going to be "shouldn't you all resign then you muppets?". So it's not a great question because it is only ever going to receive a swerve.

For me personally, I would want to phrase that question along the lines of "The infrastructure has been great but the trophy haul is really poor. Now that the infrastructure is mainly done what actions are being put in place to increase the trophy haul?". I know it's just semantics at the end of the day, but I really think you get better answers to questions that look forwards rather than looking back.

I do think that as a fan base we are overdue some answers and/or a better insight into the next phase for Spurs under Paratici.




I was thinking more about the response immediately after the ESL stuff... that the trust would only meet with Lewis and would only do so if the entire executive board were fired or resigned. It's not the right attitude for any organisation who wants to get stuff done (in my view).

As with the above, I think a lot of the questions on the table are completely valid and we should expect some explanations. But you have to be "in the room" in order to get those answers, and particularly if you want to pass on the worries that fans have. Even a meeting with no official minutes being taken is better than no meeting at all. Having an official record isn't going to make them get off their arses and start spending money or whatever.

I'm sure that much of what happens in those meetings never comes to fruition, but it's still important to keep those communication channels open and keep asking the right questions. It's very hard for the trust to truly represent all fans because we all have differing views etc. so there is a balancing act there in terms of how to interact with the club to keep the conversation flowing.

And to be clear, I'm not saying that the fan base should be deferential to these people - just that we shouldn't expect like we can act in any manner we want and have those people be deferential to us. I don't think that's how the world works. As I said before, hopefully there will be a bit of movement from both sides and cooler heads will prevail.

Click to expand...

I forgot the bit where resignations were demanded. Yes, that's fair enough - that was silly or at least not realistic.

SpursForever71 said:

ENIC built the new stadium to make money by putting on events, not to make the team better, simple as. FFS Newcastle will even be leap frogging us next season. For Levy to say he has Tottenham FC's best interests at heart is crap, where is the proof? its not the stadium

Click to expand...

Where Newcastle are concerned it doesn't matter how many events we stage we can't compete with them.
What hasn't helped is the poor decisions and recruitment that has seen us decline, so that now we are not that far ahead of them meaning we will caught up quicker than previously.

Metalhead said:

I forgot the bit where resignations were demanded. Yes, that's fair enough - that was silly or at least not realistic.

Click to expand...

The Trust are like the BBC - they get criticised for being too 'harsh' and they get criticised for being 'in Levy's pocket'.

The main thing for me is that at least they're trying. They're a volunteer organisation after all, giving up their own time to try and help the fans, going up against a massive, wealthy corporate entity. Personally I think they deserve slack rather than stick.

Imo over the next 5 years we will spend a decent amount. It won’t be on City Chelsea United levels but I honestly don’t think it will be a million miles behind. FFP probably limits those clubs to £150-200 net. I think you’ll see us around the £100m net spend when stadium is fully operational. Then it all comes down to manager/scouting if we get it right we can still challenge top 4. The big difference is Chelsea can buy a £50m player if he doesn’t work they don’t care they buy another immediately. As seen with Ndombele we have to persist and hope they work. Chelsea City spending guarantees success. Our spending will leave maybe having a chance.

jimbo said:

The Trust are like the BBC - they get criticised for being too 'harsh' and they get criticised for being 'in Levy's pocket'.

The main thing for me is that at least they're trying. They're a volunteer organisation after all, giving up their own time to try and help the fans, going up against a massive, wealthy corporate entity. Personally I think they deserve slack rather than stick.

Click to expand...

Absolutely but like with anything, there's room for constructive criticism as well as praise where due. I think that the problem in football or in general is that we have a tendency to go all in one way or another rather than appreciating that things are rarely black and white but more shades of grey.

Metalhead said:

Absolutely but like with anything, there's room for constructive criticism as well as praise where due. I think that the problem in football or in general is that we have a tendency to go all in one way or another rather than appreciating that things are rarely black and white but more shades of grey.

Click to expand...

Agree. I understand the Trust not liking their meeting being unofficial and unaccounted for. But then maybe the board wanted to know what kind of people they were first. Plus asking for resignations is fucking stupid and hardly going to endear the board for a meeting with a bunch of volunteers.

It's all swings and roundabouts with surveys and fans opinions on ENIC & the club , 2019 fans relatively happy, 2021 unhappy,


"The scale of discontent with the way the Board of Tottenham Hotspur FC is running the Club has been laid bare in the largest-ever independent survey of fan opinion carried out by the Supporters’ Trust. Of the 8,358 fans who responded, 75% said they felt ENIC’s stewardship of the Club had declined over the last year. That’s significantly up from just 6% in our last survey in 2019. Only 9% thought it had improved, significantly down from 61% in 2019. On-field events have undoubtedly had an impact on supporter sentiment, but our findings show substantial discontent with decisions made off-field too."

dontcallme said:

Agree. I understand the Trust not liking their meeting being unofficial and unaccounted for. But then maybe the board wanted to know what kind of people they were first. Plus asking for resignations is fucking stupid and hardly going to endear the board for a meeting with a bunch of volunteers.

Click to expand...

Imagine being in Levy or a board member’s shoes seeing that call for resignation. We know Levy works stupid hours and I can’t imagine he lets his other executives take it easy either. They’ve put all their effort into growing the club, even if some buys have been done badly for years and in Levy’s case a large proportion of his life and then you get that said to you by a bunch of strangers. If I was Levy that would immediately rub me up the wrong way. It just comes across as so thankless, arrogant and pretty ignorant. Things Levy has been accused of many times actually.

Whilst there’s many things to criticise Levy for, I don’t think his work rate is one of them.

spursfan77 said:

Imagine being in Levy or a board member’s shoes seeing that call for resignation. We know Levy works stupid hours and I can’t imagine he lets his other executives take it easy either. They’ve put all their effort into growing the club, even if some buys have been done badly for years and in Levy’s case a large proportion of his life and then you get that said to you by a bunch of strangers. If I was Levy that would immediately rub me up the wrong way. It just comes across as so thankless, arrogant and pretty ignorant. Things Levy has been accused of many times actually.

Whilst there’s many things to criticise Levy for, I don’t think his work rate is one of them.

Click to expand...

I'm sure Levy works very hard and makes long hours. Given his paygrade however, that should be par for the course.
Results are what execs at his level should be judged upon - and in the Football industry that translates into success on the field. In that department, Levy is distinctly unsuccesful...

dontcallme said:

Agree. I understand the Trust not liking their meeting being unofficial and unaccounted for. But then maybe the board wanted to know what kind of people they were first. Plus asking for resignations is fucking stupid and hardly going to endear the board for a meeting with a bunch of volunteers.

Click to expand...

Thank you, that was exactly the point I was making.

On question of success under ENIC , over the last 10 seasons of the teams currently in the PL only 6 have won one of the domestic major honours, PL title , FA/League Cup , so 14 have won nothing , at least we are in the majority

dontcallme said:

Agree. I understand the Trust not liking their meeting being unofficial and unaccounted for. But then maybe the board wanted to know what kind of people they were first. Plus asking for resignations is fucking stupid and hardly going to endear the board for a meeting with a bunch of volunteers.

Click to expand...

The Trust have met the board many times over many years, they are well acquainted - and if you listen to the key representatives of the Trust speak they give Levy credit where it's due (which they're then criticised for) and they criticise where it's warranted (which they're then criticised for). It is a very thankless task, clearly.

Some of the things they've advocated for in the past would be opposition to the proposed move to Stratford, better ticket pricing/concessions, away day travel, and I believe they suggested that having such a high number of season tickets in the new stadium has the potential to block the recruitment of new/young fans who don't have the disposable income to meet the high prices. You might disagree on all those things, but they're not unreasonable positions and are set by majority fan opinion (those that express it to the Trust anyway).

What seems to be happening here is a judging of the story by the headline.
"Trust refuses to meet with ENIC" - the context as has been explained, the club would only agree to a meeting if it remained unminuted. The Trust considered it but decided that not being able to report on the substance of the discussions rendered it a pointless exercise. There's no excuse from the board about 'wanting to know what kind of people they were' because they've had so many minuted meetings before. The reason is that Levy didn't want what he said reported.

Similiarly calling for the board to resign after the ESL debacle. Taken as a headline it does seem childish and silly, but that ignores the context. The ESL has come up before in meetings between the Trust and board - Levy himself denied any involvement and any intention of ever being part of such a thing. As it turns out, he lied. Brazenly. No excuse here about 'things changing' because it was shown by investigation that, as he was telling the Trust and the fans one thing, he was negotiating with the ESL/clubs about the breakaway in secret. If you feel that calling for resignations isn't endearing, how about someone lying openly to your face and treating you like a worthless idiot? I wouldn't find that very endearing at all.

Bear in mind that at the time the call to resign was made the threatened repercussions were large fines and expulsion from our domestic league - if that doesn't warrant calls for resignation, what does?

ardiles&villa said:

You will never beat a Ferrari in a race with an audi. Money means that you can compete.

Click to expand...

It's a dubious analogy, but to continue it you could ask what if it was Lewis Hamilton driving the Audi and one of us in the Ferrari - suddenly the odds of victory are quite different. Perhaps we can see that as a metaphor for organisation vs. raw spending power - who is at the controls of the footballing organisation matters a lot.

It's been done to death but I really don't think anyone is expecting Chelsea/City levels of spending. Liverpool are still up there, and Leicester have bagged some trophies through clever recruitment. We need to be smarter. I sense that Levy think's he's the brainiest guy in any given room, and maybe that's correct in some ways, but he's been pretty dumb in footballing matters for some time.

McArchibald said:

I'm sure Levy works very hard and makes long hours. Given his paygrade however, that should be par for the course.
Results are what execs at his level should be judged upon - and in the Football industry that translates into success on the field. In that department, Levy is distinctly unsuccesful...

Click to expand...

That's because ENIC don't see football success as success for them it's about brand building .

To think that Levy was going to reveal to THST any secretive dealings he was having with the other co-conspirators is a bit naive methinks, bit like asking Boris Johnson to tell the truth.

McArchibald said:

I'm sure Levy works very hard and makes long hours. Given his paygrade however, that should be par for the course.
Results are what execs at his level should be judged upon - and in the Football industry that translates into success on the field. In that department, Levy is distinctly unsuccesful...

Click to expand...

This is what us, as fans, judge the football industry on, success of the first eleven.

But in reality Levy isn't just the chairman of the first eleven, he oversees Finance departments, Sales and Marketing departments, HR, Catering, Estates teams, the academy, medical teams, community outreach programs, etc, etc.

Whilst we may be underperforming in the one aspect that's visible to us it's just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to his overall role.

And whilst you're not wrong about on field success I don't think it's fair to judge him solely on this one aspect of his role which is where I tend to disagree with a lot of the anti-Levy sentiment.
Having been involved with low level senior teams most my life I've seen what Chairman have to put into running a club and it's rarely appreciated.

For the trust to be taken seriously they need a balanced approach to his stewardship, not just an aggressive anti-Enic stance.
We've all done jobs where someone comes in and only focusses on what's gone wrong, not what's gone right and we've all felt the urge to tell them to sod off. Levy's no different.