ENIC...

Shadydan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2012
Messages
29,806
The problem I have is that the e mail was sent to all players. By all means the PFA should be protecting the lower league players, but they should also, imo, be encourageing PL players to take a wage defferel to look after the larger majority in football.
That would be totally counter productive to what they stand for, you can't make up a rule for the lower league players and another one for Prem players, that's not how it works. It's not the Prem players fault that clubs are willing to offer them stupid money. It sounds like I'm sticking up for the players here but why should they have to forego what they are contractually obligated to, it's down to the clubs who offer them the stupid clubs in the fist place, they should be accountable, not the players.
 

SirHarryHotspur

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
1,217
you do realize that Danny boy owns approx 9% of the club which is worth around 2 billion pounds.
And the other owner is a tax haven living billionaire.
But sure let's defend baldy because it is "our" club
there was a football club there once, and it felt, briefly and naively like one was reappearing
but let's face reality - we ain't a dortmund for eg:
Dortmund are a model football club with their connection to fans and the community but many UK football fans would hate their transfer policy , never spending more than £28 million in the transfer market on any single player and making a net profit on transfers over the last 10 years, personally I have no problem with that but many Spurs fans for instance think we should be spending something like £60/70 million on players.
 

vegassd

The ghost of Johnny Cash
Joined
Aug 5, 2006
Messages
2,955
The key word is "yet". We were out of all cups and he still has our season ticket and ticket exchange money so limited hit on ticket sales. Have we felt the effect of prize money, tv money, concert cancellations yet? Matchday revenue is the main hit.

This thing is going to hit all teams financially and football will need to change. However, our very existence is not going to depend on the government furlough scheme. If we'd signed Giroud in January it probably wouldn't be far off his salary.

He's taking the money because he can, not because it's needed.
I'm quoting this post but my point is aimed at the collection of your recent posts, and a number of other similar ones in this thread. Please don't take any offense or feel personally attacked - this is more of a general reply.

I think many people forget what Levy's job is all about. He is tasked with protecting the long-term interests of the club. So the idea of taking money that is available which we may not need might seem to be immoral but it's just part of his job. He will not have come to this decision on his own or without thinking things through. It is not a decision made out of some evil greed.

From the outside it may seem crazy - we have massive revenues so why are we making the staff at the bottom of the ladder accept an 80% wage? Well for a start we don't know the outlook for our expenses in terms of debt repayments. We also don't know how heavily our revenues are going to be hit because we don't know the duration of the lockdown or how life will look afterwards. And whilst the stance of players remains as it is (ie. full wages) we are obliged to pay them many millions over the next few months.

So by furloughing the non-playing staff we are able to increase the financial resilience of the club as far as possible. Many of those people are not currently doing any work anyway so why should they receive 100% pay, but more than that we are putting them in a position where they are not a burden on the club so sacking them will not be necessary - for now at least. Their jobs are now as protected as they can possibly be. And we will be levelling out (percentage wise) the guys who work in the shop earning minimum wage with the hundreds of levels of admin people.

I understand the concern about there being many more needy people than our staff but that simply isn't the duty of THFC. The duty of our board is to protect the club and by extension the people who work for the club, and in my opinion that is what this move does. If other clubs want to pay 100% wages that's cool, but they are going to run out of options before we do. And when those options run out it will be the staff who bear the brunt.

Anybody who runs a business will know that if you wait to change or seek help until the very moment you need it then you will find your efforts are too late. By setting ourselves up this way we are keeping as many options on the table for as long as possible. If things blow over quickly then we will have the option to make repayments or whatever... but if things take a long time we will be last to suffer.
 
Last edited:

shelfboy68

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2008
Messages
10,479
but Levy is included though his reduction will be through 20% less from the club, if it was paid via the government it would be over 90% cut
Fucking hell mate I hope with these job cuts that your position on the payroll hasn't been affected, I'm sure the chairman would miss not having you around. :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:
 

joelstinton14

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2011
Messages
982
There is no doubt this has been a PR disaster for us, think it’s imperative that when player wages are reduced the shortfall that day to day staff have lost is made up using that money. The players, Levy and Management really need to come forward with a joint statement on topping up staff wages (i.e taking voluntary cuts)

I do think all premier league clubs will follow in eventually furloughing staff ( I can see football coming back for a long while) but we've really messed up the timing of our announcement. I can see what Levy was trying to do - twist the arm of the PFA but that argument wasn't even in the public conscious and even now outlets such as the BBC (news report at six) aren't reporting on why players aren't taking cuts. He jumped the gun whilst not really thinking about public perception and more important the day to day staff.

Again, I'm sure there are finer details in the finances that none of us understand, but that is kind of the grave modern football as dug it self with money going around like confetti, even if it was never sustainable.
 
Last edited:

Wsussexspur

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Messages
5,705
See Bournemouth have joined us and Newcastle and Norwich

Bournemouth's Eddie Howe has become the first English Premier League manager to take a voluntary salary cut, following the suspension of the competition because of coronavirus fears.

A statement on the club website said the chief executive Neill Blake, first team technical director Richard Hughes and assistant manager Jason Tindall had also all taken "significant, voluntary pay cuts". Other non-playing staff have also been affected.

Tottenham, Newcastle and Norwich had already announced they had furloughed their non-playing staff - although managers appeared to be exempt.

Bournemouth said: "Furloughed employees - all of whose roles have been affected by the closure of Vitality Stadium and the club’s other sites - will be on leave for a minimum of three weeks under the UK government's coronavirus job retention scheme, which is currently set to run until Sunday, 31 May."
 

shelfboy68

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2008
Messages
10,479
There is no doubt this has been a PR disaster for us, think it’s imperative that when player wages are reduced the shortfall that day to day staff have lost is made up using that money. The players, Levy and Management really need to come forward with a joint statement on topping up staff wages (i.e taking voluntary cuts)

I do think all premier league clubs will follow in eventually furloughing staff ( I can see football coming back for a long while) but we've really messed up the timing of our announcement. I can see what Levy was trying to do - twist the arm of the PFA but that argument wasn't even in the public conscious and even now outlets such as the BBC (news report at six) aren't reporting on why players aren't taking cuts. He jumped the gun whilst not really thinking about public perception and more important the day to day staff.

Again, I'm sure there are finer details in the finances that none of us understand, but that is kind of the grave modern football as dug it self with money going around like confetti, even if it was never sustainable.
Doesn't matter what this club gets involved in its always one step forward and three backwards.
 

mpickard2087

Patient Zero
Joined
Jun 13, 2008
Messages
20,995
Levy has now made two or three utterings during this situation, and he clearly is very spooked by it. I don't know if he is just looking at the worst case scenario, but lets be honest there is a chance this wont be resolved in the next few weeks and months and is instead a long term thing we have to bare - there could be multiple flare ups of the virus and a continued disruption of our lives, sport trying to restart and then shutting down again, and would impact all things economically in terms of sponsors, tv money, prize/participation money, fan spending, etc.

Most clubs, 99.9% of them, even at PL level, aren't 'cash rich' and get by until the next tranche of TV/competition money gets released to them. I don't know what the situation is exactly with the contracts but these media companies are taking a hit themselves and this will eventually filter through to the football clubs. Commercial and matchday will also have dried up at this time, whilst outgoings remain at the tens/hundreds of millions of pounds. Most clubs will be shit scared of liquidity-type issues right now, I suspect, even more so if this disruption continues beyond the next few immediate months. In our case, the stadium debt, whilst not a critical concern given it's paid off each year, is another headache and cost burden to deal with in those times, and whilst I don't have expertise in football finances may also prove to be a problem in terms of needing to source additional borrowing.

But even though from a business perspective it makes sense if assistance is there that you take it, the decision in regards to the non-football staff has been a PR disaster and I don't know why they have done it. The cost of these staff must be a tiny percentage out of the annual budget so what is the point really, and any financial saving is not going to be greater than the bad Press it gets. I think it's very poor form.

The main issue though is the players, not just ours but across the PL. They do have to be in the spotlight here, and have to be realistic as those in other leagues have been. It isn't fair for them to have to give up wages, they shouldn't be expected to more than anyone else in any job, and they have lifestyles and commitments no doubt too, but they have to be realistic. The football bubble is threatened, they are the main beneficiaries, if it bursts then they (and us all) will be much much worse off. They are going to have to sacrifice now in order to make sure it stays intact. I don't think they can escape that.
 

DCSPUR

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2005
Messages
3,699
I don't mind Levy, I think he's done a hell of a lot more good for the club than bad, but this doesn't sit right with me and I think this is yet another blow to our public image over the past year. We're becoming dislikable and while I don't give a shit what other fans or the media think, I'm disliking some of the things we're doing as well.
yes - it starts to be a problem when your own fans start to dislike you....
 
Top