ENIC...

Dinghy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2005
Messages
6,106
Look at the comments under every social media post put up by THFC.

This could be a permanent change in the image of our club. And you know what totally deserved.

Our offshore-"tax efficient"-investment opportunities-owners haven't got a clue about civic responsibility in a crisis. They are a disgrace.
Obviously shit at being 'tax efficient' as THFC has paid more tax in the last 2 years than the rest of the PL clubs combined.
 

Bobbins

SC's 14th Sexiest Male 2008
Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
19,447
It's ultimately all just a massive drama over not much at all isn't it? I'm not seeing any justification for the ridiculous vilification of Levy and the club anywhere - the best people can offer is "morally we should be different from every other business" - but absolutely no-one can say why exactly that should be.

However, it's football - the world of perpetual false-drama and ridiculous narrative. The fact that BBC news led with this story a couple of days ago shows how hysterically this country and others react to anything to do with football. If it's not hyperbole about how important the results are, it's super-villain owners and evil corporate monsters - all because clubs are doing the same thing every other business in the same position is doing.

And we're getting people saying they won't pay the club any money anymore, that our image will "be tarnished forever" etc. Yes you will. No it won't (outside the Twitter bantersphere).

The pointless over the top invented artificial drama of football which, as always, is completely ambivalent to the facts, the truth or any sense of objectivity. That's all this is.
 

MK Yid

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
1,023
It's ultimately all just a massive drama over not much at all isn't it? I'm not seeing any justification for the ridiculous vilification of Levy and the club anywhere - the best people can offer is "morally we should be different from every other business" - but absolutely no-one can say why exactly that should be.

However, it's football - the world of perpetual false-drama and ridiculous narrative. The fact that BBC news led with this story a couple of days ago shows how hysterically this country and others react to anything to do with football. If it's not hyperbole about how important the results are, it's super-villain owners and evil corporate monsters - all because clubs are doing the same thing every other business in the same position is doing.

And we're getting people saying they won't pay the club any money anymore, that our image will "be tarnished forever" etc. Yes you will. No it won't (outside the Twitter bantersphere).

The pointless over the top invented artificial drama of football which, as always, is completely ambivalent to the facts, the truth or any sense of objectivity. That's all this is.
If you haven't seen anything apart from "morally we should be different from every other business" then with respect you have not been reading or comprehending.
 

Bobbins

SC's 14th Sexiest Male 2008
Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
19,447
If you haven't seen anything apart from "morally we should be different from every other business" then with respect you have not been reading or comprehending.
Tell me. Tell me why Spurs should act differently to every other business in the same position.

And remember that we've already long ago established that there is not some imaginary vast pit of cash lurking about, and that clubs cannot make arbitrary decisions around the payment of players.

If the argument hasn't been a moral one (it absolutely has been), then what is it?
 

MK Yid

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
1,023
Tell me. Tell me why Spurs should act differently to every other business in the same position.

And remember that we've already long ago established that there is not some imaginary vast pit of cash lurking about, and that clubs cannot make arbitrary decisions around the payment of players.

If the argument hasn't been a moral one (it absolutely has been), then what is it?

Well Spurs have acted differently to every other business in the same position (i.e. every other football club), so will turn this around and ask why are Spurs acting differently to every other club in our business to you ?


Also Spurs are acting differently to many other companies who are making up the delta for furloughed staff (especially those on low wages)
And what other business basically says we have no operation, so are furloughing all the operations staff, but continue to employ and pay numerous mullti-millionaires either in full or at 80% (for the non-players) of their salary, when there is no operation ?
 

chrissivad

Staff
Staff
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
42,135
Well Spurs have acted differently to every other business in the same position (i.e. every other football club), so will turn this around and as why are Spurs acting differently to every other club in our business to you ?


Also Spurs are acting differently to many other companies who are making up the delta for furloughed staff (especially those on low wages)
And what other business basically says we have no operation, so are furloughing you all, but continue to employ and pay numeous mujlti-millionaires either in full or at 80% of their salary ?
I don't think we were even the first PL club to cut wages.
Newcastle and another team did the same before us, didn't they?
 

MK Yid

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
1,023
I don't think we were even the first PL club to cut wages.
Newcastle and another team did the same before us, didn't they?
Yes, but they are making up the 20% delta, so their staff they have furloughed are still paid in full, as have Bournemouth.
No other club has yet, Norwich likely to be next, and I assume they will do the right thing and cover the wages (and reclaim 80% back)
 
Last edited:

Led's Zeppelin

Can't Re Member
Joined
May 28, 2013
Messages
5,945
Well Spurs have acted differently to every other business in the same position (i.e. every other football club), so will turn this around and ask why are Spurs acting differently to every other club in our business to you ?


Also Spurs are acting differently to many other companies who are making up the delta for furloughed staff (especially those on low wages)
And what other business basically says we have no operation, so are furloughing all the operations staff, but continue to employ and pay numerous mullti-millionaires either in full or at 80% (for the non-players) of their salary, when there is no operation ?
Do you know that they're not?
 

chrissivad

Staff
Staff
Joined
May 20, 2005
Messages
42,135
Yes, but they are making up the 20% delta, so their staff they have furloughed are still paid in full, as have Bournemouth.
I doubt Newcastle will be paying the extra 20%
I think it's Watford (could be wrong) are.
Other clubs (arsenal at least) are still keeping an eye on what's going on.
 

Led's Zeppelin

Can't Re Member
Joined
May 28, 2013
Messages
5,945
OK, balls on the line, here's my theory, and you'll know within hours whether it holds water:

Levy wants to put pressure on players to take a pay cut a la the Barcelona example, but knows they'll need to believe it's for the benefit of the lower paid members of the staff and not for the top-paid execs or shareholders.

So if the club announced that they'd pay 100% of all salaries, there'd be greatly reduced incentive for the players to do anything.

That doesn't mean the club will allow lower paid employees to go short, but it does mean that making an announcement to that effect would undermine his own strategy.
 

Bobbins

SC's 14th Sexiest Male 2008
Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
19,447
Well Spurs have acted differently to every other business in the same position (i.e. every other football club), so will turn this around and ask why are Spurs acting differently to every other club in our business to you ?


Also Spurs are acting differently to many other companies who are making up the delta for furloughed staff (especially those on low wages)
And what other business basically says we have no operation, so are furloughing all the operations staff, but continue to employ and pay numerous mullti-millionaires either in full or at 80% (for the non-players) of their salary, when there is no operation ?
Turning this around isn't how this works. You're the one who said I'd missed all the many other arguments as to why Spurs shouldn't be doing what they're doing aside from the morality argument - the burden of proof to supply that evidence is on you, I'm afraid.

Whataboutery and strawmanning isn't an answer to that question. You've not given me any reason why Spurs shouldn't be doing what they're doing.
 

MK Yid

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
1,023
OK, balls on the line, here's my theory, and you'll know within hours whether it holds water:

Levy wants to put pressure on players to take a pay cut a la the Barcelona example, but knows they'll need to believe it's for the benefit of the lower paid members of the staff and not for the top-paid execs or shareholders.

So if the club announced that they'd pay 100% of all salaries, there'd be greatly reduced incentive for the players to do anything.

That doesn't mean the club will allow lower paid employees to go short, but it does mean that making an announcement to that effect would undermine his own strategy.
Gave you creative mark it deserved.

Levy is interested in bottom line, and bottom line only, ENIC is an investment company.
It is our whole modus-operandi, every other club spends to their income to try to be as successful as they can within their financial limitations on the pitch, we spend just enough to get top prize money, and make the largest profits and re-invest the cash those profits in non-playing operations.

He is doing the right thing, in trying to reduce the overheads, with our revenue in freefall, and the value of his investment reducing, but he should not be declaring we have no operation and reducing by 20% the wages of the most vulnerable, without first having sorted out the situation of the highest earners, and without having taken significantly more than 20% reduction himself.

I agree with you he is putting pressure on players, but that is not from a moral standpoint (he has already shown his lack of them with what he has done), it is from a business bottom line basis.
 
Last edited:

MK Yid

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
1,023
Turning this around isn't how this works. You're the one who said I'd missed all the many other arguments as to why Spurs shouldn't be doing what they're doing aside from the morality argument - the burden of proof to supply that evidence is on you, I'm afraid.

Whataboutery and strawmanning isn't an answer to that question. You've not given me any reason why Spurs shouldn't be doing what they're doing.

Hold on so the fact that the 19 other clubs have not done what Spurs have done and reduced the wages is not proof then ?

Do you want me to research and see what 10 million businesses across the country have done, is that the only proof you will accept ?
All I am aware of are a few cases, like my daughter, in hospitality industry, furloughed, on full salary, and what is happening in the industry we are discussing, where nobody apart from Spurs employees are taking a forced wage reduction. Some such as Bournemouth's management and coaching staff are taking voluntary reductions, but all their furloughed employees are on full pay.

I will ask again (the question you decided not to answer) Why are Spurs acting differently to every other club in our business ?
 
Last edited:

LeSoupeKitchen

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2011
Messages
2,206
Tell me. Tell me why Spurs should act differently to every other business in the same position.

And remember that we've already long ago established that there is not some imaginary vast pit of cash lurking about, and that clubs cannot make arbitrary decisions around the payment of players.

If the argument hasn't been a moral one (it absolutely has been), then what is it?
The argument really is whether £1M a month is a meaningful amount to Tottenham. If people are adamant that it is then I respect their opinion that Levy is doing the right thing.

To me this amount of money is such a small proportion of total outlay it seems unbelievable it is the difference between life and death of the club. For other big businesses who employ thousands of people then being able to furlough does make a huge difference to their total outlay.

It's not just football. If a highly successful city law firm that had massively increased in value over the last few years (albeit technically in debt having recently moved to plush new offices) were to get the government to pay for all admin staff, cleaners, security etc (and give them a pay decrease) while continuing to pay all the lawyers their full obscene salaries then I would be equally appalled.
 

Bobbins

SC's 14th Sexiest Male 2008
Joined
May 5, 2005
Messages
19,447
Hold on so the fact that the 19 other clubs have not done what Spurs have done and reduced the wages is not proof then ?

Do you want me to research and see what 10 million businesses across the country have done, is that the only proof you will accept ?
All I am aware of are a few cases, like my daughter, in hospitality industry, furloughed, on full salary, and what is happening in the industry we are discussing, where nobody apart from Spurs employees are taking a forced wage reduction. Some such as Bournemouth's management and coaching staff are taking voluntary reductions, but all their furloughed employees are on full pay.

I will ask again (the question you decided not to answer) Why are Spurs acting differently to every other club in our business ?
So that's it? The many examples and different arguments I supposedly missed in this thread all boiled down to "not everyone has done it (yet)"?

That's... not an argument for why Spurs should not have done what they've done. I could equally claim that Spurs are fully justified in doing what they've done because tens of thousands of businesses have done exactly the same thing. But that's not an argument either, it's another strawman.

You still aren't able to give me a reason, apart from a moral argument, as to why Spurs shouldn't be doing what they're doing.

I'll answer your question, no problem - I didn't answer it originally because as I said, the challenge was from you, therefore the burden of proof lies on you. But here you go:

Q: Why are Spurs acting differently to every other club in our business?
A1: They're not.
A2: Levy feels this is the right thing to do for the club.
A3: Spurs have over £600m in stadium debt to pay off.
A4: Levy is more astute than other PL chairmen and you'll see plenty of other clubs do exactly the same thing if the players don't collectively agree to a wage deferment.
A5: Why should they do what everyone else does? Hold on, here comes that moral argument again...
 

Drink!Drink!

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
890
Yet their work in the community and with the NHS is being overlooked by you and many others.

#blinkered
Even wetherspoons do corporate social responsibility projects

Corporates and bankers are beyond criticism as long as they sponsor a few community projects?

Mind you we are FC Wetherspoons these days
 

Vinny_Sammways_left_peg

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2014
Messages
8,285
Even wetherspoons do corporate social responsibility projects

Corporates and bankers are beyond criticism as long as they sponsor a few community projects?

Mind you we are FC Wetherspoons these days
So do we, I thought we were talking about the current? Any chance you could stop moving the goalposts around to suit your argument?

Didn't see you praising our work in the community in and around Tottenham with the food bank, the opening up of the stadium and the links to the NHS that were reported end of last week beginning of this?

No?

Surprise surprise.
 
Top