ENIC...

JamieSpursCommunityUser

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2011
Messages
654
And I agree. But with all those players we bought. Lo Celso, Ndombele, Clarke, Sessegnon, Bergwijn, Fernandes. They're all young players with resale value. They're all great signings but my point is occasionally investing when the footballing case is greater than the financial one because winning should be the most important thing, it's why we're all here.

People can say this striker doesn't exist etc. etc. But I repeat that Jason Burt and I think many other journalists reported our attempt to try and sign Eran Zahavi from China in the dying minutes. There were also reports everywhere that we wanted Ighalo too.

So Jose clearly deemed those two as good enough for us. Now my point is people are saying there is nobody in world football as good as these two available had we stumped up a decent loan fee to get somebody in temporarily for 6 months? I just don't buy it. It's either incompetency or there's just not a great care for winning.
You've raised some good questions, but I just don't buy there's any evidence that we won't buy when the football case outweighs the financial one.

A few points.

1. Its not proven because those 6 signings happen to fit both the football and investment / sell on value criteria.

We made some good signings of a certain type. It doesn't prove that we wouldn't touch buys of a different type.

2. We bought Fernando Llorente whilst under far greater financial restrictions mid stadium build.

That's a £12m (+ £100k pw) write down on a 32 year old who wasn't intended to start.

We did that after Levy had already written down £13m Soldado and what turned out to be £10m on Jansen.

So we were prepared to do that mid summer when it wasn't evidently crucial to CL football and revenue, but wouldn't speculate when it obviously could be pivotal?

3. Finally, loan strikers. You've argued earlier that we could have a better loan striker by throwing a bigger loan fee around. Neither of us can prove a hypothetical either way.

But I'd argue a £6m per season write down on Llorente suggests it more likely we will invest when no young "investment option" is available to solve a football-ing need.

So lets take Ighalo as the quality bench mark of what loan strikers were available to PL clubs.

Functional, probably bench options to throw on. Do any of us, JM included, think Ighalo is such a difference maker that we should try and outbid United's deep pockets? Probably not.

So what does the permanent version of Ighalo look like financially, or even slightly better. We're back to Piatek, Jose, or similar levels across Europe who we may have enquired but never heard about.

Add on the "Spurs are desperate for a striker" tax. It's still going to be a £40-50m 4+ year commitment in Fee + Wages.

Does Mourinho want to spend his first summer window moving on the next Janssen. Definitely not, so my read is that in agreement with the board (as per his comments) he passed and took the football hit in order to have a better less risky summer window.

I get why there's suspicion over Levy, some of it is well earned, but I genuinely believe in this case it's just an unfortunate series of events stemming from changing manager and the different value they both place on having multiple game ready no.9s.

The board couldn't have over ruled Poch, who wasn't necessarily wrong to rely on Son /Parrott for his style of football.

If it happens in the summer though, we riot ;)
 
Last edited:

Lo Amo Speroni

Only been in match thread once.
Joined
Aug 9, 2010
Messages
1,697
You're raised some good questions, but I just don't buy there's any evidence that we won't buy when the football case outweighs the financial one.

A few points.

1. Its not proven because those 6 signings happen to fit both the football and investment / sell on value criteria.

We made some good signings of a certain type. It doesn't prove that we wouldn't touch buys of a different type.

2. We bought Fernando Llorente whilst under far greater financial restrictions mid stadium build.

That's a £12m (+ £100k pw) cost on a write down on a 32 year old who wasn't intended to start.

We did that after Levy had already written down £13m Soldado and what turned out to be £10m on Jansen.

So we were prepared to do that mid summer when it wasn't evidently crucial to CL football and revenue, but wouldn't speculate when it obviously could be pivotal?

3. Finally, loan strikers. You've argued earlier that we could have a better loan striker by throwing a bigger loan fee around. Neither of us can prove a hypothetical either way.

But I'd argue a £6m per season write down on Llorente suggests it more likely we will invest when no young "investment option" is available to solve a football-ing need.

So lets take Ighalo as the quality bench mark of what loan strikers were available to PL clubs.

Functional, probably bench options to throw on. Do any of us, JM included, think Ighalo is such a difference maker that we should try and outbid United's deep pockets? Probably not.

So what does the permanent version of Ighalo look like financially, or even slightly better. We're back to Piatek, Jose, or similar levels across Europe who we may have enquired but never heard about.

Add on the "Spurs are desperate for a striker" tax. It's still going to be a £40-50m 4+ year commitment in Fee + Wages.

Does Mourinho want to spend his first summer window moving on the next Janssen. Definitely not, so my read is that in agreement with the board (as per his comments) he passed and took the football hit in order to have a better less risky summer window.

I get why there's suspicion over Levy, some of it is well earned, but I genuinely believe in this case it's just an unfortunate series of events stemming from changing manager and the value the pace on having multiple game ready no.9s.

The board couldn't have over rule Poch, who wasn't necessarily wrong to rely on Son /Parrott for his style of football.

If it happens in the summer though, we riot ;)
Good post young man.
 

coys200

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
8,367
Ranked No 1 in a new study of all clubs across Europe in terms of tangible assets at over £1bn.Levy has pretty much reached his exit plan.
 

DogsOfWar

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2005
Messages
1,777
Ranked No 1 in a new study of all clubs across Europe in terms of tangible assets at over £1bn.Levy has pretty much reached his exit plan.
I think there is still huge potential to grow the club further before he calls it a day.
The re-development of the local area and expanding the non-footballing side of the business will keep him busy for another 2 or 3 years.
He'll want to make us the biggest (richest) club in the world before he finishes.
Whilst this may sound laughable if you put Wembley level turnovers on top of our current earnings we will be.
 

slartibartfast

Grunge baby forever
Joined
Oct 21, 2012
Messages
9,914
Ranked No 1 in a new study of all clubs across Europe in terms of tangible assets at over £1bn.Levy has pretty much reached his exit plan.
Not being funny but do you actually know what ENIC and Levys plans are? Did he tell you lol.
 

jeremystorey

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2011
Messages
1,812
Levy may have plans, and may have persuaded uncle Joe to stick with them. But sometimes offers come along that you can't refuse. And if Joe gets an offer that is simply too huge to turn away from, Levy doesn't have the clout to stop the sale.

But my guess is that it would take a mammoth amount of money for that to happen. As in, between to 2 to 3BN, at least.
 

Cornpattbuck

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2013
Messages
4,834
Ranked No 1 in a new study of all clubs across Europe in terms of tangible assets at over £1bn.Levy has pretty much reached his exit plan.
Yeah, he's going to push the button any second now. Which study by the way? Ta.
 

hellava_tough

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2005
Messages
7,031
I think there is still huge potential to grow the club further before he calls it a day.
The re-development of the local area and expanding the non-footballing side of the business will keep him busy for another 2 or 3 years.
He'll want to make us the biggest (richest) club in the world before he finishes.
Whilst this may sound laughable if you put Wembley level turnovers on top of our current earnings we will be.
Yeah there's still plenty of room for financial grow.

The DML has us 8th in the world for revenue, on £521m p/a using last season's figures.

The top club in the world is Real Madrid on £840m p/a

The fact we got to the Champions League final helped our revenue massively, which is something we probably won't be doing this year (who knows?).

However, on a more positive note, we don't have to pay for Wembley this season, instead having our new stadium cash cow online. Plus we still have to sort naming rights for it.

It's a bit of a stretch to catch Real anytime soon, especially if we're not winning leagues or Champions Leagues, but there's definitely room for a further £100m p/a growth in the short term.

 

coys200

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
8,367
Yeah, he's going to push the button any second now. Which study by the way? Ta.
Soccerex. Who also ranked us 4th overall in terms of “ powerful “ 🤷🏻‍♂️ Which seems a bit unlikely but if you only use certain criteria is plausible. Although tangible assets is fact not based on some weird Formulae. As it would be considering we’ve just built most expensive stadium in Europe.
 

davidmatzdorf

Front Page Gadfly
Joined
Jun 7, 2004
Messages
14,102
Soccerex. Who also ranked us 4th overall in terms of “ powerful “ 🤷🏻‍♂️ Which seems a bit unlikely but if you only use certain criteria is plausible. Although tangible assets is fact not based on some weird Formulae. As it would be considering we’ve just built most expensive stadium in Europe.
The tangible asset value of the stadium development isn't directly related to its cost. You could spend £500,000 building a house in a neighbourhood where a house is worth £300,000 and it would still be worth only £300,000 when you sell it.

It is heavily related to the stadium's location in London, that being the centre of a large a catchment area for audiences for events, as well as having further asset value and potential growth in the undeveloped housing-and-hotel land. I imagine there's also a value in the income from the multiple food and drink outlets, Spurs shop and other retail on site.
 

mickdale

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2016
Messages
995
Match day beer and food sales will be through the roof.
Extra Staff bills will be too.
 

coys200

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 22, 2017
Messages
8,367
The tangible asset value of the stadium development isn't directly related to its cost. You could spend £500,000 building a house in a neighbourhood where a house is worth £300,000 and it would still be worth only £300,000 when you sell it.

It is heavily related to the stadium's location in London, that being the centre of a large a catchment area for audiences for events, as well as having further asset value and potential growth in the undeveloped housing-and-hotel land. I imagine there's also a value in the income from the multiple food and drink outlets, Spurs shop and other retail on site.
I’d disagree tbh. Because they haven’t just built a stadium they’ve built an independent business and a cash cow. Most stadium are worthless without the football club or just worth the price of the land. Ours is a totally different story and although I hate to say it an asset that could be sold in its own right a business much like Wembley can be. And to this end makes it totally unique in European football. The stadium itself already has contracts with multiple sources independent of the football club. NFL music rugby and boxing about to happen.
 

davidmatzdorf

Front Page Gadfly
Joined
Jun 7, 2004
Messages
14,102
I’d disagree tbh. Because they haven’t just built a stadium they’ve built an independent business and a cash cow. Most stadium are worthless without the football club or just worth the price of the land. Ours is a totally different story and although I hate to say it an asset that could be sold in its own right a business much like Wembley can be. And to this end makes it totally unique in European football. The stadium itself already has contracts with multiple sources independent of the football club. NFL music rugby and boxing about to happen.
I can't see what you are disagreeing with, nor anything that constitutes a disagreement!

This is an undisputed fact of capitalism: the value of an asset does not depend on its cost, it depends on how much the market will pay for it. Therefore, the equally undisputed fact that our stadium was expensive to build has no effect on its asset value.

The rest of your post restates the same kind of things I was referring to about the value of events, retail businesses and the housing/hotel development: "an independent business and cash cow", if you prefer.

So what are you disagreeing with?
 

Wsussexspur

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Messages
5,571
wish Levy and Enic would just fuck off out of our club! Now they have the cash cow of the stadium they clearly aren’t interested in the actual football team who play there! More interested in filling there pockets from all the extra events they can hold at the ground. Lol at all us mugs who thought that this amazing new ground would take us to the next level! Just used fill Levys/ENIC and fellow directors pockets.
 

Shadydan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2012
Messages
29,242
wish Levy and Enic would just fuck off out of our club! Now they have the ca#h cow of the stadium they clearly aren’t interested in the actual football team who play there! More interested in filling there pockets from all the extra events they can hold at the ground
grow up ffs
 

Wsussexspur

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2007
Messages
5,571
grow up ffs
what you are happy with how he is running this football club?? Highest paid director in football while
completely under investing in the team and leaving us with the shit we have to put up with watching week in week out whilst being charged highest ticket prices in football.
 

Shadydan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2012
Messages
29,242
what you are happy with how he is running this football club?? Highest paid director in football we
l completely under investing in the team and leaving us with the shit we have to put up with watching week in week out whilst being charged highest ticket prices in football
The moment we go in transition and lose a few matches you throw your toys out the pram.

You're only resorting to the 'Levy out' mantra because you're emotional and frustrated, getting rid of the chairman isn't the answer right now, patience is.
 
Top