What's new

ENIC...

Status
Not open for further replies.

dontcallme

SC Supporter
Mar 18, 2005
33,988
81,933
I am mostly in favour of ENIC. I believe they have tried to grow the club on and off the pitch within our means.

When they took over our turnover was vastly behind our rivals. It's easy as fans to call the board cheap but if we don't have as much money as our competitors then we can't outspend or match them. This wasn't helped by the emergence of the billionaire chairman using the club's as a means to improve their living situations. Without Abramovich it is very possible we could have been a CL team years ago.

So growing the club off the pitch was vital to us competing and ENIC have done this well.

ENIC/Levy have struggled on the playing side. It took Levy a season with a caretaker manager to put his hopes into Arnesen to run the football side. Since his departure the transfer and management side has been all over the place.

We have the stadium now and in the first 2 windows have spent money. But we need a proper transfer setup. We need to be buying young players again. If between Levy and Jose they cannot get a good setup in place then Levy has probably taken us as far as he can.
 

ToDarrenIsToDo

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2017
1,665
6,291
we were continually told the new stadium wouldn’t effect transfers!

yes he has spent money in jan but Completely failed to address the weakness in the squad with the money spent

Old WHL matchday revenue = £40m

New stadium matchday revenue = £100m estimates

25 year loan repayment of £25m per season

£100m - £25m = £75m matchday revenue towards bottom line

£75m-£40m the old WHL used to make = £35m extra. No dent in the transfers, in fact as you can see it'll actually get us more money if estimates are hit, with a further £25m kicking in in 25 years time.
 

inclineyid

Well-Known Member
Dec 5, 2006
613
1,348
Old WHL matchday revenue = £40m

New stadium matchday revenue = £100m estimates

25 year loan repayment of £25m per season

£100m - £25m = £75m matchday revenue towards bottom line

£75m-£40m the old WHL used to make = £35m extra. No dent in the transfers, in fact as you can see it'll actually get us more money if estimates are hit, with a further £25m kicking in in 25 years time.

You're forgetting the approx £17m per year interest over the next 30 years that is on top of the approx £20m per year repayments, but yes the stadium was built as it increases our cash flow
 

ToDarrenIsToDo

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2017
1,665
6,291
Great stadium / Great training ground / great at making money / Pity about the team otherwise everything is great .
I said it before sometimes you have to try to that extra inch . We apparently owe 6oo million well in the way the payback is set up why not add 100 million on to that and we could be sitting here with Grealish / Dybala / Fernandes / I am not saying that the 100 mill would pay for these three players but added to what we had offered we could have pushed all three over the line .
I am saying a one off time go that bit extra . Because from their own mouths they thought they were on their way to us but the deals fell thru and all for a few mill here a few mill there peanuts in todays football finances .
That is not to say gamble every transfer window as we would be in financial trouble I am saying in the position we were in a one off "go the extra inch " and we would be in a lot healthier place than we are now .
Oh I forgot and a striker to play alongside our only striker or in his place if god forbid your only striker gets injured .
Levy does not need to be replaced he needs to have a rethink because Jose needs help and this failure to take a chance could cost him big time regards to gate receipts because football history tells us all there will be a big fall off in attendances it may even occur this season .

We owe £600m, we secured a 25 year loan repayment for that loan only last year. The loan repayments were due in 2-4 years prior to that agreement being met.

Do you think there's a possibility the only reason we got such a long time period to pay it back was based on cash and our credit levels? Banks will want security for such large sums, its natural so when you say just another £100m, have you thought that maybe we need to demonstrate x amount of banked money/ profit each season to keep our interest rates low? I mean it happens when anyone else gets a loan or credit card that you only get good deals if you have good ratings. Maybe our hands are tied to ensure we keep such a generous and easily manageable deal with the banks at a relatively low cost compared to the £600m outstanding.
 

ToDarrenIsToDo

Well-Known Member
Aug 22, 2017
1,665
6,291
You're forgetting the approx £17m per year interest over the next 30 years that is on top of the approx £20m per year repayments, but yes the stadium was built as it increases our cash flow

I don't know the ins and outs of all the financials but as you said even with the £17m in interest that still leaves us with c£18m extra than if we had stayed at WHL just months into moving in. Seems a smart and financially advantageous decision transfers wise to me.
 

Shadydan

Well-Known Member
Jul 7, 2012
38,247
104,143
I honestly think if somebody completely neutral was marking the top 6 owners out of 10 over the last decade.it would be something like this taking the whole picture into consideration:

Liverpool - 9 only reason it’s not a 10 is I think they missed a trick on the stadium which I think they will regret in 10-15 years. Had a real opportunity to compete with Madrid and Barcelona and build a 75k stadium.

City-10 leaving aside current issues they couldn’t have done much more.

Chelsea - 8 too quick to fire managers and should have sorted stadium. But plenty of silverware.

United- 3 personally I think it’s a house of cards that’s gonna financially come crashing down. Been a shambles since fergie.

Arsenal - 3 Held on too wenger to long. Lost star players failed to reinvest in the squad adequately. Been a slow decline.

Spurs - 7.5 Off the pitch it’s a 10. On the pitch they stumbled around and found Pochettino. Probably didn’t invest at right moments. However as a whole from 10 years the club is transformed.

So all in all are ENIC perfect no, but it could be way worse.

I'd love to know what other fans think of evil ENIC and the bald midget.
 

Graysonti

Well-Known Member
May 8, 2011
3,904
5,823
What am I justifying, that books have to balanced and spending on the level we have done needs to be paid for? When you an adult you realise these things, ENIC is an INVESTMENT company they aren't a bank roller.

There was no deadline day specials last summer, broke our transfer record twice if I am correct?

Defending the indefensible? ENIC have taken us from a level of shit and elevated us to a club that is starting to compete with the big teams in Europe, what is indefensible in that? Levy and ENIC have made plenty of mistakes but if you really cant see where they have brought us from as a club, that could very well went like Villa, your either a troll or fucking stupid. We have 3-4 other clubs which are either massively bank rolled to the point they are breaking FFP rules, have much more recent league/cup success or are a financial behemoth.

My ambition is realistic, its not made in airy fairy land.

Now if you want to be a bankrolled club that's a totally different question, its not the same question as have ENIC been overall good or bad for us.

Agree all this - that bloke is not an adult mind.

Also, ENIC are not an investment company (not nowadays mind) - they purely exist to own Spurs now.
 

nailsy

SC Supporter
Jul 24, 2005
30,536
46,628
Nowadays, my main hope on the ITK front is that we get news relating to ENIC selling up to owners who want to see us achieve success on the pitch. Just plain bored of ENIC, Levy, Lewis etc and the way they operated.....their main priority has never been mounting challenges for silverware and after nearly 20 years of them, it is sucking the life out of a lot of the fanbase.

I think they were interested in challenging for silverware, but they weren't interested in doing in it just in the short term. When they came in they took a look at where we were as a football club and decided that we couldn't compete with the big clubs as we didn't have the financial muscle to pay the wages that teams like Chelsea, Manchester United, Liverpool and Arsenal were able to pay. We might have been able to pay a big transfer fee or two to get the odd star, who might help us win something, but we were never going to be able to pay them enough to keep them here and build a team that could challenge for silverware every season. I suspect there was also a fear that we'd end up as another club destined for the championship like Sheffield Wednesday, Forrest or West Ham if we didn't change. The only way to bridge that gap was to build the stadium which should give us the financial power to compete with most of the biggest clubs in Europe. We're just getting to that point now. We couldn't spend loads of money on transfers while the stadium was being planned and built and I know that was extremely frustrating, but I'm going to judge them on what we do now that we're in the stadium. We've already broken our transfer record twice since we moved into the stadium and that was with us only being there for a couple of months at the end of the season, although the Champions League run probably added to the money available. I'm not expecting us to buy world class players in every position next summer, but I do expect us to solve the problem positions and improve the squad with quality additions who can come straight into the first team. If that doesn't happen I think a lot of people will start asking big questions about the ambition of the owners.
 

dudu

Well-Known Member
Jan 28, 2011
5,314
11,048
Daniel Levy. has done no wrong.

No, no......He can be criticised for this or that.

No, He's done nothing wrong I tell you.

He's a chicken fingering munchkin

He's not, he's the noblest of the noble. His intentions are so pure that he makes Sir Lancelot look like a pickpocket

His intentions are to fill his wheelbarrow

Oi! Don't talk about my dad like that

*Thread goes quiet for a few days or weeks*

*We lose while playing terribly*

*Start at the beginning again.

You missed one step
 

spursfan77

Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2005
46,680
104,957
it’s been reported on the Deloitte report

common knowledge - 8th biggest in the world.

Ok, so it’s old news then. Just a rehash to get the anyone but enic brigade’s knickers in a twist!

Becoming a richer club is a good thing as it means more investment in the team, which we are now starting to see. People don’t like success though do they?
 

buckley

Well-Known Member
Sep 15, 2012
2,595
6,073
After talking today with my son about Levy he made me realise that he really has been a great chairmen who has made mistakes but always with the right intentions . And that my gripes about Levy are really just a reflection of my feelings that the team is poor the football is awful at this moment in time and Levy is my whipping boy . On reflection he is probably right and I have been taking a childish view in regards Levy .I hope his vision for spurs comes to fruition because if it does the future is looking good even tho right now I feel very disheartened in the way we are playing . Also it would not surprise me if they have no intentions of selling but maybe a family dynasty is more in their mind .
So on balance ENIC have been brilliant for us but we are now going thru a bad patch that won't last forever.
By the way my son said to me " don't be such a cry baby " it was very chastening .
 

coys200

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2017
8,436
17,403
One thing in the Deloitte figures was our commercial growth. Which over 10 years is not far behind city without cheating. If City really do get done by FFP we will be the 3rd revenue richest club in the country and only gonna get stronger when stadium fully kicks in. If FFP really takes a grip we will arguably be best placed of any club to compete in future years.
 

yido_number1

He'll always be magic
Jun 8, 2004
8,646
16,809
I honestly think if somebody completely neutral was marking the top 6 owners out of 10 over the last decade.it would be something like this taking the whole picture into consideration:

Liverpool - 9 only reason it’s not a 10 is I think they missed a trick on the stadium which I think they will regret in 10-15 years. Had a real opportunity to compete with Madrid and Barcelona and build a 75k stadium.

City-10 leaving aside current issues they couldn’t have done much more.

Chelsea - 8 too quick to fire managers and should have sorted stadium. But plenty of silverware.

United- 3 personally I think it’s a house of cards that’s gonna financially come crashing down. Been a shambles since fergie.

Arsenal - 3 Held on too wenger to long. Lost star players failed to reinvest in the squad adequately. Been a slow decline.

Spurs - 7.5 Off the pitch it’s a 10. On the pitch they stumbled around and found Pochettino. Probably didn’t invest at right moments. However as a whole from 10 years the club is transformed.

So all in all are ENIC perfect no, but it could be way worse.
Clearly the Glazers are hated by UTD fans because of the debt but they've actually still won 19 trophies since they took over fully in 2005.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top