Financial Results, shareholder and stadium update (from Official Site)

[jambreck]

Project 'new stadium' wasn't thought of in October 2008 though was it? Prior to 2008 we had an extended run of European competition and a very near miss on Champions League football under Jol. We'd also just poached the hottest managerial prospect in Europe at the time. Doing a Harry Redknapp and making out we were Derby County in October 2008 and we suddenly became a good side is rubbish. We were in a false position and in the season you're talking about actually finished 8th.

You have a point. But it seems that you're not prepared to apply that point consistently.

The blip under Ramos rightly wouldn't have influenced the decision as to whether or not to proceed with the stadium project.

But the same is true of this disappointing season.

We need the new stadium. A few poor results and performances under an interim manager isn't going to change that.

 

[jambreck]

Would be good if any SC financial whizz-ers could explain, in layman terms, the major points out of the news.

Things I see are;
No mention of the increased TV money?
Loan from Enic is being written off (I think)
Enic, not Spurs, have bought a load of property/land in prep for stadium

Oh and the stadium could be up in 3 years!!!

1. TV money increase won't figure until next year's accounts. These accounts are for the 2012-13 season, before the new TV deal kicked in.

2. Loan from ENIC will be converted into equity. So there will be nothing for Spurs to repay.

3. As far as I understand it from the statement, ENIC (via its subsidiary, TH Property Ltd) bought (from Spurs) the land where the Sainsbury's / technical college now stands and some properties that the club owned to the west of the High Road. ENIC subsequently financed the building of the Sainsbury's / technical college.

As a consequence of all of the property deals and the £40m loan, the club's debt (which had been around £80m at the last count, iirc) has been reduced almost to zero.

 

[jambreck]

Would fans be happy with finishing 6th - 10th for 5 seasons if it meant building a new stadium because I cannot see how we can afford the investment in players needed to push on to be Top 4 regulars and build the new stadium.

I can see a number of frustrating seasons ahead

And to Levy - investing in the squad, developing the squad and strenghtening in key positions looks nice on paper but the reality is you sell our most influencial players so its always 1 step forward and 2 back. Fed up with his empty promises.

The whole point of the loan and property deals is so that the club's normal operations will not be adversely affected by building the stadium. Hence, from the statement:

"Our focus therefore is to continue to invest in and develop the squad".

 

[beats1]

Would fans be happy with finishing 6th - 10th for 5 seasons if it meant building a new stadium because I cannot see how we can afford the investment in players needed to push on to be Top 4 regulars and build the new stadium.

I can see a number of frustrating seasons ahead

And to Levy - investing in the squad, developing the squad and strenghtening in key positions looks nice on paper but the reality is you sell our most influencial players so its always 1 step forward and 2 back. Fed up with his empty promises.

Mate funding has been secured for the stadium, it won't affect the running of our club. A couple of guys have said this now. Also the value of the club after the stadium build will be alot higher. If anything we are set to make profits for the next 5 years or so

 

[jambreck]

Yeah, its important people realise that this loan is being converted to equity and is not the same as ENIC/Joe Lewis providing a £40m net investment in the playing squad.

I'm not making a judgement on one way or another but it doesn't prove ENIC are any less or more serious about investing in the football team.

Eh?

Any which way you look at it, this is a £40m investment in THFC. This is money that the club would otherwise not have. It isn't an Abramovich or Mansour sized investment, maybe, but it is a huge boost for the club nevertheless.

One thing this statement highights is just how difficult it is for a London club to get a new stadium project up and running. It's so much easier in other parts of the country with less built up areas and problems with CPO's etc. Frustratingly, the gooners really came up trumps in this regard and at the right time as well. Wankers.

Arsenal experienced very similar kinds of frustrating delays. In all, it took them some 9 years after first embarking on a new stadium project before they began construction on the Emirates.

 

[dricha1]

1. TV money increase won't figure until next year's accounts. These accounts are for the 2012-13 season, before the new TV deal kicked in.

2. Loan from ENIC will be converted into equity. So there will be nothing for Spurs to repay.

3. As far as I understand it from the statement, ENIC (via its subsidiary, TH Property Ltd) bought (from Spurs) the land where the Sainsbury's / technical college now stands and some properties that the club owned to the west of the High Road. ENIC subsequently financed the building of the Sainsbury's / technical college.

As a consequence of all of the property deals and the £40m loan, the club's debt (which had been around £80m at the last count, iirc) has been reduced almost to zero.

Cheers for the explanation.

 

[dagraham]

Mate funding has been secured for the stadium, it won't affect the running of our club. A couple of guys have said this now. Also the value of the club after the stadium build will be alot higher. If anything we are set to make profits for the next 5 years or so

Funding may have been secured but it still needs to be repaid. Unless the shortfall after naming naming rights is going to provided by a similar cash injection by ENIC. In which case, I will doff my cap to Joe Lewis.

 

[HotspurFC1950]

This was brought up in the stadium thread a few days ago, as a possible way for us to get the stadium completed faster. Sharing the Olympic stadium with the Spammers for a year was also mentioned as a possibility.

Yes but I think the Wembley idea is more to do with obtaining a bigger attendance sooner rather than the gradual transformation of WHL .

It would be interesting to see what our attendance potential is using Wembley before we actually move in to the new WHL with a max capacity of less than 60k.

 

[dimiSpur]

You have a point. But it seems that you're not prepared to apply that point consistently.

The blip under Ramos rightly wouldn't have influenced the decision as to whether or not to proceed with the stadium project.

But the same is true of this disappointing season.

We need the new stadium. A few poor results and performances under an interim manager isn't going to change that.

I haven't said we shouldn't build it. I think at this stage we're past the point of return anyway with all the money that's been invested in land acquisition and building the college and supermarket.

I was just making a general point that if we are a mid-table club by the time its built, we'll struggle to fill it.

 

[Stoof]

I haven't said we shouldn't build it. I think at this stage we're past the point of return anyway with all the money that's been invested in land acquisition and building the college and supermarket.

I was just making a general point that if we are a mid-table club by the time its built, we'll struggle to fill it.

No (or less) demand will drop the price.

Either that or a stadium full of tourists.

 

[nailsy]

I haven't said we shouldn't build it. I think at this stage we're past the point of return anyway with all the money that's been invested in land acquisition and building the college and supermarket.

I was just making a general point that if we are a mid-table club by the time its built, we'll struggle to fill it.

As Stoof says prices will come down if the ground doesn't sell out. At the moment there are a lot of people that are priced out of going to football so the ground move could be a blessing for them.

 

[yiddopaul]

I know you want it.

 

[Kyle Broflovski]

Is anyone else disappointed that our new stadium will only be 58k seater?

 

[sloth]

Is anyone else disappointed that our new stadium will only be 58k seater?

Disappointed we don't have more fans you mean?

 

[tttcowan]

Re the stadium, does it say anywhere or does anyone know when they'll need to "break ground" if they want the stadium is to open in 2017??? At that point you'd think it'd be no going back... Until then they can(and probably will) push it back again.

 

[dagraham]

Is anyone else disappointed that our new stadium will only be 58k seater?

I'd rather we play in a 58k near sold out stadium than a large, more empty one.

I don't think we'd fill anything over 60k, apart from the big games. And if we continue to go backwards as a team bewteen now and whenever the stadium is built, we'll be lucky to fill 58k.