Tottenham Takeover Talk

[bat-chain]

It's crass and it hurts because taking this kind of money should hurt and it is crass. It does devalue the club and the morals of everyone who accepts it.

You think I’m just being a dick and that’s fair enough but I don't think QSI want to invest in Spurs because they love the game, I don’t think they are these deeply misunderstood guys.

They want to look 'ok' but they are not 'ok'.

 

[GioW]

Qatar holds Spurs talks as it pushes to add Premier League club to portfolio

The head of Qatar’s sporting investment group has held talks with Tottenham amid plans to significantly increase the gulf state’s sporting portfolio

www.google.com

Apologies if already posted

 

[McFlash]

It's crass and it hurts because taking this kind of money should hurt and it is crass. It does devalue the club and the morals of everyone who accepts it.

You think I’m just being a dick and that’s fair enough but I don't think QSI want to invest in Spurs because they love the game, I don’t think they are these deeply misunderstood guys.

They want to look 'ok' but they are not 'ok'.

Those are fair points and it would have been better to start with that sort of thing, rather than a tabloid style headline post.
For what it's worth, I don't think you're being a dick, I just thought your initial post was poorly thought out and inflammatory.

But hey, here am I engaging with it so I guess it worked to an extent.

 

[MattyP]

Boring reality is that audit firms have introduced significant extra reviews which could just as easily explain delayed publication of accounts compared to previous years as anything significant from the club/structure.

Doesn’t mean there’s not something big behind the delay, just an educated opinion that it’s just as likely that there’s other reasons that could explain it.

 

[animalmom]

No, I wouldn't welcome it. But I also realise there's nothing I can do if it happens - other than to stop going.

I thought with the stadium now generating lots of money (and not just on a match day) we'd be able to compete better financially. Maybe it's still not enough.

I'd rather we did it more organically. And despite us winning nothing major since 91, I can't say it's affected my life in any way, shape or form.

Probably is enough but only if you spend some

 

[mil1lion]

I really don't think these fans make a big deal of their owners. I'm not sure about Newcastle for example, I'm sure they are just interested in the football. I also think sports washing doesn't have such a big an impact as made out. I think fans generally just care about what their team is doing on the pitch. I don't think fans are suddenly pro that Middle East life or whatever. If we have some investment like this I personally am not going to think any different to what goes on in Qatar and honestly I really don't know much anyway. My focus will always be on the football side so nothing changes for me. I will just watch Spurs sign great players and win titles. It's not even like I know much about ENIC other them being bloody tight in the transfer window. I wouldn't suddenly take an interest in Qatar and what goes on there, it will just be about the Spurs team as always has been. I'm really not sure where the sports washing comes in and how it would affect me personally.

 

[McFlash]

It's crass and it hurts because taking this kind of money should hurt and it is crass. It does devalue the club and the morals of everyone who accepts it.

You think I’m just being a dick and that’s fair enough but I don't think QSI want to invest in Spurs because they love the game, I don’t think they are these deeply misunderstood guys.

They want to look 'ok' but they are not 'ok'.

I'd also add that it really doesn't affect my morals because there's sweet fa I can do about it, one way or another.

Whether I like it or not, it's not going to stop me from supporting the club I've supported for my entire life.
I don't really have a choice but to suck it up and deal with it.

 

[bat-chain]

Those are fair points and it would have been better to start with that sort of thing, rather than a tabloid style headline post.
For what it's worth, I don't think you're being a dick, I just thought your initial post was poorly thought out and inflammatory.

But hey, here am I engaging with it so I guess it worked to an extent.

I'll take what you say on board mate, I'll try and tone it down!

 

[bubble07]

Although Spurs are QSI’s first priority, it is thought that at least two other consortiums are also interested in acquiring a stake in the club, which has debts of hundreds of millions of pounds after the construction of their new stadium.

When I see the word consortium I always think about del boys consortium for the gold chains

 

[Trent Crimm]

Watching Newcastle suck off their Saudi overlords is nauseating.

We are better than that.

What channel is that on ?

 

[DenverSpur]

As someone above mentioned, what are the implications of a 25% stake by Qatar? If it's a bunch of shares, at current value, transferring from enic to them, then it doesn't mean a whole lot. The bigger question is what comes with it all in terms of funds for the 1st team. If we only get some more fancy seats in the stadium, nobody will be too impressed.

Dirty/nation money is a reality of the game now. The rule makers have let it in and unless the rules change, we simply have to play ball by the rules as they are, not as we'd like them to be. Or we'll be left further behind.

The worse implication of this, again allowed by rule makers, is the minority share allowance across several clubs. The scope for corrupt match fixing in European competition is huge. And it'll happen eventually if it hasn't already.

We missed the game being ruined by the super league by fine margins. A monopoly of top teams (no relegation) with a handful of owners having stakes across those teams isn't too far off.

But in the meantime, while there is still some semblance of real competition, I think spurs have to take investment that makes us more competitive.

So what you’re saying is it’s wrong but everybody else is doing it because the rule makers let them so we should too. Interesting moral code.

 

[dirtyh]

Unfortunately Enic will never invest enough for us to truly compete on a consistent basis. So it’s either this route or we’re stuck in the same rinse repeat cycle of hope and ultimate disappointment until we all die.

happy Christmas.

 

[Gb160]

Although Spurs are QSI’s first priority, it is thought that at least two other consortiums are also interested in acquiring a stake in the club, which has debts of hundreds of millions of pounds after the construction of their new stadium.

When I see the word consortium I always think about del boys consortium for the gold chains

I love the way that they describe our debt like we owe it to a back street bookie or loan shark, and if we don’t come up with it by the weekend we’ll get our fingers broken with a hammer...fans of other clubs like to do this as well.
It’s just like a mortgage ffs.

 

[animalmom]

You and @arunspurs are both assuming that they’re doing this for the money. The ROI that these guys are looking for isn’t measured in pounds or dollars. We’d be a political tool.

Aside from the moral stuff that I’ve discussed at length, I’d have real concern that they’d be look to interfere in our dealings should PSGs interests come into conflict with our own.

Curious how conflicts of interest would be managed. I suppose since they aren't managing spurs that's what they would claim but there would be influence surely

 

[animalmom]

The sad fact is that Qatari investment could be absolutely game-changing for us on the football pitch. Look what happened since they took over PSG. Them buying Neymar out of his Barcelona 200M release clause like it was nothing. They're not investing in football clubs to try and get a return on their investment, they want the massive international publicity that comes with teams playing at the highest level.

A Qatari investment may put the big boot up Levy's backside to stop haggling every penny on incoming transfers and to back our serial-winner manager.

Curious how they would fund spurs as a minority. It would have to be through sponsorship (well not have to be). Could we them being issued convertibles to increase ownership over time

they could certainly be buying a pro forma 25 percent stake with primary shares No details yet

 

[animalmom]

I love the way that they describe our debt like we owe it to a back street bookie or loan shark, and if we don’t come up with it by the weekend we’ll get our fingers broken with a hammer...fans of other clubs like to do this as well.
It’s just like a mortgage ffs.

exaclty. Responsible journalists would say " they have entirely manageable stadium debt at low interest rates that they sensibly secured before the recent inflationary cycle". But no

 

[mr ashley]

A definite no from me.

It's crass and it hurts because taking this kind of money should hurt and it is crass. It does devalue the club and the morals of everyone who accepts it.

You think I’m just being a dick and that’s fair enough but I don't think QSI want to invest in Spurs because they love the game, I don’t think they are these deeply misunderstood guys.

They want to look 'ok' but they are not 'ok'.

You think enic wanted to invest in spurs because they oivethe game ??
Or Alan sugar??

Come on fella. No one invests ina football club because they are a fan. They do it to make money.
At times that hurts us pleb fans because it’s us they rinse out of our cash.
At other times we benefit because their investment helps us become more successful, so us pleb fans get to cheer our team winning games.

For me Newcastle fans are very similar to us. Had a taste of what success Feels like nder their best manager in recent history. Just missed out and desperately trying to get back there, to finish the job off properly. Redemption or whatever you want to call it.
I don’t begrudge them that. Their love for their club predates the new owners, as does ours. So does their ambition.
it would be exceptional to be able to beat all these other teams and their backers with an organic approach relying in hg youth and smart transfers but as far as I can see we don’t have that vision (or at least weve made such a bad job of executing it).

Tbh I’m more interested in watching great football that beats other teams too. I’d rather we didn’t have to resort to this too but it’s not a deal breaker to me

 

[Capocrimini]

Young me would have been strongly against it. As I've gotten older it's clear pretty much everything we interact with has a certain degree of sketchiness and don't always align with my morals. So I'm not going to preach to the Middle East and Africa, especially given our own bloody history.

Qatar is using football to sportswash their image for sure, but we also have an opportunity to shine a light on issues and help them to align to modern morals. For example during the WC, never heard so much about immigrant rights and lgbtq+ rights.

Not saying its a good thing but it's the way the football world has been for the best part of 3 decades now and it will get worse. Joe Lewis is no saint either BTW.

 

[jolsnogross]

So what you’re saying is it’s wrong but everybody else is doing it because the rule makers let them so we should too. Interesting moral code.

I reckon you know very little about anyone's "moral code" via this discussion on a footy forum. So you should consider winding your neck in regarding your own absolutism and apparently superior ethical framework compared to others.

I'm saying it is indeed unfortunate that any state actor can buy a football club. It is distorting and anticompetitive for the sport, and represents an absurd use of 'public' funds. A better footy governance system, one with a better moral code you might say, would forbid this. And it wouldn't matter if it was Qatar or Norway or any other country. It should be against the rules for ownership. Which would apply to all clubs.

And it is precisely because *not* everyone else is doing it that makes this uncompetitive. Only a handful of clubs are doing it, which is why its distorting. And that's unlikely to change. Because the rule makers have allowed this state of affairs. For the most part, democratic countries are not investing in private ownership of footy clubs because that would be improper use of funds. Not so for these middle eastern countries, so they are the only ones doing it so far.

So we are stuck in a crappy rule set, and can ignore the investment 'opportunities' and keep trying gamely to succeed. Or we can avail of those investments and keep trying gamely to succeed. And minority shareholding is different from owning and calling all the shots.

There are some grey areas here, which may not fit into your black-and-white moral code view of things.

 

[DenverSpur]

I reckon you know very little about anyone's "moral code" via this discussion on a footy forum. So you should consider winding your neck in regarding your own absolutism and apparently superior ethical framework compared to others.

I'm saying it is indeed unfortunate that any state actor can buy a football club. It is distorting and anticompetitive for the sport, and represents an absurd use of 'public' funds. A better footy governance system, one with a better moral code you might say, would forbid this. And it wouldn't matter if it was Qatar or Norway or any other country. It should be against the rules for ownership. Which would apply to all clubs.

And it is precisely because *not* everyone else is doing it that makes this uncompetitive. Only a handful of clubs are doing it, which is why its distorting. And that's unlikely to change. Because the rule makers have allowed this state of affairs. For the most part, democratic countries are not investing in private ownership of footy clubs because that would be improper use of funds. Not so for these middle eastern countries, so they are the only ones doing it so far.

So we are stuck in a crappy rule set, and can ignore the investment 'opportunities' and keep trying gamely to succeed. Or we can avail of those investments and keep trying gamely to succeed. And minority shareholding is different from owning and calling all the shots.

There are some grey areas here, which may not fit into your black-and-white moral code view of things.

Fair enough my apologies. Interesting moral code is a bit over the top. Probably should have said something like interesting rationalizing. You are still saying we should do something that you don’t really feel comfortable with just because others have been allowed to do it.
Life is full of grey areas but you still sometimes have to decide whether something is right or wrong.
For me it is clearly wrong to accept investment from Qatar. Apart from the way they treat certain segments of their population this is a country who debased the worlds greatest sporting tournament by bribing FIFA to award the World Cup to them in order burnish their public image.

Basically telling the world “hey we’re filthy rich so we can have anything we like, do anything we like”. Is that really the sort of people you want to be associated with, want our club to be associated with?

Tottenham is my club, it’s your club, it’s our club. Do you really want our club, that obviously means so much to us all, just be basically a department in the Qatari( or any other country for that matter) Ministry of Truth used to make them look like great guys when in reality they’re mean spirited people who just happen to be loaded.
We’d have come a long way from that group of boys under the street light( just across the road from our present stadium) who decided to start a football club named after Harry Hotspur. Wonder what they’d think of it.
You’re all entitled to your view on this but be careful what you wish for.

Whatever happens, however distasteful I may find it, I will always be TTID. No one will ever take that away from me.