Stop comparing us to the Chavs. They spend and spend we don't and don't.
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Transfers Summer 2021 - Transfer Thread
- Thread starter SchmoodSpur
- Start date
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
- Status
Stop comparing us to the Chavs. They spend and spend we don't and don't.
Saracens have set the benchmark in how to circumvent the salary cap, albeit in rugby.
Sign all the top players, busting all the salary cap rules by paying extras in investments, win everything available for 5yrs, get a slap on the wrist and enforced relegation after investigations prove all the wrongdoing and rule breaking, change nothing and get promoted again. Repeat.
By buying players for massive money!!!
So, in short, UEFA want a piece of the action via a ‘luxury tax’.
That’s not a prohibition. It’s just making sure they get their slice.
Hard to know what to believe here, you'd have to assuming having Lo Celso, Romero and a few other Spanish speakers here should help convince him if he needs convincing.
Also ££££££££££££££
If we sell Kane it's going to be a really hard and long season, he is our only brilliant finisher, think of the Ass pre season game, if Kane was playing it would be 3 or 4 nil
If we buy Vlahovic & Pau Torres, the striker may be good in the future but if we spend big money on Torres then we have 100% wasted the Kane money
If we buy Vlahovic & Pau Torres, the striker may be good in the future but if we spend big money on Torres then we have 100% wasted the Kane money
But Zero Strength, if we are selling our best player, we should go for a future star like Lacriox who statistically would be a perfect fit for him, is absolutely rapid and would cost a big chunk of money
First target: any new clubs trying to enter the power structure
Second target: labor
Capital gonna capital
Well their kit for sure isn't.
I like to take the piss out of Werner, but his main strength is the quality of runs he makes off the ball, which frees up space for other players, which was demonstrated perfectly in the Havertz goal in the CL Final. Not sure Lukaku would benefit a lot from those runs. Also, Tuchel doesn't have a good record managing target men, apart from his time at BVB when he made Aubameyang a star (although that was in a compeletely different system to what he plays now at Chelsea).
As you said, Lukaku will be extremely good when it comes to holding up play, but when it comes to having space and finishing, I'm not so sure. If he struggled at Olimpico against Roma and Smalling last year, what chance does he have against defences like Liverpool's, City's, United's or even ours if we manage to get Torres or Laporte?
You know what my worry is? Sell Kane near deadline day and we are prancing around trying to find his replacement and if it fails, we sign fucking Braithewaite from Barca. How would people honestly feel if this happened ? The club give the “we tried” scenario and we end up just using Son as our “striker”
WTF? Is he waiting to see if we qualify for it before the season starts?
Agree. We have to buy at least one of Vlahovic or Martinez before we sell Kane. Absolute necessity, no more last minute desperation signings.
Nearly correct. Parents used to own a sports shop so this is how it works. Nike pay club a hefty fee to do the shirts. Back in the days where adults shirts were c.£40 Nike would sell the club and all other retailers the shirts for c.£23.
So the club would make an uplift and profit the same as any other retailer plus the hefty annual fee. Nike would more often than not break even/lose on the deal because they have made the shirts at say the have to recoup the cost paid to the club. They would also have to pay volume bonuses to the club. So Nike just get exposure out of the deal, working on the premise that if you have a Nike football shirt you will want Nike trainers etc.
Some smaller clubs have alternate arrangements. They will approach a manufacturer and simply say we will pay for you to make our kit I.e in the old days of £40 shirt will pay Nike £7 per shirt. Nike make a profit like any other wholesale type arrangement but the club gets more for each and every shirt sale (filling the gap of a one off annual lump sum).
So anything that ever says shirt sales will pay for a player (especially when including image rights) is absolute bobbins
This.
I have worked on these very contracts (though not the Spurs one). Nike pay the fee and get whatever they can make from selling the shirts around the world. Club only gets the profit from the ones they sell in the shop or online. Might be different for PSG and Barca but I doubt it.
No doubt if Messi was moving from an Adidas team to a Nike team the team might go to Nike and renegotiate before he signed as Nike would in that instance gain sales. In the case of Messi they dont increase their sales with this move, just a different club shirt they are selling.
The figures are also very misleading
"£100 million in shirt sales!"
Minus -
Vat @20%
Retailers Cut 30-50%
Cost of manufacture/shipping 10%
Already were down to somewhere between £20-40m
There are plenty of marketing opportunities to make big money off superstar players - sponsorship, hospitality and exhibition matches - but shirt sales isn't the big one.
Great business compared to Pogba.If football wasn't an increasingly soulless husk, a team selling a player for £30m and buying him back years later for £100m should raise questions.
I got excited until I realised I have no idea who Matt Hayes and Fabio Gatto are
In the late 90s and early 2000s The Yankees were always over the salary cap and they happily paid the luxury tax. If the owner wants to spend, the the luxury tax does nothing to curb it.
Last edited:
- Status