But that's EXACTLY what the more rabid ENIC apologists keep doing to try and put some meat on their bare bones of an argument
-
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...
Management ENIC
- Thread starter The Fighting Cock
- Start date
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
Is very important, yes we never won it but the money we earn can go into buying top quality playe…..
Oh never mind
I think he was waiting for conte.
Nuno was the cheap fix. Shown by how long he was here for. And then how much it cost to get rid of him.
I know you jest, but if you ask fans of any other top 7 club would they like ENIC as their new owners the answer would be a resounding NO!Be careful what you wish for in a new owner , you could end up with another ENIC
That should tell us all we need to know.
Exactly. Football has changed in the last 25 years. You need serious income to be able to compete at the top table. Spend beyond your means and you end up in the second or third tier of football. And for a long time. Quite simply, if we had not built the stadium, and did not spend above our means, we would be less competitive than Villa, Everton, Leeds etc. You either need a sugar daddy, a nation state or a very good business man. I think everyone is frustrated with ENIC as they never take advantage of momentum and refuse to invest in players to take that next step. Their approach is too 'safety first'. I honestly do appreciate why, between 2017 and the end of Covid, they had to prioritise the stadium build and the financing of the long term debt (the most in the league). The fact we pay only ~2% interest on long term loans (until 2051) means the 600% increase in match day revenue was massively worth it (£120M income, £20M interest), and gives us the platform to compete on a level playing field financially with Woolwich, Liverpool and Chelsea (well, hopefully after the Abramovich era). Man U are still a giant commercially that puts them on another level to us, but luckily they have about the absolute worse owners and have totally messed up that advantage by taking significant money out of the club instead of investing it in infrastructure. Man City and Newcastle's nation state level of financial doping means that our par will always be 4th at best (behind Man C, Newcastle, and Man U), maybe even 5th when you consider Liverpool's commercial advantages. The best solution is for ENIC to sell up now to a multi-billionaire who just wants to win things (for personal glory and/or for nation state sport-washing purposes), but the other side of the coin of new owners comes with the risk of US business men who want to take money out of the club (like the Glazers). All things considered, the best outcome IMO is that the Lewis family put a new chairman in place with the objective to win trophies and Levy moves to the commercial side of the club to increase global revenues further and is not allowed to meddle in player recruitment or transfer budget at all.
Man U fans would trade Levy for the Glazers in a heartbeat.
We weren't in the same bracket as say Liverpool through the 70's and 80's but we were always in with a shout of a cup. And we were always trying to be in with a shout.
Yeah they're the only ones who would trade imo.
Woolwich fans definitely wouldn't due to recent upturn. City fans .. lol. Newcastle no. Liverpool have their issues with the owners but the majority know that their current owners won't spend much (net) but are far better at the football side of running a club than ENIC. Boehly has had a weird start but has shown willingness to invest so don't think most Chelsea fans would.
The only owners ENIC are better than out of the top 8 or so are the literal scam artists who pull money out of United.
I think ENIC, would be fine, at a mid table or lower half of the table club.
They would, trim the wage bill, and have them profitable but without ever really affecting the big boys, a bit similar to how we are now.
They would. They’ve been fine here in stabilising us, building infrastructure and building our revenue. We’re a stable club.
Personally I’d be excited for that changeover to an owner who wants to make that next ‘step’ in the process but I understand people who are worried about the risk.
The risk comes entirely from who we sell too. If ENIC don’t care they could sell us to Glazer style fraudsters, if they cares it would be to someone who wanted to achieve success with the club and the publicity you get for that.
Man United fans?
They literally only support the club because of their glory days. The days of winning trophies very year year after year. The days of marquee signings the days of being the best of the best and never settling for less.
You think those fans would want ENIC.
ENIC.
You think those glory hunting pricks would want the least ambitious owners in the history of football to buy them?
Their owners are many things, but they have constantly backed the coaches with players regardless of cost. They would have spent more if they were still a big draw too.
Really on what basis?
There’s nothing inherently risky about the Glazers. They’ve leveraged the club up to the eyeballs, but if the underlying business is sound then it is perfectly acceptable.
And they’ve spent like drunk sailors.
They spent the money United generate. People don’t realise how big United are, they are massive, they spent a billion of their own money while paying the Glazers debt at the same time. If the Galzers did that here we would be selling players like Kane for £100m and buying his replacement for £25m.
United are the only club that can spend like drunken sailors without a sugar daddy.
You're liked as a poster
But give up the rhymes
It's up there with some of
The worst of your crimes
Do you not remember the search pre Nuno, we were snubbed , we fell apart on a done deal , we scrambled after Gattuso ,then had to withdraw , we were a laughing stock before we got him and a bigger laughing stock once we had
i loathed Graham ’s style of football , he actually won us a trophy
This is why they'd prefer Enic.
They estimate that the Glazers have taken a staggering £1.1bn out of the club in the last 17 years.
This figure includes an eye-watering £743m in interest payments on the money they borrowed to buy the club in the first place.
Debt repayments make up another £147m, while owners have paid themselves dividends of £166m - including £133m in the last decade alone.
Over the last ten years, United's spend has not outweighed the money brought into the club in revenue even once.
Directors have been remunerated £55m since the Glazers' arrival, while £23m has also been taken out of the club in "management fees
The £154m taken out of United by the Glazers in the last decade is more than any other Prem club.
And that right there is why I'm worried about who our new owners could potentially be.