• 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...

    Get involved!

Management ENIC

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

ENIC In or ENIC Out

  • Total voters
    209
LeParisien said:
The house example was only to show how big increases in wealth don’t necessarily lead to increased liquidity.

THFC is a privately owned company. I don’t understand your point about stock.

The stadiums value will not go down. The value of land in Tottenham will only increase - in part because of the effect of having a top football club and a world class stadium. The loans on the stadium are SECURED which makes them low risk. That is very different from loans used to buy players. The value of a player will fluctuate far more and depreciate to 0 far more quickly than the stadium. The stadiums value (with the land it sits on) will never drop to 0.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Er the stadium value won't go down? Where do you get that from? You better tell hmrc then mate because every year spurs claim deprecation on the stadium. In fact deprecation of assets is almost universal for glaringly obvious reasons..

The stadium generates revenue but even with maintenance will need replacing in say 60 to 100 years. The fact is our accounts started showing deprecation immediately (literally) because it's the best way to right off tax owed and all physical tangible or non tangible assets lose value.

You say the loans are secured, so you mean a mortgage essentially, what does it say on your mortgage contract In terms of risk?

I'm not suggesting we borrow to buy players I'm suggesting we invest properly. As for the loans we have, they are on the club, levy can walk away at any time and sell up and has no responsibility for the loans. But he does for the time being get financial reward from a sale of the club. Combined with the shocking decisions made over the last 5 years it's time he actually got to fuck.
 
StevenPL said:
Er the stadium value won't go down? Where do you get that from? You better tell hmrc then mate because every year spurs claim deprecation on the stadium. In fact deprecation of assets is almost universal for glaringly obvious reasons..

The stadium generates revenue but even with maintenance will need replacing in say 60 to 100 years. The fact is our accounts started showing deprecation immediately (literally) because it's the best way to right off tax owed and all physical tangible or non tangible assets lose value.

You say the loans are secured, so you mean a mortgage essentially, what does it say on your mortgage contract In terms of risk?

I'm not suggesting we borrow to buy players I'm suggesting we invest properly. As for the loans we have, they are on the club, levy can walk away at any time and sell up and has no responsibility for the loans. But he does for the time being get financial reward from a sale of the club. Combined with the shocking decisions made over the last 5 years it's time he actually got to fuck.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Good post. Insightful and knowledgeable

LeParisien LeParisien , hopefully you'll feel more informed on the matter moving forward and take what you've learned on board

:dierpochhug:
 
StevenPL said:
Er the stadium value won't go down? Where do you get that from? You better tell hmrc then mate because every year spurs claim deprecation on the stadium. In fact deprecation of assets is almost universal for glaringly obvious reasons..

The stadium generates revenue but even with maintenance will need replacing in say 60 to 100 years. The fact is our accounts started showing deprecation immediately (literally) because it's the best way to right off tax owed and all physical tangible or non tangible assets lose value.

You say the loans are secured, so you mean a mortgage essentially, what does it say on your mortgage contract In terms of risk?

I'm not suggesting we borrow to buy players I'm suggesting we invest properly. As for the loans we have, they are on the club, levy can walk away at any time and sell up and has no responsibility for the loans. But he does for the time being get financial reward from a sale of the club. Combined with the shocking decisions made over the last 5 years it's time he actually got to fuck.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I think you’ve developed tunnel vision and you’ve forgotten what was being discussed.

The key point was that an increase in the value of the club does not imply a corresponding increase in the clubs liquidity (ie capacity to spend).

Taking out loans to build a stadium is a normal thing to do and the debt is secured against an asset with a stable value. I think you’re getting confused by the amortisation schedule which does not represent the true value of the stadium. It’s an accounting practice. It also ignores that the stadium generates revenue. Unless you want to argue that the stadium debt is unmanageable then this is a dead end.

Taking out loans to spend on players is a lot more risky because their values are not stable. Ndombele is a good example. He was worth 55m until he wasn’t. If players guaranteed the same returns as a stadium then taking out loans to buy them would be a good idea. They don’t.
 
LeParisien said:
Taking out loans to spend on players is a lot more risky because their values are not stable. Ndombele is a good example. He was worth 55m until he wasn’t. If players guaranteed the same returns as a stadium then taking out loans to buy them would be a good idea. They don’t.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
and? He literally wrote this ‘I'm not suggesting we borrow to buy players’. No-one is suggesting we loan money for players, what we are suggesting is the spiv bastards invest some of their paper earnings into transfer funds. A self sustaining FC is not feasible if expectations are aligned to ST fees

Spend some of your own money, you’ve made billions. Liquidise some other assets or sell a minority stake, do something
 
Zomb said:
and? He literally wrote this ‘I'm not suggesting we borrow to buy players’. No-one is suggesting we loan money for players, what we are suggesting is the spiv bastards invest some of their paper earnings into transfer funds. A self sustaining FC is not feasible if expectations are aligned to ST fees

Spend some of your own money, you’ve made billions. Liquidise some other assets or sell a minority stake, do something
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Many other clubs (including Brighton and Liverpool who many people here look up to) have taken loans from their owners.

You would like a sugar daddy to invest their own money into the club. In part I suspect that’s because you assume it’s the norm when it’s not - most owners give out LOANS. I’m happy to have a well-run club that operates under its own hard-earned resources - that’s a point of pride in fact. In fact I see the financial distortions created by clubs like Chelsea and Man City as killing the game.
 
LeParisien said:
Many other clubs (including Brighton and Liverpool who many people here look up to) have taken loans from their owners.

You would like a sugar daddy to invest their own money into the club. In part I suspect that’s because you assume it’s the norm when it’s not - most owners give out LOANS. I’m happy to have a well-run club that operates under its own hard-earned resources - that’s a point of pride in fact. In fact I see the financial distortions created by clubs like Chelsea and Man City as killing the game.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Bloom doesn’t want that money back, probably done as a loan for tax purposes

I want a well run club, but after 23 years of self funding it’s time to flex some of the 4BN paper gains into making the FC competitive and in parallel, further increasing the value of their investment (commercial rev is fully maximised)
 
Zomb said:
Bloom doesn’t want that money back, probably done as a loan for tax purposes

I want a well run club, but after 23 years of self funding it’s time to flex some of the 4BN paper gains into making the FC competitive and in parallel, further increasing the value of their investment (commercial rev is fully maximised)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You have no idea what Bloom wants. The vast majority of clubs have had owner loans which have either been converted to equity which means the owners will make back that money when they sell (Fulham or Villa) or are being repaid (West Ham, Liverpool, Southampton).

Presumably you think that spending money can “make us competitive”. Can you give an example of when that has happened in the past and how much was spent? Are there any counter examples where spending the same amount has failed?
 
LeParisien said:
You have no idea what Bloom wants. The vast majority of clubs have had owner loans which have either been converted to equity which means the owners will make back that money when they sell (Fulham or Villa) or are being repaid (West Ham, Liverpool, Southampton).

Presumably you think that spending money can “make us competitive”. Can you give an example of when that has happened in the past and how much was spent? Are there any counter examples where spending the same amount has failed?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Plenty of examples where spending has failed, normally from a position of desperation
 
Brian Fantana said:
Spot seems all that noise about them possibly selling up was complete bullshit. They’re ripping the soul out of the club.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
They used Tottenham Hotspur football club, and it's fans, its history, it's prestige, and it's London location, to realise their dream of a multi purpose, money spinning sports and entertainment complex.

Mission accomplished. The football club is basically the afterbirth.

Pair of cunts
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top