-
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
Why? It is a bullshit statistic really, isn't it? We could keep the exact same wage spending and just not host NFL and music events and that number would shoot up to United/City/West Ham levels.
Look at the top end of that chart - Villa at 96%. What do you think it means exactly? That Villa have a better chance at winning the league, or that they are competing with City and Liverpool for players? That players will choose them over us? Because none of those things are happening.
We wouldn't be "better run" if we sold the stadium to ENIC or a third party just to buy and pay some players. We wouldn't be "better run" if we leased it from the council like Man City or West Ham, and we wouldn't be "better run" if the stadium was falling to pieces like Old Trafford.
We needed a stadium to compete with other clubs financially. Since it has opened, we have increased our transfer and salary spending significantly, at the same rate as our income increase.
What you're really doing is making a false equivalence between the sporting achievements of the club with the financial stability of it. There are a ton of clubs that have tried to just throw money at the field to get success (including but not limited to Everton and Aston Villa, who were our equals in terms of trophies won at the point ENIC took over). Both of those clubs have still done worse than we have in all metrics.
Going by this response I don't think you've quite grasped what that means
Or getting drug tested
I Live in Africa. Trust me, I've been vocal for many a year. I've stopped putting money into Tottenham coffees for a while now. This may change this season. Levy seems to have gotten the shock he needed.
New Staff, Kudus and possibly Gibbs White. Seems we heading in the right direction. With Frank, I believe we building for now and the future. Don't think anyone can complain about a window with that.
Going by this response I don't think you've quite grasped what that means
Ignore.
Isn't it time you went for lie down for a month. Banging on about other posters disappearing for a week at every opportunity without acknowledging that you've done the same thing twice for a month at a time. Hypocrite!!When you say no-one here you mean you and your ilk of sad little toerags who are unable to accept any counter argument to your constant hysterical claims about the board?
Meanwhile I'm here very content right now and so should you be, it looks like the board is finally showing some ambition you've been craving so enough over obsessing about me for a change and be happy for once, it looks like we are finally building a team you've desired.
My chairman
If the board get the players in we need then yes they deserve credit. Let's wait and see what happens.
With respect, I think you are confusing the chronology / correlation - I've only described him like that very recently, after many, many years of him posting in the same way. Anyway it's not just me, he doesn't get into a proper discussion with anyone.
As I said, it's just my opinion, he posts the way he does, I criticise it, you criticise me for criticising it, and around we go, which is fine. I'm just not sure what he's trying to do any more, but of course he doesn't have to answer that.
It's interesting to me that I've agreed with a huge amount of what you've said in our exchanges, yet you've agreed with nothing that I've said, not sure what to take from that - hopefully you're not just another one of those posters. Apologies if you're not, it might just be a coincidence that in this particular exchange you can't find any common ground with me.
Why you so angry dude, we're doing some great business, it seems like it's upsetting you more than anything which is slightly weird.
Now run along and quit following me around like a stray dog, it's not that deep man.
Same here but, it seems they are backing the manager and are trying to get back amongst the big hitters again.
Probably need a couple more in, certainly looks positive though for a change.
You could say it's incomplete, ideally you'd incorporate transfer fees and amortization schedules and the like, but it's certainly not bullshit. That's hard, objective, apples-to-apples data.
Well, one thing you can sell is equity in the club, and it sure seems like something with that flavor to it has happened here. It will be very interesting to see what all this rumbling is about.
I had my doubts about how a minority stake could change things, but hope springs eternal. The situation at Spurs, with a stadium singularly suited to maximizing the revenue potential for an elite, PL and CL contending football operation, has been begging for investment from the moment we moved in.
One of the top 10 most ignored.Sure have, matey.
01 March 2013 to be precise. One of the longest standing and most respected posters in TFC history
One of the old guard, as they say.
It isn't the data I'm calling bullshit - it is merely a 'representation' of a thing. It is how it is being represented that I am calling bullshit. Without context, it is purely a number.
It is like saying your mate on £100k+ is a tightarse for only spending 10% of his wages on food shopping, compared to another mate, when the former has a mortgage, kids, season ticket on the train, lives in zone 1 etc, and the latter lives at home with his parents, single, pays no rent.
Per the 'wages' stat, it is also relatively meaningless for how it is presented.
- Team A has 50 players all on £2m a year means each one is earning £38.5k a week, which is championship level wages, but £100m overall.
- Team B has 5 players on £100k, 8 players on £70k, 10 players on £50k, 5 more on £25k would give you a 28-strong squad and just under an £87m wage bill.
- Team C has 30 players on various wages, at a total cost of £90m per year.
If Team C has a revenue of £100m they are paying 90% wages to revenue. If Team B has a revenue of £200m, they are paying 43.5% wages to revenue.
Team C could have a healthy profit, meaning they are actually not in debt and have money left over even after the 90%. Team B could be like Man Utd (so say) and making loss before wages, spending less than half their revenue but are accumulating debt with their wage bill.
So, with all the above in mind, what does that % mean other than something designed to be misused to make a point that it doesn't.
ENIC only own 86%. I've asked it to john thomas a few times and been ignored, but why is no one upset or annoyed with the other 14% or so that have, seemingly, done absolutely nothing for the club but profit from their shares.
Willing to bet there's a lot of fans wanting a buy out purely so they can profit, whilst simultaneously bashing the 86% for the same outcome.