Yep, seems that way.
All major news outlets now saying he was, in layman's terms...SACKED
-
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
All major news outlets now saying he was, in layman's terms...SACKED
Remember Josh Levy is joint CEO of Tavistock
As I said, it's BS. You don't just "remove" an executive chairman, who is an executive director and shareholder of the parent company.
If we're to judge Levy, then it should be on the record of the last 20 years, given that it took the first 5 years to clear up an enormous mess. So, after that, how do we 'measure' his success or otherwise?
Well, he increased our turnover/revenues. Remember, we were in the 'big five' in the eighties/early nineties, then fell apart and declined to mediocrity in the nineties. Levy brought us back into the 'big six' in terms of revenue.
Was that enough? No. I'd want to do the soccernomics thing and ask whether we performed on the pitch according to our spending power. If we exclude the two trophy winning seasons – the 2007/08 League Cup and the 2024/25 Europa League – as league performance outliers, then we averaged 5th place in the PL. So, a pretty good par. Of course, this average was below the CL threshold for most of the period, but it was still par. There were the years when we punched above our weight and we saw some good Champions League action.
In the period we're considering, we saw the arrival of two clubs who were 'doped' by massive deficit spending. Had it not been for the financial cheating of Chelsea and Man City, whose true home was in the lower echelons, we could well have seen significantly greater success above the threshold of CL qualification, and thus inside the virtuous financial circle that affords.
Meanwhile, we saw good, financially-sustainable infrastructure development: the training ground and a multi-use stadium with NFL and music concerts funnelling more money into the football club.
The stadium, as expected, was associated with quite some strain. Sheer bad luck brought Covid19 to interfere with the stadium benefits across two seasons. Since then, this latest phase in the Levy era, we've seen growing pains associated with the substantially raised revenues of the stadium and its commercial spin-offs.
One 'metric' demonstrates the problem: the wages/turnover ratio. In the seasons during the stadium construction and its financing, the club was run with a healthy operating profit, which enabled bank and bond borrowing at relatively low rates. In these years, we ran a low wages/turnover ratio. This was a creditable achievement.
But, since Covid19, we have not expanded wages sufficiently. We've been stuck in a too conservative 40% or so. We should be aiming for 60%, and not as an absolute ceiling. Straying a little above this in some years should not be seen as a problem. In the last financials (2024/25) we were still stubbornly low at 42%, the lowest in the PL.
So, to judge Levy, he achieved a huge amount: the raising of revenues to put us in the 'big six', and a par performance on the pitch of play, while he delivered a world-class training ground and stadium.
But we now need a new regime to convert the enhanced income of the stadium and associated commercial revenues into football success. We need a club management to develop a wages structure appropriate to our turnover, and thus enable recruitment of the next generation of player.
Let's see if a reconfigured club board can usher in this transition. To my mind, it's already begun.
Well, he increased our turnover/revenues. Remember, we were in the 'big five' in the eighties/early nineties, then fell apart and declined to mediocrity in the nineties. Levy brought us back into the 'big six' in terms of revenue.
Was that enough? No. I'd want to do the soccernomics thing and ask whether we performed on the pitch according to our spending power. If we exclude the two trophy winning seasons – the 2007/08 League Cup and the 2024/25 Europa League – as league performance outliers, then we averaged 5th place in the PL. So, a pretty good par. Of course, this average was below the CL threshold for most of the period, but it was still par. There were the years when we punched above our weight and we saw some good Champions League action.
In the period we're considering, we saw the arrival of two clubs who were 'doped' by massive deficit spending. Had it not been for the financial cheating of Chelsea and Man City, whose true home was in the lower echelons, we could well have seen significantly greater success above the threshold of CL qualification, and thus inside the virtuous financial circle that affords.
Meanwhile, we saw good, financially-sustainable infrastructure development: the training ground and a multi-use stadium with NFL and music concerts funnelling more money into the football club.
The stadium, as expected, was associated with quite some strain. Sheer bad luck brought Covid19 to interfere with the stadium benefits across two seasons. Since then, this latest phase in the Levy era, we've seen growing pains associated with the substantially raised revenues of the stadium and its commercial spin-offs.
One 'metric' demonstrates the problem: the wages/turnover ratio. In the seasons during the stadium construction and its financing, the club was run with a healthy operating profit, which enabled bank and bond borrowing at relatively low rates. In these years, we ran a low wages/turnover ratio. This was a creditable achievement.
But, since Covid19, we have not expanded wages sufficiently. We've been stuck in a too conservative 40% or so. We should be aiming for 60%, and not as an absolute ceiling. Straying a little above this in some years should not be seen as a problem. In the last financials (2024/25) we were still stubbornly low at 42%, the lowest in the PL.
So, to judge Levy, he achieved a huge amount: the raising of revenues to put us in the 'big six', and a par performance on the pitch of play, while he delivered a world-class training ground and stadium.
But we now need a new regime to convert the enhanced income of the stadium and associated commercial revenues into football success. We need a club management to develop a wages structure appropriate to our turnover, and thus enable recruitment of the next generation of player.
Let's see if a reconfigured club board can usher in this transition. To my mind, it's already begun.
Its not BS, journalists are being briefed , they are not making things up.
So this was all true then.
The Athletic and the BBC use ITK?
"ITK"
Wow you obliviously have better contacts then them
A good, impartial assessment from the BBC
Daniel Levy: What will his legacy be as former chairman steps down at Spurs?
"The news of his exit will be greeted with undisguised delight by a large percentage of the fanbase "
Daniel Levy: What will his legacy be as former chairman steps down at Spurs?
"The news of his exit will be greeted with undisguised delight by a large percentage of the fanbase "
The news of his exit will be greeted with undisguised delight by a large percentage of the fanbase "
A minority of the fan base, the majority never joined in the Levy out chants at the stadium and re the CFT marches a maximum at it's peak of about 1,000 the last one achieved about 20 lost souls.
A minority of the fan base, the majority never joined in the Levy out chants at the stadium and re the CFT marches a maximum at it's peak of about 1,000 the last one achieved about 20 lost souls.
Last edited:
They'd also like to thank the Qataris for their cheque for £4.2b
What the fuck are you talking about? I wouldn't see winning the EPL as success? What kind of nonsense is that?
I already stated my position on the Super League, which is that it would be an utter blight on the sport and I'm profoundly relieved it never took root. But if your ultimate criticism of Levy was that he did not show enough ambition for the on-field success of the football club, you cannot hold the Super League dalliance against him. If that had actually happened and Spurs were not included, we would have been rendered a football backwater. No top players would want to come here, we would be left competing for some hopped-up version of the EFL Trophy with Wolves and Forest and Everton. You can't claim you'd be happy with that while expressing unhappiness with what Spurs have achieved (or not achieved) under Levy.
No. It definitely says the majority. And he's right.
Every poll on every platform showed a massive majority wanting Levy out.(including this one)
I guess you think the 70,000 who go to Old Trafford every week and don't protest want the Glazers to stay.
He's gone, mate...Sacked.. Fired..
Deal with it
Yo
Airfixx
you staying or quitting as well?
Airfixx
you staying or quitting as well?
You do, by voting them out.
You obviously have a wealth of business knowledge. CEO's get ousted all the time.
Levy is a Spurs legend. One of the best people to ever draw a salary from the club.
I wonder how long he has known. It was only a few weeks ago he was doing an interview with Gary Neville.
Interesting times ahead behind the scenes.
I wonder how long he has known. It was only a few weeks ago he was doing an interview with Gary Neville.
Interesting times ahead behind the scenes.
You know the BBC have to verify what the write, right? Not exactly a ITK. But given that you so clearly know what's going on, are you an ITK?
"ITK"
You couldn't write this.