• 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
Brian Fantana said:
It's either one of these. Or investors are just smelling blood in the water of a set of owners that have no experience of running a football club. So bids are coming in. I'm not taking any notice really until a Gulf state is mention as they will definitely be watching closely.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
They're waiting for the right offer I'm sure. If we sold for that reported £3.5bn, that's not much than Chelsea sold for. We have billions in infrastructure that they don't have. The Chelsea brand might be a little more popular globally, but success generates growth (as Chelsea can point to), and spending £1bn chasing on-field success is much cheaper than spending £3-4bn on infrastructure.

I think once we see offers go north of the £5bn mark, I don't t think we'll be getting such quick refutes by the club.
 
Papafeels said:
I think once we see offers go north of the £5bn mark, I don't t think we'll be getting such quick refutes by the club.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Would they need to use part of that fee to pay off the stadium debt, bearing in mind that the stadium including training facilities is a significant portion of the club's value?

Or are prospective buyers to buy the club and pay off the debt, which doesn't seem right, it's as though they'd be buying the stadium twice, once for the actual structure and again for it's construction debt.
 
McCOYS said:
Would they need to use part of that fee to pay off the stadium debt, bearing in mind that the stadium including training facilities is a significant portion of the club's value?

Or are prospective buyers to buy the club and pay off the debt, which doesn't seem right, it's as though they'd be buying the stadium twice, once for the actual structure and again for it's construction debt.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yep. And it’s a low rate so why use your cash paying it off, keep the mortgage ticking along and invest the cash elsewhere
 
McCOYS said:
Would they need to use part of that fee to pay off the stadium debt, bearing in mind that the stadium including training facilities is a significant portion of the club's value?

Or are prospective buyers to buy the club and pay off the debt, which doesn't seem right, it's as though they'd be buying the stadium twice, once for the actual structure and again for it's construction debt.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

No they would not have to pay off stadium debt (unless there is something in bond documentation requiring that which has never been disclosed).

As bond interest rates are fixed at just under 3% and average repayment time circa 20 years, any purchaser would want to keep this financing as its better than anything available in market now.
 
Don't want this DJ numpty and his 12 man consortium taking over, id rather stick with Enic until someone more credible and stable comes along.

Ideally the PSG owners sell up and buy us instead. They've been patient with PSG, spent whatever was necessary, and ultimately delivered the biggest prize in european club football.
 
ElTel said:
Don't want this DJ numpty and his 12 man consortium taking over, id rather stick with Enic until someone more credible and stable comes along.

Ideally the PSG owners sell up and buy us instead. They've been patient with PSG, spent whatever was necessary, and ultimately delivered the biggest prize in european club football.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
What do you know about them that we don’t?
 
McCOYS said:
Would they need to use part of that fee to pay off the stadium debt, bearing in mind that the stadium including training facilities is a significant portion of the club's value?

Or are prospective buyers to buy the club and pay off the debt, which doesn't seem right, it's as though they'd be buying the stadium twice, once for the actual structure and again for it's construction debt.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I don't see why they would, that debt is fixed, long-term, inflation busting debt. They'd likely just factor it into an ongoing liability. When it's been paid back, the ~£1bn or so in 2019, is going to cost significantly less in real time by 2050 or whenever it's paid back. Also cheaper than building one. Something like one or two home games or events, pays off the yearly repayments. It's absurd. If the debt was short-term and a potential risk impacting the operating of the club, ENIC would likely have to cover that.

It might affect the amount people are willing to pay, to a small extent, but when you factor in what that would cost now, and with tariffs, supply chains screwed since covid, cost of materials vastly increasing etc, planning, red tape ect, to build a structure like now will set you back probably 3* what it cost to build ours. Having debt is good. Besides, the naming rights that will go with the stadium will be enormous, and that's a very large portion of that debt accounted for.
 
Guy From The Lane said:
Yup they have to - hence why these people are getting clout from our club...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
For what purpose would Stavely, who has already brokered the sale of a club need to use us for clout?

I'm sorry to inform you that our global standing isn't close to other clubs, if it were United or Liverpool, possibly? The club are turning down advances, and likely the only reason is because there's a number that they have in mind that's "too good to turn down". This latest point of interest is a conglomerate consisting of people who are in ownership positions of NFL and NBA. Those orgs are worth far more money than PL teams. The Lakers sold for $11bn, Blazers for $5bn. These guys have money.

Needing us for "clout" is feankly absurd.
 
White Hart said:
What do you know about them that we don’t?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
He had a failed takeover bid for Maserati in some racing thing. He's definitely a huge gimp, like dictionary definition of tech bro. Made money of NFT's, crypto etc.

But, the guy isn't stupid. It would depend on who the backers were. They're allegedly big into the NBA and NFL, which are worth way more than any football club. He obviously doesn't have the net worth to buy us outright, but neither did Todd Bohely, the money was in the consortium.

We'll likely never know unless the club accept their bid, which at the moment, looks like a no go.

For what it's worth, don't really want to be taken over by that crowd, simply because the guy looks like a huge wanker, and I hate the Elon Musk type.
 
Spursidol said:
No they would not have to pay off stadium debt (unless there is something in bond documentation requiring that which has never been disclosed).

As bond interest rates are fixed at just under 3% and average repayment time circa 20 years, any purchaser would want to keep this financing as its better than anything available in market now.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I was just thinking and maybe didn't explain myself well, that the stadium debt would be deducted from the value of the club, even at a low repayment rate, the stadium isn't worth it's full value whilst there is a debt to come along with the purchase.

I mean if you sell a house that you built or bought with a mortgage that you've partly paid off, you wouldn't expect the buyer to buy the house, and to pay off the remaining mortgage. The debt on the mortgage isn't the responsibility of the new owner.

They'd need to have the stadium debt deducted from the overall price of the club.
 
Last edited:
Papafeels said:
I don't see why they would, that debt is fixed, long-term, inflation busting debt. They'd likely just factor it into an ongoing liability. When it's been paid back, the ~£1bn or so in 2019, is going to cost significantly less in real time by 2050 or whenever it's paid back. Also cheaper than building one. Something like one or two home games or events, pays off the yearly repayments. It's absurd. If the debt was short-term and a potential risk impacting the operating of the club, ENIC would likely have to cover that.

It might affect the amount people are willing to pay, to a small extent, but when you factor in what that would cost now, and with tariffs, supply chains screwed since covid, cost of materials vastly increasing etc, planning, red tape ect, to build a structure like now will set you back probably 3* what it cost to build ours. Having debt is good. Besides, the naming rights that will go with the stadium will be enormous, and that's a very large portion of that debt accounted for.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well say there's £500m left to pay off on the stadium, surely that amount would be deducted from the overall price of the club. Otherwise the new owners would be buying the stadium at it's full price, and have to pay off the debt in addition to the value.

So I'm supposing the stadium debt is deducted from the overall value of the club.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top