Levy out?

Smoked Salmon

Finest human being of all time
I think of people carried out and honest and overall assessment of Levy, including signings record, managerial choices and so on, then the results would actually be quite mixed.

I think Levy's financial skills (not specifically transfer fees) are a very important bonus and I'd rather have him here making sure that we are not in debt than have to face things lik te Scholar days. So for that reason I'd rather him be here than not.

But, what I don't understand is the attitude of some fans that Levy is some sort of Spurs god - perfect in all areas and beyond criticism. The fandom seems to have taken on this bizarre approach that you either think Levy is the dog's bollocks or utter shit and should resign. I don't understand either attitude if you carry out a meritorious review.

For all the skill Levy otherwise has in running the club, I would say that there are two key areas where his results have been mixed. Transfers are obviously one of them. Sure, he gets some good deals on players, but missing out on key signings like Moutinho because you leave everything to the very last day, is not, IMO, the best way to go about things just to save an extra million. I think it's short sighted as with a player like that you might find yourself finishing higher and making that extra million back via a higher league spot. Hell, if anyone thinks his brinkmanship is always the bee's knees then one only has to look at the embarassment over the Berbatoss departure that saw him having to apologise to the fans on our website.

I also think his managerial recruits have been less than stellar. His two most successful managers are one he never brought in as a manager, and another who he hired as a relegation solution. The rest have been disasters. Even AVB, who the jury is still out on, is by no means an assured upgrade on Redknapp.

So, all in all I think Levy is a mixed bag with good points and bad points. Frankly, probably my only main reason for preferring that he stick around is because I think the financial stability of the club is crucial and we need not sink back to the days of an Irvin Scholar style regime. But I'm certainly not one of these fans that think's he's either hero or villan and nothing in between.
 

Blanchflower

Supporter
See what you are saying on leaving transfers too late but then even Man City with a virtually unlimited budget left all their transfer deals late.

One thing I think Levy could do though is lobby the other PL clubs / FA to agree an earlier end to the transfer window.
 

Smoked Salmon

Finest human being of all time
Blanchflower said:
One thing I think Levy could do though is lobby the other PL clubs / FA to agree an earlier end to the transfer window.
I don't think that would change the late rush. But, I do, nonetheless, think it is a good idea. It seems absurd that we are playing games without knowing what our squad is going to look like for the season.
 
Anurag Jo said:
The reason I asked because because there is a guy in a fb group I am in and he keeps banging on about how Levy is ruining the club,which
I find preposterous.

He also keeps bringing the point of ticket prices.I no idea how bad it is since I have never been to WHL but here is what he had to say

There are factors in that Tottenham as a London club will charge more and the restriction in capacity but I firmly believe that Levy exploits the in elasticity within our demand curve knowing that he has a loyal and wealthy fanbase who he can charge high prices but likewise not invest sufficiently within the team

Clearly done a first year course at Uni entitled "Introduction to Economics" and now thinks he's the dogs bollocks. He don't know shit :levylol:
 
Levy is doing a damn fine job and anyone who says otherwise hasn't done his/her homework.

You have to go back to the Scholar years to appreciate how those jokers ran the club to the ground, and gave folks like Man U and Woolwich the opportunity to leapfrog to the top of the table. Not forgetting we also missed out on the big monies from the advent of the EPL.

With Sugar and Levy, they've basically started from scratch, no crazy gambles steady progress through the years. It may be 3-steps-forward-2-steps back but it is still progress and you have to appreciate that, with the likes of Leeds, Portsmouth etc...imploding in the background.

How's that for a first post?
 
metalgear said:
Levy is doing a damn fine job and anyone who says otherwise hasn't done his/her homework.

You have to go back to the Scholar years to appreciate how those jokers ran the club to the ground, and gave folks like Man U and Woolwich the opportunity to leapfrog to the top of the table. Not forgetting we also missed out on the big monies from the advent of the EPL.

With Sugar and Levy, they've basically started from scratch, no crazy gambles steady progress through the years. It may be 3-steps-forward-2-steps back but it is still progress and you have to appreciate that, with the likes of Leeds, Portsmouth etc...imploding in the background.

How's that for a first post?
You'll fit in here nicely, welcome :thumb:
 

Flannerz

Rapey
Smoked Salmon said:
Blanchflower said:
One thing I think Levy could do though is lobby the other PL clubs / FA to agree an earlier end to the transfer window.
I don't think that would change the late rush. But, I do, nonetheless, think it is a good idea. It seems absurd that we are playing games without knowing what our squad is going to look like for the season.
That's not even degree level shit, it's A Level!
 
metalgear said:
Levy is doing a damn fine job and anyone who says otherwise hasn't done his/her homework.

You have to go back to the Scholar years to appreciate how those jokers ran the club to the ground, and gave folks like Man U and Woolwich the opportunity to leapfrog to the top of the table. Not forgetting we also missed out on the big monies from the advent of the EPL.

With Sugar and Levy, they've basically started from scratch, no crazy gambles steady progress through the years. It may be 3-steps-forward-2-steps back but it is still progress and you have to appreciate that, with the likes of Leeds, Portsmouth etc...imploding in the background.

How's that for a first post?
Solid
 
Flannerz said:
Smoked Salmon said:
Blanchflower said:
One thing I think Levy could do though is lobby the other PL clubs / FA to agree an earlier end to the transfer window.
I don't think that would change the late rush. But, I do, nonetheless, think it is a good idea. It seems absurd that we are playing games without knowing what our squad is going to look like for the season.
That's not even degree level shit, it's A Level!

It's not even that, the simpleton has just watched an episode of The Wire, with Stringer Bell talking about the very same topic..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=COf2bQEQ7Zw
 

Eskimo

'you middle class out of touch cunt!'
Wonder how dropping the plans to increase the size of the east stand that were in place when ENIC took over has affected our revenue.
 

Smoked Salmon

Finest human being of all time
Eskimo said:
Wonder how dropping the plans to increase the size of the east stand that were in place when ENIC took over has affected our revenue.
Would you rather have had a bigger east stand for the past few years or double capacity stadium within ten?
 

sammyspurs

Suspended
Smoked Salmon said:
Eskimo said:
Wonder how dropping the plans to increase the size of the east stand that were in place when ENIC took over has affected our revenue.
Would you rather have had a bigger east stand for the past few years or double capacity stadium within ten?

Maybe he means the East stand would have increased our revenue, and we could have afforded more towards the new stadium?
 

Smoked Salmon

Finest human being of all time
sammyspurs said:
Smoked Salmon said:
Eskimo said:
Wonder how dropping the plans to increase the size of the east stand that were in place when ENIC took over has affected our revenue.
Would you rather have had a bigger east stand for the past few years or double capacity stadium within ten?

Maybe he means the East stand would have increased our revenue, and we could have afforded more towards the new stadium?
Yes, because it would've been free to erect a new East Stand in the first place....
 

Eskimo

'you middle class out of touch cunt!'

Smoked Salmon

Finest human being of all time
Eskimo said:
Smoked Salmon said:
Eskimo said:
Wonder how dropping the plans to increase the size of the east stand that were in place when ENIC took over has affected our revenue.
Would you rather have had a bigger east stand for the past few years or double capacity stadium within ten?


Why is it a case of one or the other?

Just found this...

http://www.certusdesign.co.uk/resources ... tement.pdf
Why? In order to build a new three tier stand you are talking about spending close to £50-£80m, that is including planning applications, lawyers, architects, builders and so on. Now, either you divert the money from transfer budgets for several years to make it happens, during which your squad stagnates, or you take out a loan and put the club in debt.

Add to this the fact that you are restricted on space and size by the current road structure around the staium and that the new stand would only have been up for about 2-3 years max before spending started on the new stadium proposals. I'm wondering where the revenue is going to come from to pay for both the rebuild, the cost of then knocking it down again several years later, and the new stadium and all that entails (including the doubled up costs of architects, lawyers, builders and so on)?
 

Eskimo

'you middle class out of touch cunt!'
Smoked Salmon said:
Why? In order to build a new three tier stand you are talking about spending close to £50-£80m, that is including planning applications, lawyers, architects, builders and so on. Now, either you divert the money from transfer budgets for several years to make it happens, during which your squad stagnates, or you take out a loan and put the club in debt.

Add to this the fact that you are restricted on space and size by the current road structure around the staium and that the new stand would only have been up for about 2-3 years max before spending started on the new stadium proposals. I'm wondering where the revenue is going to come from to pay for both the rebuild, the cost of then knocking it down again several years later, and the new stadium and all that entails (including the doubled up costs of architects, lawyers, builders and so on)?


50-80m?

From the 2000 AGM:

Sugar was non-committal over the stadium expansion. We now have planning permission to expand the East Stand by 8000 seats to get the capacity to 44000, but this will cost £15 million to build and Sugar really didn't sound as if he wanted to spend that money on a stand. A move to Picketts Lock has yet to be considered as there are still planning problems with that stadium.
 

Blanchflower

Supporter
The money isn't in an increased capacity just by itself, rebuilding the East stand would still have meant shit corporate facilities and shit non-corporate (selling beers and burgers still makes money...) in the rest of the ground.....
 

Smoked Salmon

Finest human being of all time
Eskimo said:
Smoked Salmon said:
Why? In order to build a new three tier stand you are talking about spending close to £50-£80m, that is including planning applications, lawyers, architects, builders and so on. Now, either you divert the money from transfer budgets for several years to make it happens, during which your squad stagnates, or you take out a loan and put the club in debt.

Add to this the fact that you are restricted on space and size by the current road structure around the staium and that the new stand would only have been up for about 2-3 years max before spending started on the new stadium proposals. I'm wondering where the revenue is going to come from to pay for both the rebuild, the cost of then knocking it down again several years later, and the new stadium and all that entails (including the doubled up costs of architects, lawyers, builders and so on)?


50-80m?

From the 2000 AGM:

Sugar was non-committal over the stadium expansion. We now have planning permission to expand the East Stand by 8000 seats to get the capacity to 44000, but this will cost £15 million to build and Sugar really didn't sound as if he wanted to spend that money on a stand. A move to Picketts Lock has yet to be considered as there are still planning problems with that stadium.
^ That isn't the same as the Enic produced plan you just posted, which required a new planning application because it was a substantially bigger endeavour. Furthermore, £15m building costs are not the only costs involved, as I stated above. Finally, if you went for the Sugar propsal instead, is that money justified for just over a decade's use for only an extra 8k in seats? Don't forget that it's not all free income once it's built. You have to employ more stewards, staff managers, health and safety people, food purveyors and so on.
 
Top Bottom