• 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!

Transfers Summer Transfer Thread 2023! - Closed (Maybe)

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Rate this window out of 10

  • 1

  • 2

  • 3

  • 4

  • 5

  • 6

  • 7

  • 8

  • 9

  • 10

Results are only viewable after voting.
LeParisien said:
If Lavia and Caicedo go through then that is €950m spent in 15 months. Almost ONE BILLION.

What is financial fair play ?

How is any normal club supposed to compete?

There’s not even a precise strategy there. Just buy a load of highly rated players and hope it sticks.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

FFP to my knowledge at least the prem version is amortised so they can take the £600-700m net spend and spread it over 5-8 seasons.

Obviously these huge contracts would fuck any normal club long term however Chavs have been able to dump large numbers of player in the Saudi league. Just so happens that Clearlake Capital (main investor in Chelsea) is majority Saudi money.

This could be a plan by Chelsea to spend freely then dumb all their players above market price on the Saudi league to get around FFP that way. The alternative is that they don’t care about FFP and will just take the fines.
 
Last edited:
Zomb said:
Agree but money talks. Israel? Turkey? Some big UEFA clubs are at deaths door and this might be a way for UEFA to defend against them breaking away and busting UEFA. What you say makes complete sense
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
FIFA recognise UEFA as the official European cf, that isn’t changing. UEFA set the qualification tournaments for the World Cup, that isn’t changing.

fifa have already opened the World Cup up to more teams to capitalise on revenue, sponsorship and broadcast. There is no other incentive for fifa to rock the boat.

like LIV, Saudi can offer more money and invite teams into a ‘special super cup’, similar to the super league, that is likely to happen but outside of national league and cf competitions. It might actually be like a world club cup. It would draw massive interest and it’s likely each team would receive £10m just for playing with the winners netting 100m. It would have huge appeal from a broadcast, sponsorship and betting rights POV.

now that would scare fifa…
 
NotThatTedHughes said:
A couple of things going on with United:
1. A number of the Glaziers do want to sell. Others don’t. I can’t remember who is who but you can look it up.
2. The Glaziers, I believe, do take a dividend from United’s profit. Again, I’m too lazy to check this but I think it’s the case.
3. The Glazier’s debt is being entirely serviced by the club. I think Burnley’s new owners used the same scheme.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Glazers are borrowing at one rate and charging ManU at a high interest rate (eg Glazers borrow at 8% and charge ManU 11%, pocketing the 3% difference)

Glazers also charge ManU 'management and other fees'
NotThatTedHughes said:
4. United are a revenue generating machine. Unlike City, they’re not propped up by fake third party transactions. Their revenue is real. They can compete with the dopers toe to toe and still make money. This isn’t true of 99.9% of clubs.
5. The Glaziers haven’t spent on infrastructure at all.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Amended it with some other details for you.
 
Tomo said:
FFP to my knowledge at least the prem version is amortised so they can take the £600-700m net spend and spread it over 5-8 seasons.

Obviously these huge contracts would fuck any normal club long term however Chavs have been able to dump large numbers of player in the Saudi league. Just so happens that Clearlake Capital (main investor in Chelsea) is majority Saudi money.

This could be a plan by Chelsea to spend freely then dumb all their player above market price on the Saudi league to get around FFP that way. The alternative is that they don’t care about FFP and will just take the fines.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Good perspective.

Serious question - is that the kind of club people would like us to be?
 
LeParisien said:
Good perspective.

Serious question - is that the kind of club people would like us to be?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

No I would like use to be able to be more active in the market (ie don’t leave holes in the team) and have a clearer long term direction so called football philosophy but in no way does that mean spending £1bn in 3 windows.

We could fix most of the team with 3-5 players from here and that would be less than £200m (far less given Kane and soon to be Hojbjerg sales so what £50m on top). Our net in all would be probably about Arsenals or just a bit less to fix most of it.

Chelsea are like a 100m runner who openly take steroids before the race. There is a huge middle ground between Joe Lewis tight with cash and Chav dodgy oil funds.
 
Richard Arlison said:
That's why it's diversification not replacement.

Oil is going to take 50 years to phase out, if we ever really can.

Football clubs are very profitable from an investment POV.

How much did ENIC make on Spurs if they sold it now? It's in the billions and that's pure profit.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Indeed, but I'd still have thought that was absolutely peanuts compared to the oil industry. I'd assumed their sudden accelerated interest in football was more of a fun 'game' whilst also being a way to improve the Saudi 'world profile' than a serious attempt at making money. Buy hey ho, I know next to nothing about it so I'm happy to bow to your superior knowledge on the topic. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top