Tottenham Hotspur Financials - Year to 30 June 2020

[Perryman]

That would be the medieval regime our honourable owners trousered 50 million blood soaked notes from for Kyle Walker?

Make no mistake, Daniel and Co are more than grateful for the billions the the likes of Sheikh Mansour and Roman Abramovich bring into the English game

I’m not. Having a country own a football club completely skews the transfer market.
Also having an owner who has basically stolen his money from the Russian people does the same.
What if the Queen decided she would invest a billion pounds of the country’s money into making Sampdoria the kings of Europe.
One good thing from last night that however rich you are, you still cannot win the biggest prize of all, especially if you don’t have Messi in your team.
Cocked it up again Pep.

 

[stevee]

No the evidence that the new stadium won't allow us to change the way we handle transfers is the fact that Levy has not changed the way he handles transfers since having the new stadium. That is the evidence that I used for my factual statement.

Now that I agree with.

But it wasn't your original point.

 

[Igula]

Now that I agree with.

But it wasn't your original point.

Yes it was.

 

[stevee]

Yes it was.

Maybe I missed it. I'd be grateful if you could highlight it from our original exchange.
You were talking about our spending not how Levy handled transfers

So we will just give Levy the benefit of the doubt when he has shown no indication that he will spend after the new stadium and came out and said the exact opposite?

Seems like a silly approach.

No indication, except for the last 2 seasons since we've moved into the stadium.

Covid affected and we still spent a lot.

What?

We have heard again that we need to sell to buy, the same BS that always is mentioned under this pathetic ownership group.

But as always there will be some "fans" more than happy to run out here and tell us how the shit sandwich that ENIC are serving us tastes so great.

 

[Igula]

Maybe I missed it. I'd be grateful if you could highlight it from our original exchange.
You were talking about our spending not how Levy handled transfers

Once again you quote things that support my point.

I am talking in the first point about how Levy will spend money and have subsequently pointed out my concern with him not spending the money needed to get players and instead going with the cheap options.

In the second point again I point out the reports that Levy has said we need to sell to spend, showing that his approach to the transfer window has not changed.

Thank you for pointing out that my argument has been Levy's approach to transfers all along.

 

[stevee]

Once again you quote things that support my point.

I am talking in the first point about how Levy will spend money and have subsequently pointed out my concern with him not spending the money needed to get players and instead going with the cheap options.

In the second point again I point out the reports that Levy has said we need to sell to spend, showing that his approach to the transfer window has not changed.

Thank you for pointing out that my argument has been Levy's approach to transfers all along.

Absolutely laughable

The first point you say "no indication that he will spend after the new stadium"
There is no comment at all about any thing to do with how we handle transfers.

The second point you are banging on about reports that we need to sell to buy. Going as far as to say that we always here it.

You have completed ignored two facts which go against you:

1) We've spent more since moving into the new stadium.

And

2) In the last two seasons we have bought more than we sold.

Once again you are trying to spin it into something that you didn't say and try to move the goalposts.
:mourfacepalm:

I'm done.

 

[stevee]

What?

Are you saying that we haven't spent a lot of money since we moved into the stadium?

Yes

 

[Igula]

Absolutely laughable

The first point you say "no indication that he will spend after the new stadium"
There is no comment at all about any thing to do with how we handle transfers.

The second point you are banging on about reports that we need to sell to buy. Going as far as to say that we always here it.

You have completed ignored two facts which go against you:

1) We've spent more since moving into the new stadium.

And

2) In the last two seasons we have bought more than we sold.

Once again you are trying to spin it into something that you didn't say and try to move the goalposts.
:mourfacepalm:

I'm done.

What are you talking about?

Of course how he will spend money is related to how he handles transfers. You also leave out the points when I clarified that it is not the total spend that matters. I clearly clarified my point in the thread but of course you think you need to be the one who tells me what I am thinking.

Your need to spin my thoughts into what you want them to be not what they actually are is a problem that we constantly have. You ignore what is written and instead constantly try to push the narrative you want. It happens all the time with you.

I am not ignoring those points, as I have already said.

I don't care if we have spent more, most teams have spent more recently than they did in the past and do so every year. As I have said my concern is that the new stadium doesn't change how we spend that money. We still go for the cheap options instead of letting football make our decisions.

It is probably good you are done as you have no interest in reading what is actually written and instead keep forcing the narrative you make up in your head.

 

[Igula]

Great

Is this supposed to be relevant to this conversation in any way?

 

[stevee]

What are you talking about?

Of course how he will spend money is related to how he handles transfers. You also leave out the points when I clarified that it is not the total spend that matters. I clearly clarified my point in the thread but of course you think you need to be the one who tells me what I am thinking.

Your need to spin my thoughts into what you want them to be not what they actually are is a problem that we constantly have. You ignore what is written and instead constantly try to push the narrative you want. It happens all the time with you.

I am not ignoring those points, as I have already said.

I don't care if we have spent more, most teams have spent more recently than they did in the past and do so every year. As I have said my concern is that the new stadium doesn't change how we spend that money. We still go for the cheap options instead of letting football make our decisions.

It is probably good you are done as you have no interest in reading what is actually written and instead keep forcing the narrative you make up in your head.

What on earth are you babbling on about.

I quoted your posts in full.
I left nothing out.
The fact that you subsequently tried to change what you were saying in later posts (due to your assertions being proved false) isn't my fault.

Obviously you are one of those people that are desperate to have the last word so I'll let you.

Go.

 

[Calgary Spur]

I’m not. Having a country own a football club completely skews the transfer market.
Also having an owner who has basically stolen his money from the Russian people does the same.
What if the Queen decided she would invest a billion pounds of the country’s money into making Sampdoria the kings of Europe.
One good thing from last night that however rich you are, you still cannot win the biggest prize of all, especially if you don’t have Messi in your team.
Cocked it up again Pep.

I’m not interested in the argument you guys have going, but suggesting money doesn’t matter because Chavs funded by oil billions beat UAE also funded by oil billions is a pretty weak point!

 

[HenryHotspurII]

But that is what they have always done, the stadium hasn't changed anything.

And it is not quantity over quality it is deals. Levy always looks for financial deals over football needs.

If he thought he could buy George Best (in 2021) for 50m and sell him for 60m he would do it in a heartbeat. The fact that Best has been dead for 15 years and wouldn't help us in the least wouldn't matter because Levy would be getting a good deal in that case.

He would rather spend the money on a dead George Best in that case than spend 50m on a 50m rated CB that would be our first choice player for the next 10 years because there is no deal in that. It is him paying what a guy is worth and Levy has no interest in doing that even if it clearly makes the team better.

I agree that he looks for deals, but whilst I'm sure he is looking to buy the Bergwijns and Chadlis for £20m-ish, we very seldom see them shine and turn the profit they were intended to give us.
Levy's problem seems to be his ego and trying to be too clever. He gets it right now and then but all too often seems to shoot himself in the foot with stubbornness haggling over negotiations to maintain his "tough negotiator" reputation

 

[Igula]

What on earth are you babbling on about.

I quoted your posts in full.
I left nothing out.
The fact that you subsequently tried to change what you were saying in later posts (due to your assertions being proved false) isn't my fault.

Obviously you are one of those people that are desperate to have the last word so I'll let you.

Go.

I didn't change anything.

You posted what I said and that read into it what you wanted. I never changed anything but pointed out to you the meaning of my post since you seemed so hell bent on reading into something that wasn't there.

Again thank you for posting those quotes to back up my position. I really do appreciate it.

 

[stevee]

I didn't change anything.

You posted what I said and that read into it what you wanted. I never changed anything but pointed out to you the meaning of my post since you seemed so hell bent on reading into something that wasn't there.

Again thank you for posting those quotes to back up my position. I really do appreciate it.

Well done on having the last word.

Hope you feel better for it.

 

[RESPECT THE COCK]

 

[Spursidol]

Ha! Here we go.

The not one brick card. The go to last resort card when you've well and truly lost another argument.

I think you'll find that's an urban myth you've sadly bought into, my friend.

Maybe you should do some research next time.

Nope

Once you've shown to have zero judgement on a big thing, people see your judgement (or lack) and bias on your other opinions for what it is.

 

[Spursidol]

Shocking ain't it.

I'm still waiting for an apology from the hoardes of Levy apologists who pissed over my prediction that failing to sign a single player for one and a half years would lead to the dismissal of Pochettino and the alarming decline in fortunes we're seeing today.

Maybe you'd like to lead the way?

You conveniently firget to add (as is always your want) that one reason why we diidn't sign a player that summer was that Poch seemed to want Jack Grealish (new owners declined to accept Spurs offer agreed with previous owner late in the TW taking the chance that Villa with Grealish in the side could get to PL worth £200m+ rather than the offer of £25m/£30m for Grealish - good judgement by them in the end) and Frenkie de Jong declined Spurs offer to wait and go to Barcelona

But of course you would know if you had followed the Birmingham press at the time, and maybe seen de Jong's interview just after joining Barcelona.

So it seems as if Poch hadn't lined up enough targets that summer, despite there being cash available.

So once again - maybe you should apologise for not doing your homework before posting ?

 

[sudoku]

You conveniently firget to add (as is always your want) that one reason why we didn't sign a player that summer was that Poch seemed to want Jack Grealish (new owners declined to accept Spurs offer agreed with previous owner late in the TW taking the chance that Villa with Grealish in the side could get to PL worth £200m+ rather than the offer of £25m/£30m for Grealish - good judgement by them in the end) and Frenkie de Jong declined Spurs offer to wait and go to Barcelona

But of course you would know if you had followed the Birmingham press at the time, and maybe seen de Jong's interview just after joining Barcelona.

So it seems as if Poch hadn't lined up enough targets that summer, despite there being cash available.

So once again - maybe you should apologise for not doing your homework before posting ?

Nobody was more gutted than me when the potential Grealish transfer went up in smoke but it was down to the new Villa owners not wanting to sell and not Levy.
I was following the potential transfer avidly at the time and read every scrap of news about it.

 

[Spursidol]

Club announcement - Finance update - CCFF repaid, short-term debt replaced with long-term | Tottenham Hotspur

The Club has completed on an institutional fund raising of £250m, with an average tenure of over 20 years and an average interest rate of circa 2.8%. The debt stack includes a new 30-year tranche, with a bullet repayment in 2051 and is a unique financing for any sports entity with the long-term...

www.tottenhamhotspur.com

Club announcement that it raised £250m in new bonds repayable between 15 years and 30 years, with interest only payable from now until first bond requires repayment. Interest only 2.8% fixed for full tenure of bond.

The £250m used to repay the covid loan of £175m and tidy up the Bank of Ameriaca term loan which now has a 15 year repayment term after partial repayment.

So Spurs no longer have any short term repayment loans to any banks ... which is good news.

 

[Zomb]

Club announcement - Finance update - CCFF repaid, short-term debt replaced with long-term | Tottenham Hotspur

The Club has completed on an institutional fund raising of £250m, with an average tenure of over 20 years and an average interest rate of circa 2.8%. The debt stack includes a new 30-year tranche, with a bullet repayment in 2051 and is a unique financing for any sports entity with the long-term...

www.tottenhamhotspur.com

Club announcement that it raised £250m in new bonds repayable between 15 years and 30 years, with interest only payable from now until first bond requires repayment. Interest only 2.8% fixed for full tenure of bond.

The £250m used to repay the covid loan of £175m and tidy up the Bank of Ameriaca term loan which now has a 15 year repayment term after partial repayment.

So Spurs no longer have any short term repayment loans to any banks ... which is good news.

This is the one aspect where the cunting bean counter excels