Who at Spurs is treating fans with the most contempt?

  • 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!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Sort by date Sort by reaction score
Kopspur said:
I included the £226m to show how much of that cash has not been reinvested but is being sat on, of course we need some operating cash but that is a lot, think maybe Dan is wanting to show high cash conversion or something to be able to command a higher sale price, didn't mean to imply we were sitting on £0.5b! Imagine?! You'd bring the rope to the lynching party I reckon.

We're actually of very similar mind by the sounds, or at least I remember making those same points myself in the past, it's just I've got the point of thinking "hmm what's the likelihood that the new owners would bring me less joy than these?" And these days I think there's only a slim chance of that.
Click to expand...

This is the irony... Outside of the hate-squad; there's a sensible majority that can (and indeed do) agree-to-dissagree on moderate grounds yet are shouted down

Kopspur said:
Anyway, yeah, I can't see anyone meeting Dan's valuation, so unless something external big happens that drives the sale, it's hard to see it ending anytime soon.
Click to expand...

Obviously any starting price would be high.... Esp. cos I don't think it makes sense for them to sell yet.

....But given the stadium is pretty much brand-new and is alone worth circa 1bn; once you start to add the operational and commercial value of the business, a round 2bn isn't the wildest starting price in the world.

Just for funzies..... How much do you think would be a fair pricetag?
 
To Dare Is To Do. said:
Apologies if you’ve covered this before; but why aren’t ENIC like the Glazers?

The glazers put the club in huge debt as part of their acquisition, BUT have invested an insane amount of money in transfer fees and wages. Are they really worse than ENIC?
Click to expand...

The money THFC borrowed was borrowed to invest directly into the club.

vs.

- The way the purchase of the club itself was structured; they basically took a huge loan out against the club once they'd become owners... Essentially they bought it with money loaned to United PLC.
- They're taking big chunks of cash out every year and have been for years now.....
- Up until recently they had been under-investing on the playing side (roughly since the exit of Ronaldo and the treble) compared to their monstrous revenue.
- The infrastructure of the club (inc. stadium) is just being left to rot.
- They're not investing THEIR money in players; they're merely spending club revenue (like ENIC in that respect)

Yes, United fans are relatively spoiled compared to most fans, but their gripes with their owners are legit and begun the moment they took over.
 
Last edited:
To Dare Is To Do. said:
Apologies if you’ve covered this before; but why aren’t ENIC like the Glazers?

The glazers put the club in huge debt as part of their acquisition, BUT have invested an insane amount of money in transfer fees and wages. Are they really worse than ENIC?
Click to expand...
As far as I'm aware the Glasers haven't invested large amounts of their own money.

They have taken over a billion pounds out of the club to finance them buying it.

www.football365.com

Man Utd under the Glazers - the ridiculously frightening numbers...

Manchester United have spent more on servicing the Glazers than their first-team squad over the last 15 years...
www.football365.com www.football365.com

£550million – the total debt immediately loaded on to the club as a result of the Glazers’ takeover. This was made up of £275million of ‘payment in kind’ hedge fund loans at an initial 14.25% interest rate, and £265million of bank loans.

£526million – United remain in debt to the tune of over half a billion pounds, 16 years after the takeover. In the Premier League, only Tottenham have larger debts but at least they have a new stadium to show for it. At Old Trafford, the roof is leaking. Before the Glazers, United had no debts.

£1.073billion – the total amount spent to finance the Glazers’ ownership in the form of interest payments (£704million), debt repayments (£244million) and dividends (£125million)

£496million – the amount spent on interest payments between 2010 and 2020, more than all the other Premier League clubs combined. United’s total is £356million more than the second-highest amount (Woolwich, £140million)

16 per cent – the share of United’s £6.8billion expenditure spent on financing the debts.

£185million – the amount spent on club infrastructure at Old Trafford and Carrington. Five Premier League clubs, including Brighton, have spent more in the last 10 years.

£22.2million – the average dividend paid per year over the five years from 2016 to 2020.

£23.2million – the annual loss made by United up to June 30, 2020.

£23million – the amount in dividends paid out to shareholders by United, mainly to the six Glazer siblings (around £18.5million), in the same period.


Tldr:
Hell yes, they are worse than ENIC
 
To Dare Is To Do. said:
Airfixx Airfixx stevee stevee

That's a strong argument for why Glazers are worse than ENIC, fair enough.

However, is there any objective measure or stat that could be useful to compare ENIC to other owners when it comes to % of revenue invested in football side of club, ie transfers, wages
Click to expand...

Fees + wages as % vs revenue would be logical ordinarily, but that get's majorly distorted by the fact we've just had a period of austerity in order to half fun our new stadium...... They get wet when it rains. 😄
 
To Dare Is To Do. said:
Airfixx Airfixx stevee stevee

That's a strong argument for why Glazers are worse than ENIC, fair enough.

However, is there any objective measure or stat that could be useful to compare ENIC to other owners when it comes to % of revenue invested in football side of club, ie transfers, wages
Click to expand...
Definitely there is.
Leaving aside the oil clubs, Dippers are very well run, albeit on a much larger budget than ours, as is Leicester on a much smaller budget, great scout network.

Villas owners are pumping money in, but unlike chavs, they're not putting it down as a loan. It's a free gift to the club.

For me, it all comes down to how we spend.
Obviously that could be laid at Levy's door as CEO, but I don't believe it's as simple as that.
He hires people to make those decisions, those people are shite, but he doesn't have the footballing knowledge to know who to replace them with.
Very hopeful now that we have Paratici in.
 
Kopspur said:
Profits AFTER tax and interest deductions from Spurs Annual Reports

2014: £65,261,000
2015: £9,396,000
2016: £33,037,000
2017: £36,185,000
2018: £112,953,000
2019: £68,552,000
2020: -£63,916,000

7 year total:
£261,468,000

2020 Cash: £226m

£261 million quid in profits since 2014 and sitting on £226m cash, now you can argue they're piling that back in by paying off stadium debts or buying climbing walls and golf clubs or whatever, fine, but we could very easily have invested more in our squad, even if that meant servicing infrastructure debts slightly more slowly (although it's far from clear that that would be required) and come out the other side richer because we were more successful on the pitch as a result.

The argument is so polarised on here with seemingly only 2 camps 'allowed' on any topic but I think it's much more nuanced. In my view they've consistently not quite done enough and that means I, like many others, have now had enough, your threshold is higher, also fine, but you may well get to the point you're fed up and want a change too, we're all only entrenched in our views until we're not.
Click to expand...
Nice post. Think you may have clicked the wrong bookmark in your browser? This is TFC.
 
Kopspur said:
I included the £226m to show how much of that cash has not been reinvested but is being sat on, of course we need some operating cash but that is a lot, think maybe Dan is wanting to show high cash conversion or something to be able to command a higher sale price, didn't mean to imply we were sitting on £0.5b! Imagine?! You'd bring the rope to the lynching party I reckon.

We're actually of very similar mind by the sounds, or at least I remember making those same points myself in the past, it's just I've got the point of thinking "hmm what's the likelihood that the new owners would bring me less joy than these?" And these days I think there's only a slim chance of that.

Anyway, yeah, I can't see anyone meeting Dan's valuation, so unless something external big happens that drives the sale, it's hard to see it ending anytime soon.
Click to expand...
Finance is put before football and the attrition of it is beginning to show in the squad and results.

It's worse when other, lesser clubs with less resources and more debt spend more net and have a higher % of wages to turnover and actually put more of that money on the pitch...far more than Tottenham have.

Maybe next year is the year it gets better after the stadium is built and we actually compete with the bigger spenders and historically more successful clubs...like we've been waiting on for the past 20 years.
 
Mick Cooper said:
The only truth I see is that people like you waste a lot of their time bitching about something they can't can't change
Click to expand...
Isn't that what we all do? It's what football forums are all about isn't it.

Or do you actually think Nuno makes his team selection based on what he reads on The Fighting Cock?

:memeokay:
 
John Thomas said:
You made the childish comment, Mick.
I just put you right. Try and think before you post, mate.
Click to expand...
Sorry!
You actually think your response was adult and incisive?
You didn't "put me right" at all, you simply threw a strawman argument at me and ignored the point I made.

You are a bore John, you bang the same drum, day long, day after day, week after week, without showing any sign of comprehending what is happening.

Find something new to talk about
 
Mick Cooper said:
Sorry!
You actually think your response was adult and incisive?
You didn't "put me right" at all, you simply threw a strawman argument at me and ignored the point I made.

You are a bore John, you bang the same drum, day long, day after day, week after week, without showing any sign of comprehending what is happening.

Find something new to talk about
Click to expand...


Such a balloon knot
 
100% the owners….why?

I truly believe owning a football club should be a hobby, simply something that someone is passionate about but isn’t trying to make money on, not lose money either of course, but not make money in the sense of a main revenue stream or massive long term investment.
Anyone who can afford to buy a club in the first place has obviously done very well for themselves, so keep doing that, it’s what they are obviously good at, and there is no need to take that mentality to a football club.

Of course football clubs are “business” models these days and that’s fine, and must be treated as such to some degree, but stopping short of becoming just another revenue stream to an owner or financial group.

We all slag off Chelsea and City, and rightly so, but maybe not for the right reasons. They almost certainly hold the “sportsmanship” side of football in contempt by doing what they have done, but you can’t accuse their owners for using their respective clubs as cash cows, they probably lose a fortune annually funding their hobby, the same as we mortals do with our hobbies…

Liverpool have it to a tee, every owner knows their fans, and once that trust has been broken where the fans see the owners not putting the team first they rebel, as Hicks & Gillett, an example of overseas owners who thought they hit the jackpot, but learned very quickly the club they own wouldn’t stand for it….

Woolwich’s owners are a prime example of owners setting up a revenue stream to support the wider family circle, Kronke’s sons are set for life on their Woolwich salaries and probably couldn’t find the library on a map of London stadiums…..

So, Joe Lewis is worth an estimated 4bn quid, the man got there without Spurs, a club he bought for pennies in the grand scheme of billionaire speak. Yet the club is run like he’s on a week to week Paycheck…In no way should we not run the club in a safe and sensible manor, I mean would you buy a new set of golf clubs if golf was your hobby and treat them like you didn’t care? Of course not…But you would repair the shafts if they needed repaired….

As it stands we are the 9th richest club in the world, the fucking world!!….yet we act like we haven’t a pot to piss in, and as a result we continue to fail…9th richest club in the world and if you asked the following questions to 5 season ticket holders of the other 19 premier league clubs (that’s 95 people) the following answers would something like:
“Who do you think will win the premier league?”……95 Others - 0 Spurs
“Who do you think will win the FA cup?” 90 Others - 5 Spurs.
“Who do you think will win the league cup?” 90 Others - 5 Spurs
“Who do you think will win the European Conference league?” 75 Others - 20 Spurs

Don’t ever want a sugar daddy, but this club needs an owner who is prepared to put every last penny into this club and return only minimal profits….

#ENIC OUT……
 
Last edited:
John Thomas said:
Tell us what's happening then Mick. What am I and countless others missing?
Click to expand...
I don't need to, see cockneyspurs post. He gets it.
Just because I can see the issue, doesn't mean I support it, or believe in it. Like you I want to see the money the club earns be used to fund the team. Even if Lewis has a major change of heart and throws his wealth behind the team, he still can't compete with the reserves that City and the chavs have, and then Spurs become part of the problem thats wrecking the game as a spectacle.
Enic are a vehicle owned by a businessman who wants a return on his investment and he pays Levy to run a business. When it ceases to become viable, he will sell it. Be thankful that Levy can keep the club competitive (ie not relegated) and making money.
When Joe dies, what happens then? It will either be a blessing, and get sold to people who will back the team, or worst case scenario, sold to another Enic style management company who fuck everything up and turn us into another Sunderland with the best house in the third division.
Or sold to another middle Eastern money bags who goes toe to toe with City,
Not sure which is the worst scenario.

So you are right about the problem, and why we are - where we are, you just seem to not grasp why. It isn't going to change any time soon until we get another Pochettino, who finds a Kane, Toby, Jan, Moussa combo and punches above his weight for a while on a budget 25% of the usual suspects.
Or someone like Steve Nash buys the club, someone like us who actually loves the football club. That person will also have to find a Levy to manage the money to keep us alive, but pour it back into investing in footballing success.

Sadly, clubs run by fans rarely succeed as they will gamble on success paying for the outlay to achieve success, see Harding and Bates as an example. When the success doesn't happen you end up in the shit financially.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom