Chairman's message

[LCLC]

I think this message is a disgrace and completely takes us fans for mongs.

To say there was a clear strategy of young players coming through this year is a lie. It was only due to the fact our signings (which he said would come good this year) absolutely showing themselves up as duds that gave our young players a chance.

To try and suggest that we are run in the right way and can only base our transfer spend on 'operational income' is a complete lie. Every year we bankroll our transfers with income from player sales and the fact we have not had a positive net spend since 2008 is a complete joke. Yes our club is financially sounds but our brick squad is the product of zero ambition in the transfer market.

The last three years has seen a disastrous managerial and board level appointments, a chaotic and completely awful transfer policy, a prolonged and laughable stadium saga, huge rises in ticket prices and a complete lack of footballing ands business coherency.

We make the largest ever recorded perm profit and we continue to bring in substandard players is a joke. Yes we have a nice training ground but the fact he now pays himself the most in the Premier League is an utter joke. We could do worse but we could do some much bloody better. If he has another awful summer then he has to go because Levy has set us back almost 10 years in the last 2.

clam

 

[parklane1]

Rubbish.

 

[DubaiSpur]

Exactly .. I like Dubai but really over the last 5 years we have spent 400M in fees and wages, the next two clubs above us have spent over 800M, and the 3 above have spent 1B+

In other words - all the speculation about if we had bought x or y 20/25/30M player is nothing but hogwash .. in all likelihood would have made zero difference, best case might have been one additional year in CL, likely with normal service resumed the following season.

Come on, Raziel. We were 3rd heading into January 2012, with a CL campaign within easy reach. We then got equally close to the CL in 2012-2013, a point away after the final game of the season. In both cases, we were inches from the big-time. In both cases, we proved utterly unable to make the final leap, due in large part to Levy and ENIC's refusal to back us when we needed it. Two more CL campaigns under our belt, and who knows, who knows how different things would have been, with regard to Bale, Modric, Harry, the stadium, finishing above Arsenal, our chances of actually winning more than one League Cup in a fifteen year spell....

Over the past five years, we have generated enormous profits, and have had the lowest net spend of any side in the top division. Despite this, and due in large part to our managers who did good jobs with inadequate backing, we came agonizingly close to breaking into the top tier not once, but twice, and that's ignoring the time we actually did in 2009-2010. It isn't being honest to suggest that we were as far away from the big time as the alleged 400 million pound difference in spending between us and the teams above us would indicate. It was achievable, in large part due to ENIC's mostly competent management of our own finances putting us into a position where we could make that jump, but that only makes their miserable failure to back us when we did try to make that leap all the more galling, especially when they continue to try and justify it with utter nonsense like that Financial Fair Play bullsh*t I talked about above. You don't want to put money into the football club you own, and don't give a damn about its ambitions, history or pretensions of 'glory nights' and aiming as high as it possibly can. That's...acceptable given how f*cked up some other football owners are these days. But don't lie through your teeth about it, as Levy has consistently tried to do to the fans, his managers, and the wider footballing world.

I think we're extremely lucky to have him at the club - I think the temptation to step outside our limits would have been too much for some.

Yes, our seemingly arbitrarily defined limits of one League Cup in fifteen years being the most we can expect in return for the second-highest ticket prices in the league and owners happy to let the club hover anywhere between 5th and 17th as long as it remains self-sufficient and doesn't bother them with pretenses of competing for things.

Sigh. He's a decent chairman with an admitted emotional attachment to the club who has a knack for managing the club's own money with basic competence, and there are far worse chairmen and chairwomen out there. But there are also far better chairpersons out there, and we shouldn't let our past decade and a half of ENIC ownership obscure that fact, regardless of whether you feel switching over to a new set of owners is a good or bad thing.

 

[Raziel]

Sigh. He's a decent chairman with an admitted emotional attachment to the club who has a knack for managing the club's own money with basic competence, and there are far worse chairmen and chairwomen out there. But there are also far better chairpersons out there, and we shouldn't let our past decade and a half of ENIC ownership obscure that fact, regardless of whether you feel switching over to a new set of owners is a good or bad thing.

Mate, like I said, I like you ..

- He's more than a decent chairman, I'm really not sure who you would classify as moderately better.

That said, he's not perfect, and like you, I can look back and see where a little more risk/aggression could potentially have paid off. But honestly, this season has tempered my view of what is possible now (era of Mourinho with unlimited budget, plus established City), I look at Manure, LVG as manager, 200M+ spent, a side with Da Gea, Carrick, Di Maria, Rooney, Mata, RVP & Falcao and they have never even looked like a title challenger.. quite honestly I laugh because I despise United, but its depressing.

I would love to see Levy take a gamble, go big for Gareth, offer him a way out of Madrid and match anything United is willing to offer, even put a get out clause in his contract in 12 months (he's as close to guaranteed success as we would likely get), plus backing Poch for a clean house and a few key players.

I don't think Levy is a liar .. I think he's extremely cautious in the face of a rigged system. Look at the above scenario, lets say we spent 70M net (we probably could manage it), we still have to outperform two of Manure, Scum & Pool, is that likely?

 

[DubaiSpur]

Mate, like I said, I like you ..

- He's more than a decent chairman, I'm really not sure who you would classify as moderately better.

That said, he's not perfect, and like you, I can look back and see where a little more risk/aggression could potentially have paid off. But honestly, this season has tempered my view of what is possible now (era of Mourinho with unlimited budget, plus established City), I look at Manure, LVG as manager, 200M+ spent, a side with Da Gea, Carrick, Di Maria, Rooney, Mata, RVP & Falcao and they have never even looked like a title challenger.. quite honestly I laugh because I despise United, but its depressing.

I would love to see Levy take a gamble, go big for Gareth, offer him a way out of Madrid and match anything United is willing to offer, even put a get out clause in his contract in 12 months (he's as close to guaranteed success as we would likely get), plus backing Poch for a clean house and a few key players.

I don't think Levy is a liar .. I think he's extremely cautious in the face of a rigged system. Look at the above scenario, lets say we spent 70M net (we probably could manage it), we still have to outperform two of Manure, Scum & Pool, is that likely?

Well, David Dein at Arsenal was a fantastic chairman, and in my eyes was much better than Levy at what he did. Ditto Hans-Joachim Watzke, Enrique Cerezo, James Pallotta, Jose Maria del Nido and Andrea Agnelli, for widely differing reasons (although not sure if the presidents in Spain and Italy should be counted ,as they're more than just chairmen imo). Point being, there really isn't anything that greatly impresses me when it comes to Levy: he rode the wave of ever-increasing TV deals and ticket price increases far out of proportion to our status as a club, and in return delivered mostly adequate financial management of our assets in a completely risk-free manner, while simultaneously overseeing a general rise into comfortable upper mid-table mediocrity and one League Cup in fifteen years. Due to the PL's success, we have revenues to play with that dwarf those of similarly-sized clubs on the continent, and yet we've endured arguably the worst fifteen year spell trophy-wise in our history. There's some positives, and some negatives: overall, imo it all just balances out into the bland 'decent chairman' tag quite nicely. I don't think he's the worst chairman out there, and I've acknowledged that, for all his faults, he does manage us in a mostly competent manner and he does seem to genuinely be a fan of the club despite his reluctance to put his own money into it. But he isn't exceptional in any way, imo. Except perhaps in being risk-averse to the point where it actively harms us as a club.

I agree, I'd like to see Levy take a gamble and back his manager for once, but I expected that last summer too, and....well, you know. I don't see his bargain bin shopping attitude changing, even though I live in eternal hope despite all the facts. Another Stambouli, another Fazio, another tinkled off manager storming out and then telling all in an interview a few months later. And I don't think we're that far off challenging two out of United, Woolwich and 'pool: We've finished above two out of three in recent seasons, and were inches away from hitting the CL in both 2012 and 2013. Yes, since then they've spent and we've regressed, selling off our best players as usual, but that isn't irreversible, and all it requires is backing a manager properly for once, which we did in both windows in 2009: unfortunately, we never did learn from that example.

And as for him lying, he just did, again. 'It's impossible to spend because of Fair Play'. That's bullsh*t, as the FFP rules linked above clearly state. Look, you just don't want to put ENIC's money into the football club you and Joe Lewis jointly own, and would happily see us self-sufficient but utterly mediocre instead of actually competing for things with a bit of your/ENIC's money. That's just about acceptable given the trolling that happens elsewhere (Oystons, for example). But why lie about it to the fans, and to the managers you hire (AVB)? We have no ambitions if they involve spending your money: just admit it, and stop this charade of coming up with differing excuses for why you won't put money into the football club you own so they can do what they're meant to do as a football club, i.e compete for things.

And I like you too, mate. Don't think my general grumpiness about this topic means I hold anything against anyone who thinks differently: for example, some of my fiercest tussles on this issue have been with braineclipse and billyiddo, and yet I'm happy to admit that I still consider both of 'em fine people and great members of this forum, despite the fact that they still mostly.... disagree with me, to put it mildly.

 

[Gutter Boy]

Well, David Dein at Arsenal was a fantastic chairman, and in my eyes was much better than Levy at what he did.

David Dein was never chairman - he was a DoF.

Peter Hill-Wood was the chairman

 

[Gutter Boy]

With Levy it's more interesting to look what has happened to our direct rivals from 15 years ago. All of Leeds, Saudi Sportswashing Machine, Villa, Everton etc have completely fallen off the map.

We're actually the only side to keep in relative touching distance of the big 3 (United, Liverpool and Arsenal).

The only thing that has hurt us has been the two doped sides, but they don't really count because they aren't playing the same sport.

 

[Spurmac1974]

David Dein was never chairman - he was a DoF.

Peter Hill-Wood was the chairman

He was Vice -chairman actually

 

[billyiddo]

Was he not a cheif exec or some over such role? - he was essentially the link man between board and managment more similar to a DoF than a Chairman (in terms of the comparisons to Levy) i would say.

 

[Gutter Boy]

He was one of those non-footballing DoFs that were common then - Rick Parry (Liverpool), Peter Kenyon/David Gill (United), Peter Kenyon (Chelsea) etc.

Recently more clubs have followed us and gone with a footballing DoF - Michael Emenalo (Chelsea), Txiki Begiristain (City), Les Reed (Southampton) etc.

 

[Finney Is Back]

He was one of those non-footballing DoFs that were common then - Rick Parry (Liverpool), Peter Kenyon/David Gill (United), Peter Kenyon (Chelsea) etc.

Recently more clubs have followed us and gone with a footballing DoF - Michael Emenalo (Chelsea), Txiki Begiristain (City), Les Reed (Southampton) etc.

He effectively had exactly the same role at Arsenal that Levy has to for Tottenham. He was running the club for the majority owner/owners (Hill Wood in Arsenal's case and Joe Lewis in our case). It was Dein who had final say on the contracts, Dein who brought in Wenger, Dein who initiated and delivered their stadium move. The only difference between him and Levy is the level of pay they award themselves.... and I notice that Levy decided that he deserved a £500,000 pay rise this year, I guess that's fair enough though... after all he must've worked really hard to have delivered that £30 million increase in revenue solely attributed to the new premiership TV deal.

 

[Gutter Boy]

He effectively had exactly the same role at Arsenal that Levy has to for Tottenham. He was running the club for the majority owner/owners (Hill Wood in Arsenal's case and Joe Lewis in our case). It was Dein who had final say on the contracts, Dein who brought in Wenger, Dein who initiated and delivered their stadium move. The only difference between him and Levy is the level of pay they award themselves.... and I notice that Levy decided that he deserved a £500,000 pay rise this year, I guess that's fair enough though... after all he must've worked really hard to have delivered that £30 million increase in revenue solely attributed to the new premiership TV deal.

I think the difference is that Levy personally owns 30% of us (cf Lewis' 70%). It's more a partnership - Lewis is just the silent partner.

Dein was always only an employee.

 

[Finney Is Back]

I think the difference is that Levy personally owns 30% of us (cf Lewis' 70%). It's more a partnership - Lewis is just the silent partner.

Dein was always only an employee.

Not quite. Dein also owned a number of Arsenal shares..... Admittedly not as big a share as Levy owns of Spurs, but he was still a part owner of the club he worked for.

 

[Finney Is Back]

In fact I will correct myself here.....

Daniel Levy owns 29.4% of ENIC, who own 85% of THFC.... Therefore Levy owns 25% of Spurs. This is the largest shareholding he has ever had (due to various convertible bond schemes underwritten by ENIC gradually increasing their shareholding).

At the time when David Dein was appointed Vice Chairman at Arsenal in 1983 he owned 16.6% of the club. However by the time the Premiership started in 1992, Dein had increased that to a 42% share of the club.

He therefore owned a larger portion of Arsenal than Levy has ever owned of Tottenham.

 

[jts1882]

Dein had a substantial share. He bought out Hill-Wood for £300,000 in the 80s ( ) and added to his share so he had over 40% at one point (more than Levy with us). He then cashed in in several stages. He sold some to Fiszman and then really cashed in with Usmanov after falling out with the rest of the board over Kroenke.

His role is very similar to Levy in that he was a major shareholder and in charge of running the club, the chief executive in all but name.

Edit: too slow.

 

[imcallingbullsh*t]

I think this message is a disgrace and completely takes us fans for mongs.

To say there was a clear strategy of young players coming through this year is a lie. It was only due to the fact our signings (which he said would come good this year) absolutely showing themselves up as duds that gave our young players a chance.

To try and suggest that we are run in the right way and can only base our transfer spend on 'operational income' is a complete lie. Every year we bankroll our transfers with income from player sales and the fact we have not had a positive net spend since 2008 is a complete joke. Yes our club is financially sounds but our crud squad is the product of zero ambition in the transfer market.

The last three years has seen a disastrous managerial and board level appointments, a chaotic and completely awful transfer policy, a prolonged and laughable stadium saga, huge rises in ticket prices and a complete lack of footballing ands business coherency.

We make the largest ever recorded perm profit and we continue to bring in substandard players is a joke. Yes we have a nice training ground but the fact he now pays himself the most in the Premier League is an utter joke. We could do worse but we could do some much bloody better. If he has another awful summer then he has to go because Levy has set us back almost 10 years in the last 2.

clam

Trouble is with the we don't show ambition in the transfer market is the Bale money. We showed ambition we broke our transfer record several times. We brought several players over 30mil.

The issue is we A) spent the money badly B) when we spend 30mil we can attract Lamela or Soldado, when other clubs spend 30mil they get Sanchez or Depay or Willian or Fabregas

We are not going to attract the "big" names they wont come, our wage structure doesnt support it because we cant afford it. Even if we then did try and gamble and pay Sanchez 200k to attract him, he may not want to come as we wont win things, and if he did come chances are its for the wrong reasons.

 

[Gutter Boy]

In fact I will correct myself here.....

Daniel Levy owns 29.4% of ENIC, who own 85% of THFC.... Therefore Levy owns 25% of Spurs. This is the largest shareholding he has ever had (due to various convertible bond schemes underwritten by ENIC gradually increasing their shareholding).

At the time when David Dein was appointed Vice Chairman at Arsenal in 1983 he owned 16.6% of the club. However by the time the Premiership started in 1992, Dein had increased that to a 42% share of the club.

He therefore owned a larger portion of Arsenal than Levy has ever owned of Tottenham.

I didn't know that about Dein - I thought PHW owned pretty much all of Arsenal until Stan Kroenke started to buy him out.

I think ENIC own quite a bit more than 85% now though. The 85% figure was the last one before the company was delisted. Since there has been the £40m loan which was to be converted in extra shares. We're effectively a private company now - there are no other shareholders (there's no liquidity/point in having them when you aren't listed), other than a few fans' christmas present shares that it would be bad PR for them to compulsory purchase (they'll probably only do that when they want to sell, like Ken Bates did)

 

[Finney Is Back]

I didn't know that about Dein - I thought PHW owned pretty much all of Arsenal until Stan Kroenke started to buy him out.

I think ENIC own quite a bit more than 85% now though. The 85% figure was the last one before the company was delisted. Since there has been the £40m loan which was to be converted in extra shares. We're effectively a private company now - there are no other shareholders (there's no liquidity/point in having them when you aren't listed), other than a few fans' christmas present shares that it would be bad PR for them to compulsory purchase (they'll probably only do that when they want to sell, like Ken Bates did)

Only partly true. We are indeed now privately owned having come off of the AIM inded early in 2012. However THFC still has close to 30,000 small shareholders (some of which are not so small in the £ scheme of things). It is entirely possible to have a holding in a private company. The only big difference between being public and private relates to how the company is regulated and the amount of information that the company has to release to the public realm.

 

[lurker of old]

ENIC have no interest in the club being anything but self-sufficient, and never will.
I don't see that as a problem at all. For me it is a very positive statement from the Chairman.
As for LCLC: The last three years has seen a disastrous managerial and board level appointments, a chaotic and completely awful transfer policy, a prolonged and laughable stadium saga, huge rises in ticket prices and a complete lack of footballing ands business coherency.
Maybe Archway Steel were simply awkward sods who were impossible to deal with. Maybe we gambled with the Bale money, and the gambles didn't pay off, but that is football. We're all disappointed that we finished the season so poorly, but the photo of the stadium outline points to the future. For once we know who the manager will be next season, and most of the players too. Cheer up!

 

[SpurMeUp]

The lift in performance mid-season, however, raised all our expectations, such that we have been disappointed by our more recent results.

Going forward, we have restructured the footballing side of the Club to ensure our sporting philosophy is adhered to – we need to ensure that we have a balance of experienced and home grown players, playing attacking, entertaining football our fans love to watch. Perhaps we had lost our way a little bit in this respect, so this will be our guiding principle as we embark on the summer transfer window.

We are all eager to be challenging at a higher level. Whilst the popular view may be to spend money in excess of earnings or find a philanthropic investor to fund transfers, those scenarios are simply not possible under the new world of Financial Fair Play rules whereby clubs can only spend revenues generated through operations.

That said, this summer we shall look to make changes to support Mauricio’s plans for next season.

Its a good honest account. Maybe we need a mid-term letter to supporters especially at the moment with all of the stadium changes. I think supports appreciate it, and as this message board shows, we take an deep interest in all aspects of the club and business.

The last sentence in the above means the Spurs sales is on! Up to 50% must go? Lots of decent players up for grabs. Get them while you can.

With the younger players coming through we have another financial opportunity. Bale was worth 80m. Our youth products that have graduated can't be worth much less in total? Then add that they will be on much lower salaries...we will have some financial and transfer opportunities again this summer if the DL sales go well. If we can use the young players to fill out the squad, the ideal scenario would see us sign 8 figure sum (£10-20m) key players. Of course the challenge is competing to sign the best, or the second tier who aren't quite on for Chelsea or CL regulars, but could develop.

We are lucky to have such an interesting club. Much to look forward to. Whether we're zhit, or punching above our weight, we're never a dull club. I hope DL stays on a good while and delivers his and our dream. Winning the PL then Champions League Easy.