• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Contingency planning : If Ange is sacked, who should replace him?

Daisuk said:
I can see the argument for that, for sure, but we'd still have to operate under FFP - how much do you reckon we're underspending, and if so, what do we really know about that being true? Not trying to be cute her, I genuinely wonder myself - I hear this thrown around a lot, but do we have any evidence to support it? Are we really just racking up money that goes into the ENIC chest, and spend a percentage of money on the actual football club, or can we find the expenditure matching our actual income?
Click to expand...
This made me wonder, if we got bought with a leverage buy out, and the new owners took out half the profits like the Glazers, would this affect what we can spend under FFP?
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Enic haven’t taken any money out, that’s clear from the accounts that are published
In total they have out in roughly £150m including money buy the club (apologies that’s all from memory and very rough)
The club is now worth around £2.5 to £3B to them
So a huge return if they sell
They do appear to put all the income back into the club
I’ve never seen anything that contradicts that in the data and reports that I’ve seen
One issue that’s forgotten regularly is we owe a lot in transfers and that’s not money pegged to an interest rate … that’s cash that has to be paid
And wages wise the last data I saw was from Swiss ramble ( an arsenal supporting finance guy but a genuine source of info) and we were paying out £251m in wages in 22/23 which was 20% more than the previous season
Click to expand...

Thanks! So if this is true, why is Levy/Enic our real problem? Would swapping any of them out really make us more competent or competitive? Does the criticism all come down to bad decision making? We have a footballing operations team now, supposedly footballing savy people with good track records - why would Levy go above them to take decisions if we're operating within what we can with regards to FFP? Ok, so we have guys like Lloris saying we should have spent more - but how could we have if the money simply weren't there?

I'm not saying Levy is perfect, of course, and not necessarily trying to defend him - just trying to probe into what exactly he has done wrong beyond bad decision making while operating within our budget. We have had this football director setup many times, by the way. Would a new guy at the top necessarily be any better? Bottom line is we want someone in who would spend more and more on players, that's it really, but do we have the money for it? Doesn't seem like it to me.
 
glorygloryeze said:
Howe, mad to leave Saudi Sportswashing Machine as you say
Potter - we arte a worse proposition than when we approached previously imo
Southgate - both of us aren't that stupid :)
Mckenna - also represented by CAA Base like Ange, think it's a decent chance given that
Iraola - he'd probably wait for another year or two and go for either the Chelsea or Man Utd jobs

My guess is McKenna
Click to expand...

Just to make a few counters

- Potter would bite your fudging hand off mate, he's in rebuild reputation mode, zero fudging chance he gets anything close to Spurs in his next gig, and if his next gig isn't amazing he's done, brick gigs for the rest of his career
- Iraola is literally earning 1M/yr right now, 5-8M/yr would be a cheap manager for us, nobody turns down that kind of money increase (it's why Amorim is at United)
- 100% on Southgate, no top half team will appoint him.
 
Daisuk said:
Thanks! So if this is true, why is Levy/Enic our real problem? Would swapping any of them out really make us more competent or competitive? Does the criticism all come down to bad decision making? We have a footballing operations team now, supposedly footballing savy people with good track records - why would Levy go above them to take decisions if we're operating within what we can with regards to FFP? Ok, so we have guys like Lloris saying we should have spent more - but how could we have if the money simply weren't there?

I'm not saying Levy is perfect, of course, and not necessarily trying to defend him - just trying to probe into what exactly he has done wrong beyond bad decision making while operating within our budget. We have had this football director setup many times, by the way. Would a new guy at the top necessarily be any better? Bottom line is we want someone in who would spend more and more on players, that's it really, but do we have the money for it? Doesn't seem like it to me.
Click to expand...

The legitimate argument is ENIC/Levy run the club in a low risk mode, while good in long run, there are decent arguments that at certain points the club could have taken on more debt/risk to try to push on, and by not doing that we have stalled/regressed.

The other side is a lot of fans want to see owners throw money in without any regard for it being sustainable/business, truth is the majority of fans want the cheat mode of City & Chelsea and would willingly turn a blind eye to the source of that money (and I'll get an incoming lecture about all billionaires bad, because Lewis is the same as the Saudi/ME owners who literally murder people for being gay)

It's a circle argument, some balanced answers in the thread, but in the end it comes back to the same place.
 
Raziel said:
The legitimate argument is ENIC/Levy run the club in a low risk mode, while good in long run, there are decent arguments that at certain points the club could have taken on more debt/risk to try to push on, and by not doing that we have stalled/regressed.

The other side is a lot of fans want to see owners throw money in without any regard for it being sustainable/business, truth is the majority of fans want the cheat mode of City & Chelsea and would willingly turn a blind eye to the source of that money (and I'll get an incoming lecture about all billionaires bad, because Lewis is the same as the Saudi/ME owners who literally murder people for being gay)

It's a circle argument, some balanced answers in the thread, but in the end it comes back to the same place.
Click to expand...
I think your spot on
Many won’t care where the money comes from and just want more spent
 
Raziel said:
The legitimate argument is ENIC/Levy run the club in a low risk mode, while good in long run, there are decent arguments that at certain points the club could have taken on more debt/risk to try to push on, and by not doing that we have stalled/regressed.

The other side is a lot of fans want to see owners throw money in without any regard for it being sustainable/business, truth is the majority of fans want the cheat mode of City & Chelsea and would willingly turn a blind eye to the source of that money (and I'll get an incoming lecture about all billionaires bad, because Lewis is the same as the Saudi/ME owners who literally murder people for being gay)

It's a circle argument, some balanced answers in the thread, but in the end it comes back to the same place.
Click to expand...

Yeah, circles indeed. Even if we had Saudi owners (ref Saudi Sportswashing Machine), we couldn't just spend billions and stay within FFP. Has Saudi Sportswashing Machine really spent that much? They're not particularly good yet. So we would either have to cheat and do some creative accounting, or just hope that FFP isn't enforced all that strictly.

We're chasing Moby dingdong. No one has a real clue as to what is wrong. Maybe nothing is wrong - we have it all in place, we just need it to gel, and it will at some point.
 
Raziel said:
Just to make a few counters

- Potter would bite your fudging hand off mate, he's in rebuild reputation mode, zero fudging chance he gets anything close to Spurs in his next gig, and if his next gig isn't amazing he's done, brick gigs for the rest of his career
- Iraola is literally earning 1M/yr right now, 5-8M/yr would be a cheap manager for us, nobody turns down that kind of money increase (it's why Amorim is at United)
- 100% on Southgate, no top half team will appoint him.
Click to expand...


£5-8m for 18 months and a tanked career isn't as good as £1m year and bonuses for doing a good job before moving to a more stable club.
Iraola comes here and crashes, and let's be honest it's a coin toss at the very best, he's in exactly the same position Potter is in now, Last chance saloon.
Not convinced it's the attractive job on the horizon.
 
glasgowspur said:
£5-8m for 18 months and a tanked career isn't as good as £1m year and bonuses for doing a good job before moving to a more stable club.
Iraola comes here and crashes, and let's be honest it's a coin toss at the very best, he's in exactly the same position Potter is in now, Last chance saloon.
Not convinced it's the attractive job on the horizon.
Click to expand...

Yep, top jobs come up home and abroad all the time. You just have to sit tight and choose the one that suits you the most.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Enic haven’t taken any money out, that’s clear from the accounts that are published
In total they have out in roughly £150m including money buy the club (apologies that’s all from memory and very rough)
The club is now worth around £2.5 to £3B to them
So a huge return if they sell
They do appear to put all the income back into the club
I’ve never seen anything that contradicts that in the data and reports that I’ve seen
One issue that’s forgotten regularly is we owe a lot in transfers and that’s not money pegged to an interest rate … that’s cash that has to be paid
And wages wise the last data I saw was from Swiss ramble ( an arsenal supporting finance guy but a genuine source of info) and we were paying out £251m in wages in 22/23 which was 20% more than the previous season
Click to expand...
You know why that was? Because we qualified for the Champions League. The players (and Levy) get good bonuses for that sort of thing because the club makes money. I will bet you any amount of money, our absolute spend on wages drops in 23/24. That's the point, we structure our pay for performance. No really top player is going to come here when he can get most of his money guaranteed elsewhere.

Baleforce said:
The numbers are out there for all to see, we are not holding back money we could be spending, it’s all going into the team.

The wages to turnover ratio is a red herring, we pay what we can afford.
Click to expand...
How is it a red herring and what numbers are you referring to?
 
DeanoAustin said:
You know why that was? Because we qualified for the Champions League. The players (and Levy) get good bonuses for that sort of thing because the club makes money. I will bet you any amount of money, our absolute spend on wages drops in 23/24. That's the point, we structure our pay for performance. No really top player is going to come here when he can get most of his money guaranteed elsewhere.


How is it a red herring and what numbers are you referring to?
Click to expand...

People say we should be spending more as our wages to turnover over ratio is lower than our rivals.

But we can’t spend more because we don’t have more.

Being able to spend more against PSR doesn’t matter if we don’t have the money in the first place.

As we are not posting huge profits each year or paying out dividends it means the money people want to spend on higher wages isn’t actually there to start with.
 
Baleforce said:
People say we should be spending more as our wages to turnover over ratio is lower than our rivals.

But we can’t spend more because we don’t have more.

Being able to spend more against PSR doesn’t matter if we don’t have the money in the first place.

As we are not posting huge profits each year or paying out dividends it means the money people want to spend on higher wages isn’t actually there to start with.
Click to expand...
We had 198m in cash and cash equivalents on the balance sheet in June 2023. See page 19.

 
Baleforce said:
18 months go, what was the reported profit next time around?

thats where the margin is, unless we spend less on transfers
Click to expand...
Profit isn't really a good measure because it includes things like depreciation which have no impact on cash flow. Even at that, someone posted a table above that shows over 3 years we are the most/only profitable club in the league.

Financial results seem to come out in April every year so we won't know the June 2024 cash number until April 2025. But it won't be a million miles away from 193m I'd bet.
 
Daisuk said:
Really? Everyone seems to blame everything all at once. It's the manager! It's the chairman! It's ENIC! It's not buying experienced players! It's buying only experienced players! It's no marquee signings! It's not playing enough young players! It's playing too many young players! It's the mentality! It's the history of the Tottenham! It's the fans! It's the awful new stadium! It's the fitness coaches! It's Ryan Mason! It's the bloody tea lady! So everything is the problem?
Click to expand...

Fans are worse now then they have ever been in the past [ at most clubs] its a case of i want it and i want it now, it never appears to be seen by some that the more change you make the harder it is to progress. We live in a blame someone for all the ills that happens.
 
DeanoAustin said:
Profit isn't really a good measure because it includes things like depreciation which have no impact on cash flow. Even at that, someone posted a table above that shows over 3 years we are the most/only profitable club in the league.

Financial results seem to come out in April every year so we won't know the June 2024 cash number until April 2025. But it won't be a million miles away from 193m I'd bet.
Click to expand...

I think its a good measure because thats where the flex is, we made more, we can afford to up the spend a bit, then check it next year
 
DeanoAustin said:
You know why that was? Because we qualified for the Champions League. The players (and Levy) get good bonuses for that sort of thing because the club makes money. I will bet you any amount of money, our absolute spend on wages drops in 23/24. That's the point, we structure our pay for performance. No really top player is going to come here when he can get most of his money guaranteed elsewhere.


How is it a red herring and what numbers are you referring to?
Click to expand...
The numbers don’t change that much when you look season to season
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back