• 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

Daniel Levy - Chairman

Bedfordspurs said:
He owns the club
He can pay himself what he wants out of the profits
That’s the thing people forget and keep on thinking he is an employee
Click to expand...
Actually I'm not sure that he can pay himself what he wants..... not without sign off from uncle Joe anyway seeing as he is the main shareholder.
 
scaramanga said:
As aggressively as possible - as is the duty of anyone running any for-profit business.
Click to expand...

That's true if you are running a quoted company owned by institutional investors. It's not true - in fact, it's spectacularly false, and contrary to any ethical norms - for my soothsaying factory, your sweatshop or Levy & Lewis's football club.
 
Grays_1890 said:
I think we need to win things 400% to cement any legacy but 3m for working by all accounts 16 hour days for 15-20 years at hat level and that involvement to deliver Spurs to become a global football power or at least dine at the top table, he deserves his salary. And that is not a pro Levy thats just reality of it all, could be anyone in that role and I would say the same.

I feel dreadful for the people on Furlough, I truly do but I am not having that the levels of pressure and involvement that Levy has as a day to day job is the same and can be judged the same based on a simple tally chart of like for like.
Click to expand...
The salary was £7 million (£3 million of which was the bonus). Not sure how that compares to CEO role for standard £400 million a year turnover companies or (probably more pertinently) the CEO's of the other 19 PL clubs?
 
Finney Is Back said:
Is that even possible?

I thought that Furlough was used to temporarily suspend workers so that the employer is giving them nothing, the government then steps in and pays 80% of their salary (to a maximum of £2,500 per month I believe). I don't think that employers can continue to pay people and have government top it up (or other way round) I think it is all or nothing and the people that you Furlough cannot work for you during that period.
Click to expand...

Employers are allowed to top up if they wish. From the gov.uk website :
Work out what you can claim
Employers need to make a claim for wage costs through this scheme.

You will receive a grant from HMRC to cover the lower of 80% of an employee’s regular wage or £2,500 per month, plus the associated Employer National Insurance contributions and minimum automatic enrolment employer pension contributions on that subsidised wage. Fees, commission and bonuses should not be included.

At a minimum, employers must pay their employee the lower of 80% of their regular wage or £2,500 per month. An employer can also choose to top up an employee’s salary beyond this but is not obliged to under this scheme.
 
Glenda's Legs said:
Employers are allowed to top up if they wish. From the gov.uk website :
Work out what you can claim
Employers need to make a claim for wage costs through this scheme.

You will receive a grant from HMRC to cover the lower of 80% of an employee’s regular wage or £2,500 per month, plus the associated Employer National Insurance contributions and minimum automatic enrolment employer pension contributions on that subsidised wage. Fees, commission and bonuses should not be included.

At a minimum, employers must pay their employee the lower of 80% of their regular wage or £2,500 per month. An employer can also choose to top up an employee’s salary beyond this but is not obliged to under this scheme.
Click to expand...
Fair play. Thank you.

In which case the club should absolutely be topping up the 20% for those 550 workers.
 
DeanoAustin said:
Yeah, I can understand the argument about it being late but construction projects nearly always run over. What Levy delivered, and by all accounts he was involved in everything, is a beyond-world-class stadium that will not only serve the club well - it's been huge for the local area too.

It's a hell of a legacy to leave compared to the odd League Cup or FA Cup although I would love a few of those too.
Click to expand...
On a side note.....thankful this wasn't going on last year when we were still in the midst of trying to get the stadium completed.

Might of had issues with social distancing on stadium building site:D
 
Finney Is Back said:
Is that even possible?

I thought that Furlough was used to temporarily suspend workers so that the employer is giving them nothing, the government then steps in and pays 80% of their salary (to a maximum of £2,500 per month I believe). I don't think that employers can continue to pay people and have government top it up (or other way round) I think it is all or nothing and the people that you Furlough cannot work for you during that period.
Click to expand...
No idea
Just what the guy said
 
https://twitter.com/x/status/1245267938011156482


Look at all the other clubs showing us up.

Of course the club can afford to pay our low paid employees the £500k or whatever a month their collective salary is. We'll be spunking multiple of that on agents fees in the last week of the transfer window no doubt.

We're being shown up by Arsenal, little Bournemouth, Brighton, Burnley, Palace, both Liverpool clubs, both Manchester clubs and even the Dildo Brothers.
 
Modric THFC said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1245267938011156482


Look at all the other clubs showing us up.

Of course the club can afford to pay our low paid employees the £500k or whatever a month their collective salary is. We'll be spunking multiple of that on agents fees in the last week of the transfer window no doubt.

We're being shown up by Arsenal, little Bournemouth, Brighton, Burnley, Palace, both Liverpool clubs, both Manchester clubs and even the Dildo Brothers.
Click to expand...

Christ. Norwich, Saudi Sportswashing Machine and us - great company to be in.

The Times, the Torygraph and others piling on now. I suspect a U-turn is in order - at least, I hope so. Because, as it was, yesterday, this is indefensible.
 
DubaiSpur said:
Christ. Norwich, Saudi Sportswashing Machine and us - great company to be in.

The Times, the Torygraph and others piling on now. I suspect a U-turn is in order - at least, I hope so. Because, as it was, yesterday, this is indefensible.
Click to expand...

Press in knee jerk slaughter session shock horror
 
ShipOfGoldblum said:
That's true if you are running a quoted company owned by institutional investors. It's not true - in fact, it's spectacularly false, and contrary to any ethical norms - for my soothsaying factory, your sweatshop or Levy & Lewis's football club.
Click to expand...
The only responsibility of the directors of a business is to deliver maximum shareholder value.

Some believe that includes all that CSR flimflam but the way people vote with their wallets suggests otherwise.
 
Last edited:
Grays_1890 said:
Press in knee jerk slaughter session shock horror
Click to expand...

True, but I can't defend what we're doing, though. Arsenal have done the right thing, we have not. West Ham have done the right thing, we have not. Brighton, Burnley, Crystal Palace...

...this is wrong, mate. And as for the point you made yesterday re: being a net contributor in terms of taxes, so what? I would suspect the majority of middle class people are (and above), the majority of viable businesses are - almost all of them less financially loaded than super-rich fudging Tottenham Hotspur.

We can do without. We don't have to stiff the taxpayers and screw our own staff.

We can be better. We don't have to go down this squalid route, and be like Sports Direct's Mike Ashley. This shouldn't be what we, as a club, think is acceptable behaviour.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back