• 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

LemonadeMoney said:
We couldn't afford the very best, so we were looking at value and potential in the market - there was a chance that he failed at Chelsea because of that club, rather than himself. Wouldn't of been my choice of manager, but I can see why Levy did.
It was Levy's long term ambition to have the best stadium and the best manager in the world. Unfortunately, by the time we were in a position to get him, he was on the decline. Man U won a couple of cups with arguably a weaker side. Virtually every fan was clambering to win something ASAP. Who's to say Jose wouldn't have repeated that with a better defence. Wouldn't of been my choice of manager, but I can see why Levy did.
Virtually every fan was clambering for Jose to go ASAP. Same with Jol. There are plenty of times when Levy does exactly what he thinks the fans want.

None of them are, that's the point. I'd say Levy getting about 50% of his appointments right is a pretty good success rate.
Click to expand...

It was a risk to say the least going for AVB. Would have been sensible going for him had he gone to another PL club, say Everton or Southampton and had relative success (top 6-8 etc). When a manager or DOF signs a player they don’t get plaudits for taking a risk or people seeing logic in signing them, they get judged on the ultimate results i.e. was he a good signing.

A lot of people saw Jose was on the decline during his years at United, personally I think a lot of that stems from how he treated the doctor at Chelsea and how he treats players like Shaw and Alli. The game has moved on and that approach doesn’t really work anymore. Neither do his tactics but he never adapted, he just claimed he wasn’t instructing to the team to sit on 1-0 leads which I don’t think anyone seriously buys. It’s worrying that Levy still thought of Jose as a top manager. He’s one of the highest paid chairman in the league and its his job to have judgment on these kind of things. If it’s not his area of expertise then he should employ someone to perform that function or at the very least help him.

No one disagreed with sacking Jose but the timing of it. A week before a cup final? Would have been better off either sacking him immediately after we got knocked out of the EL or waiting until after the final. That was when most of assumed Levy would pull the trigger as the results and performances were only going one way.

Sorry where are you getting the 50% success rate from? I’d say the only unqualified successes were Jol, Harry and Poch. The others are pretty debatable. Bringing in Harry made sense as we were struggling at the time and he had experience getting teams out of trouble. Not sure if anyone expected him to get us into the top 4 in his first full season but he did and even though it ended on a sour note, he left us in a better state then we were before he arrived. Same for Jol and Poch without a doubt. I don’t see how you can honestly say any of the other managers Levy appointed did that but we all see things differently.
 
Jurgen the German said:
It was a risk to say the least going for AVB. Would have been sensible going for him had he gone to another PL club, say Everton or Southampton and had relative success (top 6-8 etc). When a manager or DOF signs a player they don’t get plaudits for taking a risk or people seeing logic in signing them, they get judged on the ultimate results i.e. was he a good signing.

A lot of people saw Jose was on the decline during his years at United, personally I think a lot of that stems from how he treated the doctor at Chelsea and how he treats players like Shaw and Alli. The game has moved on and that approach doesn’t really work anymore. Neither do his tactics but he never adapted, he just claimed he wasn’t instructing to the team to sit on 1-0 leads which I don’t think anyone seriously buys. It’s worrying that Levy still thought of Jose as a top manager. He’s one of the highest paid chairman in the league and its his job to have judgment on these kind of things. If it’s not his area of expertise then he should employ someone to perform that function or at the very least help him.

No one disagreed with sacking Jose but the timing of it. A week before a cup final? Would have been better off either sacking him immediately after we got knocked out of the EL or waiting until after the final. That was when most of assumed Levy would pull the trigger as the results and performances were only going one way.

Sorry where are you getting the 50% success rate from? I’d say the only unqualified successes were Jol, Harry and Poch. The others are pretty debatable. Bringing in Harry made sense as we were struggling at the time and he had experience getting teams out of trouble. Not sure if anyone expected him to get us into the top 4 in his first full season but he did and even though it ended on a sour note, he left us in a better state then we were before he arrived. Same for Jol and Poch without a doubt. I don’t see how you can honestly say any of the other managers Levy appointed did that but we all see things differently.
Click to expand...

From what I understand if he was sacked after winning a cup the compensation package would have been astronomical and grounds for unfair dismissal, just like how Conte stuck the boot into Chelsea.

Again goes with the narrative that Levy was more about balancing the books vs winning a cup. Now i know its only the Carling cup but surely even Levy could see what it would have meant to the fans to have a great day out at wembley and winning something.
 
  • Famed for being a tight fisted chairman who doesn't back his managers buying youngters for profit (not success)
  • Squad that is a shower of dog muck most days
  • Your star player's future is uncertain (at best)

How do you negotiate your way out of this one Daniel?
 
spurs' magna carter said:
  • Famed for being a tight fisted chairman who doesn't back his managers buying youngters for profit (not success)
  • Squad that is a shower of dog muck most days
  • Your star player's future is uncertain (at best)
How do you negotiate your way out of this one Daniel?
Click to expand...

He doesn't have to as he is only accountable to ENIC.... and definitely not to the fans. Its surely not the fans based in london now more about global fans that support tv rights, merchandising and sponsorships.

That PR exercise in the villa match program? Just a PR idea to soothe the sponsors and the NFL partners.
 
JerusalemMan said:
There's just the inconvenient issue of the amount greater than £1 billion that is owed to Abramovich.
Click to expand...
He could see that as a valid investment to increase the asset value of the business. Chelsea may now be worth as much as £2 billion if it were up for sale. Without that £1b investment made by Abramovich Chelsea would've had less success, less fans, lower sponsorships and been worth a far lower amount. Chelsea and us are actually carrying very similar debt levels at the moment (I think our gross debt is higher due to Abramovich's Chelsea loan bearing no interest). So Chelsea have lower debt than us and a higher turnover than us. Does it matter that Chelsea's debt is to their owner instead of the Banks? (Personally I'd much rather our debt was to our owners at zero interest and not being asked to be repaid than the debt we have loaded on our club right now).
 
parklane1 said:
The fact that you are compering our debt to Chelski and their crook of a chairman shows your vendetta against Levy. Pathetic.
Click to expand...
You need to be a little less touchy about your favourite person at THFC mate!....

I said that Chelsea were now largely self sustaining (which they are) and was pulled up on the fact that is only because they owe their owner £1 billion. I merely pointed out that we also owe a large amount of money (gross debt around £1.2b according to last figures on SwissRamble).

Both Abramovich and ENIC have used debt to attempt to increase the asset value and turnover of the club that they own....

Abramovich has done it by investing his own money so that the club can buy the best players in order to consistently win silverware and thus increase the club's profile, fan base and sponsorship revenue.

ENIC have done it by the club borrowing money from the Banks to improve our infrastructure to increase our ticket and corporate revenue. Both are legitimate ways of attempting to grow a business. At present Chelsea's model looks to be more effective as they have a higher turnover than Spurs (along with countless more trophies).
 
parklane1 said:
The fact that you are compering our debt to Chelski and their crook of a chairman shows your vendetta against Levy. Pathetic.
Click to expand...
TBF he is right though
Although they claim their self sustaining and there not that either
But Romans debt is now worth less than the value of the club
Which is odd really when you look at the infrastructure work needed but that’s why football club valuations are a joke
 
Bedfordspurs said:
TBF he is right though
Although they claim their self sustaining and there not that either
But Romans debt is now worth less than the value of the club
Which is odd really when you look at the infrastructure work needed but that’s why football club valuations are a joke
Click to expand...

A club is only worth whatever a buyer will pay. Tottenham being self sufficient and a couple of nice modern buildings is a better investment than one that is going to require the same levels of investment made by Roman just to sustain it.

He may be able to write some of the debt off, but anyone buying that club knows it will take further investment as time progresses vs spurs which will be a turn key operation where debts and profits are completely on the balance sheet and not behind some dodgy figures and unrealistic pie in the sky figures that do not reflect the reality.
 
Gazza said:
A club is only worth whatever a buyer will pay. Tottenham being self sufficient and a couple of nice modern buildings is a better investment than one that is going to require the same levels of investment made by Roman just to sustain it.

He may be able to write some of the debt off, but anyone buying that club knows it will take further investment as time progresses vs spurs which will be a turn key operation where debts and profits are completely on the balance sheet and not behind some dodgy figures and unrealistic pie in the sky figures that do not reflect the reality.
Click to expand...
But neither club has anyone buying it anytime soon
 
What makes me laugh about Levy is that he won't sell players to another club in case it strengthens our "rivals". Since when are Emirates Marketing Project, Man Utd, Liverpool, chelsea our rivals? We are not competing against them. They want titles and go for titles.


Our rivals are Leicester, West ham, arsenal, we cannot afford to strengthen them just incase they finish above us ... OK its only currently arsenal that are our rivals.

So levy completely understands that buying quality players make the team better .... but will not apply the same standards to his own team.
 
Chelsea made a profit due to £143m profit in player sales (this include eden hazard to madrid). Their operating profit did not look so good. -£112m. Everton were the only one worse at -£175m.

With brexit meaning english clubs being unable to buy under 18's from abroad. Chelsea wont be able to hoard young players anymore and sell them at large profits to get around ffp.
 
Last edited:
Gazza said:
A club is only worth whatever a buyer will pay. Tottenham being self sufficient and a couple of nice modern buildings is a better investment than one that is going to require the same levels of investment made by Roman just to sustain it.

He may be able to write some of the debt off, but anyone buying that club knows it will take further investment as time progresses vs spurs which will be a turn key operation where debts and profits are completely on the balance sheet and not behind some dodgy figures and unrealistic pie in the sky figures that do not reflect the reality.
Click to expand...
Please explain what you mean by ‘dodgy figures’?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back