• 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

Ah well mistakes have been made, it's a new start for us now. And since Paratici there haven't been many poor purchases at all and most of them with their best years ahead. Bentancur, Kulu, Bissouma, Sarr, Udogie, Romero, Richi (yeah that's right) and probably more I've forgotten. Spence looks like a punt that isn't going to work out, Perisic was very much a Conte signing. VDV looks the part already too, we are well set and much improved in this area I feel....

I agree.
Onwards onwards and onwards, albeit with the knowledge that leopards and spots, etc, so enjoy what we can when we can as it happens!
 
We have under used talent already in the youth
City got smashed yesterday which may be the standard of under 21s but our team was young and Jamie Donnely was the lad pulling the strings

I’m in France and a few of the Northern Irish lads I’ve met are from Antrim and they all know him even though he left there years ago

They all have great hopes that he won’t choose England

Agreed, I think Donnely and also Dorrington are two I see as very close to at least proper squad exposure on a regular basis. Kyermaten is another exciting young player. Here's hoping we nurture their talents properly! I fear we have wasted some very good players in the last few years, Harvey White, Dane Scarlett and, of course, Troy Parrott, albeit still more than young enough to step up up...
 
Honestly if that was Chelsea and their DoF was banned for whatever.... we would be foaming at the mouth saying xyz ....
 
I agree with you there…. Wasn’t their ownership structure a bit complicated at the time with both Usmanov and Kroenke holding large portions of shares?

I think there were also stories of money being there for Wenger to spend but him choosing not to spend it.

Your statement about Arsenal holding cash to underwrite the Rams stadium is wide of the mark I think. I’ve owned minority, majority and (effective) full stakes in many companies and have never had to hold cash reserves in one limited company for the sake of another.
It's not unheard of of you're using one as collateral against another.

Rare to be stated as simply as a cash sum though, usually forms part of a ratio.
 
A pretty balanced article on Levy, all things considered.

https://theathletic.com/4780850/2023/08/17/daniel-levy-harry-kane-joe-lewis/

Won't copy the whole thing, but there is a snippet on the Trust that is interesting in light of the uproar by many on here at the temerity of the Trust daring to question our dear leader:

Daniel Levy has lost his shields at Tottenham – more than ever, it is his club

At the end of the 2018-19 season, in which Tottenham reached the Champions League final and moved to the new stadium, the THST’s annual survey saw 89 per cent of fans express at very least cautious optimism (46 per cent confident, 43 per cent somewhat confident) in ENIC’s long-term strategy for the club.

By the end of last season, that faith had plummeted: seven per cent were very confident in the owners’ long-term strategy, 18 per cent were somewhat confident, 75 per cent were either not so confident or not all confident. Looking to the future, just three per cent stated full confidence in the owners; 48 per cent called for a greater focus on the football side of the business; 25 per cent would welcome new ownership if a “credible” alternative emerged; 23 per cent wanted ENIC to sell immediately; one per cent said none of the above.

“There is a section of the support that is very firmly ‘They need to go’,” says THST member and former co-chair Martin Cloake. “Others feel that is extreme and are proud that we reached the Champions League final and challenged for the Premier League without being owned by a nation-state. They’re worried about what might come next if the club was sold. Some supporters don’t care what comes next. They just want a change.”

Cloake has long felt conflicted about that. He doesn’t want his club owned by a state, particularly not one with what he calls “dubious policies”. He knows there are many worse or less appealing owners out there, but increasingly he doubts whether Levy and ENIC can “take the club much further”.

At the same time, he questions the decision-making and the culture within the club — not just on football matters but on ticket prices and much more. He has campaigned for years for Tottenham to offer more transparency and better communication. He wants the club to learn from its mistakes but feels they all too rarely acknowledge them.


Again, a pretty reasonable take from an organisation many on here resent for apparently being unreasonable. If anything, one can say Cloake is being too measured in his views - the survey clearly reveals a vast majority of respondents are no longer confident about the club under ENIC's leadership.
 
Thank Levy for going back to his preferred dof template, we’re clearly much better as a club like this, hopefully he doesn’t get swayed by a relatively successful manager again who might not want someone above him.
I’m not sure a CEO should be thanked for finally fixing a HUGE problem after 4 years of neglect under their own stewardship.
 
A pretty balanced article on Levy, all things considered.

https://theathletic.com/4780850/2023/08/17/daniel-levy-harry-kane-joe-lewis/

Won't copy the whole thing, but there is a snippet on the Trust that is interesting in light of the uproar by many on here at the temerity of the Trust daring to question our dear leader:

Daniel Levy has lost his shields at Tottenham – more than ever, it is his club

At the end of the 2018-19 season, in which Tottenham reached the Champions League final and moved to the new stadium, the THST’s annual survey saw 89 per cent of fans express at very least cautious optimism (46 per cent confident, 43 per cent somewhat confident) in ENIC’s long-term strategy for the club.

By the end of last season, that faith had plummeted: seven per cent were very confident in the owners’ long-term strategy, 18 per cent were somewhat confident, 75 per cent were either not so confident or not all confident. Looking to the future, just three per cent stated full confidence in the owners; 48 per cent called for a greater focus on the football side of the business; 25 per cent would welcome new ownership if a “credible” alternative emerged; 23 per cent wanted ENIC to sell immediately; one per cent said none of the above.

“There is a section of the support that is very firmly ‘They need to go’,” says THST member and former co-chair Martin Cloake. “Others feel that is extreme and are proud that we reached the Champions League final and challenged for the Premier League without being owned by a nation-state. They’re worried about what might come next if the club was sold. Some supporters don’t care what comes next. They just want a change.”

Cloake has long felt conflicted about that. He doesn’t want his club owned by a state, particularly not one with what he calls “dubious policies”. He knows there are many worse or less appealing owners out there, but increasingly he doubts whether Levy and ENIC can “take the club much further”.

At the same time, he questions the decision-making and the culture within the club — not just on football matters but on ticket prices and much more. He has campaigned for years for Tottenham to offer more transparency and better communication. He wants the club to learn from its mistakes but feels they all too rarely acknowledge them.


Again, a pretty reasonable take from an organisation many on here resent for apparently being unreasonable. If anything, one can say Cloake is being too measured in his views - the survey clearly reveals a vast majority of respondents are no longer confident about the club under ENIC's leadership.
A THST survey with 5-6k votes with the majority being THST members doesn't give a true representation of Spurs fans.
 
A THST survey with 5-6k votes with the majority being THST members doesn't give a true representation of Spurs fans.

Could not agree more, however do not mention it to Dubai who is convinced that the THST muppets have a voice that actually means something :rolleyes:
 
A THST survey with 5-6k votes with the majority being THST members doesn't give a true representation of Spurs fans.

And you're basing this assertion on...what, exactly?Screenshot_20230818-080617.png

Here's their sample for 2023. Note that only a third (35%) are THST members. So not the majority as you're asserting.
 
Back