Doing a "Leeds"

[BrainOfLevy]

Well we did break our transfer record...three times. Signed seven (mostly) young, talented internationals. And made a profit.
Theoretically we have now improved our squad massively, while still having money in the bank should we see that we need to buy in January.

Not bothered about this at all, TBH.

Yeah, to be fair there's not too many places where I think we are weak. Willian would have been the icing on the cake. Maybe a back up striker but Ade and Defoe are good options, hopefully Ade being motivated.

And we have hopefully a lot of money in the bank to really strengthen next summer and go for a title challenge if it isn't achieved this year, because that is where we have to be aiming. I'm not demanding a win, just a challenge.

 

[NickTB]

Didn't quite know where to put this. Can't say I'm to sure about these numbers, but for those who are fearing we're doing a leeds, it might be comforting.

Michael McIntyre behind Levy there

 

[scotty220]

I don't really think you can simply list all the ins and outs and come up with a "net spend" figure. Almost every deal completed will be paid over installments. What's not to say that the reason we receive decent money for our players is because we negotiate fees over say a 4 year period, squeezing every last pound out of a deal by providing "finance" to other clubs. Whereas when we buy we offer say 50% up front, then pay the rest over 2 years, giving the selling club a massive cash injection and in return paying a smaller amount overall.

 

[jaysea67]

^ Also need to consider add-on clauses and sell-on percentages. It's all much more complex.

 

[braineclipse]

I don't really think you can simply list all the ins and outs and come up with a "net spend" figure. Almost every deal completed will be paid over installments. What's not to say that the reason we receive decent money for our players is because we negotiate fees over say a 4 year period, squeezing every last pound out of a deal by providing "finance" to other clubs. Whereas when we buy we offer say 50% up front, then pay the rest over 2 years, giving the selling club a massive cash injection and in return paying a smaller amount overall.

This could influence our short terms spending power.

However the general impression I get about Levy in the press is quite the opposite of what you're describing. He wants as much cash as possible when selling a player and he wants the deals staged as far into the future as possible when signing a player.

Either way our net spend, however staged, is still relevant imo. It doesn't give the complete picture, it's not definitive and probably not accurate. It does say something about what has been going on.

^ Also need to consider add-on clauses and sell-on percentages. It's all much more complex.

This is true as well of course, although you would expect those to be at least somewhat similar both ways.

It is more complex for sure, but as a basis for discussion and as a guideline to talk about if clubs spend a lot of money and if money is being spent wisely I think it's a good tool.

----------------------------------------------------

One thing that is often ignored though is agent fees. We've made a lot of deals this summer and a lot of deals abroad, I wouldn't be surprised if we broke our record this summer and we've been close to £10m in the past in a single fiscal year.

 

[Jordinho]

Thinking in terms of net spend, especially for just a single window, is quite pointless really. It's not even a fun exercise, it's just another reason to moan. It's impossible for us to know if there's been a net spend. We don't know the exact figures, but even if you listed everyone in and out going back a few years using estimates, we still don't know how much has gone out on associated costs like agents, sign on fees etc.

We also know very little about the overall financial state of things. Most clubs spend so much money on wages that there's barely anything left to spend. Even if we're as low as 60% of revenue, it takes a lot of money to run a big football club, there are loans to service and stadiums to build.

 

[Spursalot]

Net spend for a season is a perfectly viable way of looking at things, however it has it's limitations. You can't really extend it beyond the season that it has occurred in.


Granted it will not be perfect as you will not know the exact prices that transfer go for, but for the purposes of discussion an estimation is better then just saying '**** it, we don't know'.

 

[Jordinho]

But people seem to be expecting a certain net spend every window when they don't know if the money's actually there. It's a very Liverpool way of looking at things. We have had big net spend windows in the past followed by a few years of profit making. Levy will get slated for the latter ones as nobody cares to include the first one. Basically, we have a chairman that doesn't run the club the way fans think, on a season-by-season basis, he's always looking a few years ahead when making his decisions.

 

[Spursalot]

But people seem to be expecting a certain net spend every window when they don't know if the money's actually there. We have had big net spend windows in the past followed by a few years of profit making. Levy will get slated for the latter ones as nobody cares to include the first one.

Let's face it, people will expect a large positive net spend no matter what. We as football fans want spurs to move on. There is a definitive link between spending money and success, so we want spurs to spend money.

They're just spurs fans wanting spurs to be more successful at the end of the day.

The only way you'll know if the money is there is if you go through the accounts. But they are released later, so any totals you estimate from previous accounts are still pretty vague estimations.

 

[Jordinho]

Let's face it, people will expect a large positive net spend no matter what. We as football fans want spurs to move on. There is a definitive link between spending money and success, so we want spurs to spend money.

They're just spurs fans wanting spurs to be more successful at the end of the day.

The only way you'll know if the money is there is if you go through the accounts. But they are released later, so any totals you estimate from previous accounts are still pretty vague estimations.

And we will be successful with our current model in time, but we won't suddenly take a huge leap. We're still in a process of building patiently instead of risking it all "Leeds style". When WE get there it will be sustainable.

 

[scotty220]

Just had a look at last years accounts and noticed this note at the bottom:

Since the balance sheet date the following events have occurred:

G Sigurdsson was bought from Hoffenheim
J Vertonghen was bought from Ajax
E Adebayor was bought from Emirates Marketing Project
M Dembele was bought from Fulham
H Lloris was bought from Olympique Lyonnais
C Dempsey was bought from Fulham
N Kranjcar was sold to Dynamo Kiev
S Pienaar was sold to Everton
S Bassong was sold to Norwich City
L Modric was sold to Real Madrid
D Button was sold to Charlton Athletic
R van der Vaart was sold to Hamburg
G Dos Santos was sold to Real Mallorca
H Kane was loaned to Norwich City
D Rose was loaned to Sunderland

Including Football League levies, the uncontingent net costs of these transactions amounted to approximately £9,917,000.

Now if you take the "official" figures we all think are correct for these transactions you get this:


G Sigurdsson was bought from Hoffenheim £6,800,000.00
J Vertonghen was bought from Ajax £9,000,000.00
E Adebayor was bought from Emirates Marketing Project £5,000,000.00
M Dembele was bought from Fulham £15,000,000.00
H Lloris was bought from Olympique Lyonnais £11,800,000.00
C Dempsey was bought from Fulham £6,000,000.00
N Kranjcar was sold to Dynamo Kiev £5,653,000.00
S Pienaar was sold to Everton £4,500,000.00
S Bassong was sold to Norwich City £3,750,000.00
L Modric was sold to Real Madrid £33,300,000.00
D Button was sold to Charlton Athletic £0.00
R van der Vaart was sold to Hamburg £10,500,000.00
G Dos Santos was sold to Real Mallorca £8,500,000.00
H Kane was loaned to Norwich City £0.00
D Rose was loaned to Sunderland £0.00


Profit/(Loss) £12,603,000.00

So where we think we have a "net spend" of -£12,603,000 we actually had a COST of £9,917,000. This may arise from outstanding debts on players being written off by the sale of said player etc etc, but you get my point

 

[THFC6061]

Spurs have had an average net spend of less than a million pounds per season on player's transfers during the past 5 seasons...