ENIC

[DubaiSpur]

I agree, Godolphin have done that with Racing, they pull out thats probably 40% or the UK racing economy gone with it.

Not sure I fancy being a pawn in that kinda stuff and I have huge reservations about Qatar.

I reckon its all BS anyhoo

That's fair. Personally I'm resigned to the fact that being a pawn in grander geopolitical games is the future of nearly all clubs in the Premier League. No other way to compete, unless you luck out and get a rich American that wants to win for his ego, like Stan Kroenke at Arsenal.

Countries see British clubs (and European clubs more broadly) as good investments to promote influence over key decision makers. This is the reality of the UK (and Europe more broadly) no longer being a significant generator of global wealth, but rather a conduit for it and a storehouse for it, while also still retaining significant defense and diplomatic capacity to help countries with wealth advance their own agendas if bought.

 

[spurs' magna carter]

That's fair. Personally I'm resigned to the fact that being a pawn in grander geopolitical games is the future of nearly all clubs in the Premier League. No other way to compete, unless you luck out and get a rich American that wants to win for his ego, like Stan Kroenke at Arsenal.

Countries see British clubs (and European clubs more broadly) as good investments to promote influence over key decision makers. This is the reality of the UK (and Europe more broadly) no longer being a significant generator of global wealth, but rather a conduit for it and a storehouse for it, while also still retaining significant defense and diplomatic capacity to help countries with wealth advance their own agendas if bought.

Good point. This is literally what happened with Real Madrid. Franco knew that Spain were about as popular as a fart in a lift as they were a fascist state in a post WW2 world so he nationalised the club to gain attention in this way.

Once the european glory of five in a row happened, a lot of people, and governments, took note and Spain's trading improved from there despite the fact that Franco was a truly horrible piece of work. I'm sure there were other factors. But this has been seen as quite a big one by historians. There was a really good documentary about football and fascism that explained this on BBC Four about 15 years ago. There was also one on football and communism.

No longer available:

BBC Four - Football and Fascism

Documentary looking at the manipulation of football by Mussolini, Hitler and Franco.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[SpurMeUp]

We had Abramovich wanting to buy us in the early 2000s, but Levy and Lewis drove him off with the asking price so he bought Chelsea instead.

We've always attracted such investors - nothing Levy did materially impacts that. In fact, by valuing the club at £3.75B, he drove some off - Boehly also wanted to buy us before he bought Chelsea and spent £1B on them. QSI has wanted to buy us since the mid-2010s.

There is no doubt we are a more attractive club as the result of Levys tenure. And you also can't deny that Levy is open about getting investment and attracting money. Which is what you are calling for - whilst calling for him to leave!

As for people 'see[ing] Levy as invaluable', it's amusing to me that this gets taken at face value. It could equally just be Levy refusing to relinquish control of the club,

So the news is a lie, and Levy is hanging on against their wishes? Are the CIA tapping your phone too?

like a sordid barnacle on the hull of a ship, and investors simply accounting for that unfortunate fact. We won't know until it happens and we see what the future holds for our dear leader.

Like I said, once he's a contracted employee, he could simply be fired. I just wouldn't want you to be upset if that's what ends up happening.

This last bit is also naive, I should imagine it will likely be a shared ownership model.

It is clear though from your posts you are exercised by our ownership more than our team performance.

 

[Finney Is Back]

I think in the past the Trust had built up a reasonable operating rhythm with the club. Much as I found Kat and Martin (Kat especially) annoying, I do believe they did a lot of good work on ticketing, on working with the Safety Advisory Group, on having THFC representation on wider football groups, and on trying to hold the board to account. And I think Levy attended every meeting but may not have been there for some of the more operational stuff (but not totally sure tbh). I recall Spurs were one of the few clubs that met with their Trust more frequently than the PL recommended. They (the Trust) fudged it all up after the Super League stuff by calling for the Board to resign. At that point you lose any ears you might have had.
The irony is that the Fan Advisory Board they pushed so much to have in place is headed by Donna Cullen, so they have lost that direct connection with Levy, for whatever it was worth.

The board should've resigned over the Super League fiasco IMO.

 

[Finney Is Back]

Are you watching the asset stripping going on at Old Trafford?

Also, the oil bubble is really starting to burst as the big phase out is taking hold. BP look in big trouble already

What asset stripping?

 

[Finney Is Back]

It's amusing how the people with the money don’t share your perspective. They see Levy as invaluable. In your view, this guy is holding us back, yet the billionaires consider him an asset. The irony runs deeper: the person who set this up and put the club in a position to attract such investors is the same one you constantly criticise. At times, it seems like you're more invested in "levy out" than in Spurs football team winning.

It is a company value versus football success question. Levy has proven himself brilliant at making himself very rich and his boss even richer than he was.

 

[DubaiSpur]

Good point. This is literally what happened with Real Madrid. Franco knew that Spain were about as popular as a fart in a lift as they were a fascist state in a post WW2 world so he nationalised the club to gain attention in this way.

Once the european glory of five in a row happened, a lot of people, and governments, took note and Spain's trading improved from there despite the fact that Franco was a truly horrible piece of work. I'm sure there were other factors. But this has been seen as quite a big one by historians. There was a really good documentary about football and fascism that explained this on BBC Four about 15 years ago. There was also one on football and communism.

No longer available:

BBC Four - Football and Fascism

Documentary looking at the manipulation of football by Mussolini, Hitler and Franco.

www.bbc.co.uk

100% mate. The Spanish government have been relatively upfront about favouring both Real and Barca for ages, and the whole reason they do it is because those clubs are so popular worldwide that supporting them furthers Spanish influence.

Football has never been fair or free of geopolitics. Just the reality of it. The big winners in most countries are also the clubs with the deepest connections to their governments, be it Madrid (and then Barca) in Spain, AC Milan and then Juve in Italy, or Bayern in Germany.

 

[Finney Is Back]

I mean for Tourism etc absolutely but buying a football club to over spend on is a black hole for finances short and long term. Spurs growth has undergone the major portion of its potential, not much left for anyone else I imagine. Maybe it will grown another 4bn with development but I doubt it

Quite a lot of people think that there is quite a lot of growth left in football valuations (properly monetising the streaming and social media income streams for example).

 

[Grays_1890]

The board should've resigned over the Super League fiasco IMO.

I actually think given a certain inevitability about it, its one of the better things they done. Levy was fairy high up in those circles and if the league had gone ahead without Spurs the uproar would have been equally as deafening

 

[Finney Is Back]

We had Abramovich wanting to buy us in the early 2000s, but Levy and Lewis drove him off with the asking price so he bought Chelsea instead.

We've always attracted such investors - nothing Levy did materially impacts that. In fact, by valuing the club at £3.75B, he drove some off - Boehly also wanted to buy us before he bought Chelsea and spent £1B on them. QSI has wanted to buy us since the mid-2010s.

As for people 'see[ing] Levy as invaluable', it's amusing to me that this gets taken at face value. It could equally just be Levy refusing to relinquish control of the club, like a sordid barnacle on the hull of a ship, and investors simply accounting for that unfortunate fact. We won't know until it happens and we see what the future holds for our dear leader.

Like I said, once he's a contracted employee, he could simply be fired. I just wouldn't want you to be upset if that's what ends up happening.

It is quite normal for a purchaser to keep the CEO and many of the existing board on post a buyout. It is often written into the sale that the current board have to serve for a minimum of a set amount of time post takeover.

The only time I would ever buy a majority stake in a company without doing this would be if I was buying a distressed asset and inserting a new team to turn that around.

 

[DubaiSpur]

There is no doubt we are a more attractive club as the result of Levys tenure. And you also can't deny that Levy is open about getting investment and attracting money. Which is what you are calling for - whilst calling for him to leave!

Like I said, we were wanted by Abramovich in the early 2000s, QSI in the 2010s, Boehly in the early 2020s.

We are valuable because we are a consistent Premier League club situated in London, capital of the UK, which means a lot of media visibility and access to British policymakers. Unless your argument is that Levy was around in 1882 and deliberately founded us in London, there is little evidence that his work has materially changed the likelihood of us being bought by men richer than him and Lewis.

At best you could credit him with keeping us in the Premier League all these years, I suppose. Hooray, he kept us from being relegated.

So the news is a lie, and Levy is hanging on against their wishes? Are the CIA tapping your phone too?

Just that we don't know how much of it is true and how much of it is spin to get around the fact that he part-owns the club and is like a recalcitrant barnacle, refusing to let go and sod off with his billions.

This last bit is also naive, I should imagine it will likely be a shared ownership model.

It is clear though from your posts you are exercised by our ownership more than our team performance.

Performance is ephemeral. I was here when we were brick, I was here when we were briefly good, I am still here when we are brick again. Reality is, we have a ceiling under this ownership model that will never change (we will never win things consistently), and likewise, a floor (we will probably never get relegated).

Changing the owners is the single biggest thing we could do to change our circumstances. Until then, it's all just panto since the reality won't change.

Same reason I'm still Ange In - sacking him fixes nothing, it's just window dressing.

 

[Finney Is Back]

I actually think given a certain inevitability about it, its one of the better things they done. Levy was fairy high up in those circles and if the league had gone ahead without Spurs the uproar would have been equally as deafening

I think the opposite. We would've been seen as the good guys. The only thing that would've massively suffered was the thing that he is most concerned about, the valuation of the club.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

The only time I would ever buy a majority stake in a company without doing this would be if I was buying a distressed asset and inserting a new team to turn that around.

But it is distressed....... haven't you been reading

 

[Mikey10]

‘Dark day for parks’: Plans to build Spurs academy on London green space approved

Residents had unsuccessfully challenged Enfield council in court over club’s plan to build pitches on rewilded area rich in bats and newts

www.theguardian.com

 

[Glenda's Legs]

The board should've resigned over the Super League fiasco IMO.

But why?
If it had gone ahead and we weren’t included the protests against Levy would have been off the scale.
I think Levy did well to have us in the frame. Whether I agree with it or not is irrelevant.

 

[Finney Is Back]

But it is distressed....... haven't you been reading

It may well be if we get relegated

 

[Finney Is Back]

But why?
If it had gone ahead and we weren’t included the protests against Levy would have been off the scale.
I think Levy did well to have us in the frame. Whether I agree with it or not is irrelevant.

I disagree. Why would anyone other than the owners have wanted to be part of the Super League?

I didn't see fans of any of the other 14 clubs protesting that they were not part of the Super League, I only saw fans of the 6 backstabbing UK clubs who were supposed to be part of it protesting.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

‘Dark day for parks’: Plans to build Spurs academy on London green space approved

Residents had unsuccessfully challenged Enfield council in court over club’s plan to build pitches on rewilded area rich in bats and newts

www.theguardian.com

Without seeing the plans it's hard to say if this is bad. It does say Spurs are only using 33% of the park they are leasing.

I'd suggest, given the way we operate and care for our own facilities, that having us as leaseholders will be a step up from relying on the council.

And I'm sure Spurs will align with the re-wilding efforts as that will in practice mean less up keep and maintenance?

Obviously the location of new pitches might be right over the top of the rewilded areas...I haven't looked. But there is 66% of parkland left to remedy this.

 

[Glenda's Legs]

I disagree. Why would anyone other than the owners have wanted to be part of the Super League?

I didn't see fans of any of the other 14 clubs protesting that they were not part of the Super League, I only saw fans of the 6 backstabbing UK clubs who were supposed to be part of it protesting.

It died a death within days of being announced so there wasn’t much opportunity for fans of other clubs to protest.
I am glad it didn’t go ahead. But if it had, and THFC were not a part of it, that would, I think, have been to our detriment.

 

[Grays_1890]

I think the opposite. We would've been seen as the good guys. The only thing that would've massively suffered was the thing that he is most concerned about, the valuation of the club.

I mean maybe you are more genuine, but I can see thousands of fans being upset at being cut off from an elite competition. I would much prefer to be in the CL than out of it myself, this languishing in 14th in hope of a moderate cup win is not all it was sold as (I jest)