• 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

Fair play Daniel Levy

Taken off The Times courtesy of star_of_davids from SC. Talks about the AIA deal and has quotes from Levy that some may find interesting.

For those who can't get behind The Times paywall

Spurs beat path from North London to Far East with AIA deal

Looming over a boardroom table in Hong Kong, the chief executive of the insurance giant AIA — a hell-bent, die-hard, all-consuming Chelsea fan — now longs for Tottenham Hotspur to win the Champions’ League.

“It chokes me to say it,” says Mark Tucker, glaring amicably at Daniel Levy, the chairman of Spurs sitting at his side: “But professionally speaking, yes, I would now be much happier if they win.”

At a visceral level, the odds were against the Tucker-Levy duo of notoriously uncompromising London negotiators assembling,
let alone reaching a deal. But Asia, with its combination of emerging consumer passions and disposable income, is cheerfully ripping-up the old rules of strategy and probability.

The pair is in Hong Kong to seal a five-year shirt sponsorship deal estimated at about £80 million. From next season the red logo of AIA, Asia’s largest life insurer, will be emblazoned on Tottenham shirts for all cup matches and Premier League games. Spurs players, who are wearing shirts bearing the AIA logo for cup matches this season — including their Europa League game against Dnipro in Ukraine on Thursday — will be touting a brand that is not remotely intended for British or European eyes.

The secrecy around the value of the deal, and the claim by both that the other got the better end of the bargaining, hints again at the unlikeliness of the entente. But in order to achieve Mr Levy’s soaring ambitions for Tottenham in domestic and European competitions, he needs dramatically heftier revenues. The north London club needs a new stadium, it needs great players and it needs to win, says Mr Levy, and it also badly needs Asia.

“From our point of view, this sponsorship deal wasn’t just about getting the maximum price,” Mr Levy said.

“Since when?” said Mr Tucker.

“Believe me, it wasn’t. We wanted to be in Asia and we wanted to extend our footprint in Asia,” Mr Levy said.

The raw statistics of English Premier League fandom already amply justify a deal of this sort. In common with other clubs, Spurs and Mr Levy rely on data that blurs the difference between “fans” (who support one club) and “followers” (who may support several), but they are confident that they have 80 million supporters in Asia.

Other major English clubs, especially Manchester United, Liverpool and Arsenal, have long recognised the huge commercial value of their growing Asian fan-bases. They have already made rapid headway, and many have Asia-specific sponsorship deals that richly monetise that.

The deal with AIA, says Mr Levy, means that the pursuit of the Asian fan has now officially become a strategic priority. “I think it is right to assume, particularly given the growth of the Premier League anyway, that we would expect it [the Spurs fan-base in Asia] to grow by millions,” said Mr Levy.

The dual appeal of the deal, Mr Tucker and Mr Levy explained, is neatly illustrated by Indonesia — a country with enticing levels of economic growth, an only partially tapped passion for Premier League football, low levels of life insurance coverage and a population where 60 per cent of people are aged under 30.

Both Mr Tucker and Mr Levy are selling products that require the young, financially liquid consumer to commit early and for the long term. AIA sends large salesforces around Indonesia to sell life insurance policies, and recently signed a multibillion-dollar, 15-year deal to distribute its products through Citibank’s Asian branch network.

Spurs, for whom Indonesian followers of the club’s official Facebook page are the second largest group after the British contingent, wants to convert young Indonesians into Spurs fans before they are seduced by Manchester United or Liverpool.

It is a quest, Mr Levy says, that undoubtedly requires Tottenham to win some trophies, but will be significantly helped by the association with a consumer brand that already has high advertising penetration throughout Asia.

Mr Levy’s determination to swell the fan-base in Asia is, strategically timed. In an attempt to grow overall viewer numbers, the English Premier League is in a six-year deal to broadcast games for free in China so that an addiction can be established for future exploitation. Vietnam and Thailand continue to produce hundreds of thousands of Premiership fans every year. With financial markets still reluctant to divert big institutional money into football, says Mr Levy, Asia offers many potential revenue streams for a more revenue-dependent era.

By next year, the rules and sanctions of “Financial Fair Play” will descend on the Premier League, supposedly forcing clubs to operate more sustainable business models. Some suspect that it will cement the position of the four largest clubs, others that it will reduce the capacity of billionaire oligarchs and oil Sheikhs — and ultimately energy or commodity prices — to dictate the way players are priced in the transfer market.

“The new fair play principle is without doubt going to have a very material impact on how clubs are run so the irrational behaviour of owners although it will still be there to an extent is going to be severely limited by the need to run clubs as a proper business,” Mr Levy said. “Tottenham Hotspur has always been run on a rational basis. It’s one of the few clubs that has been consistently profitable.”

Most recently, profitability has been boosted by Tottenham’s record-breaking, sale of Gareth Bale to Real Madrid for £85 million in a deal that prompted some to question whether Mr Levy was allowing his skill as a trader of players to outweigh the need to build the sort of star-studded trophy-winning squad he admits he needs to attract Asian fans.

“It wasn’t a money decision that forced us to sell him. I easily would have turned down 125 million if we believed that Gareth would have been a committed Tottenham player. I would much rather be sitting here with Gareth Bale in the team, but we are dealing with people. Tottenham is not a club that can consistently pay £50 million for a player. We have to make our players,” Mr Levy said.

Asked whether, as a consequence of Mr Levy’s notorious negotiating skills, Mr Tucker had transferred any allegiance from Chelsea to Spurs, the AIA chief executive said that he would not, himself, be wearing the new AIA-branded Tottenham shirt.

“I think there are certain limits,” Mr Tucker said. “When Tottenham win the Champions’ League, I will wear one.”
Click to expand...
 
QFE: “It wasn’t a money decision that forced us to sell him. I easily would have turned down 125 million if we believed that Gareth would have been a committed Tottenham player. I would much rather be sitting here with Gareth Bale in the team, but we are dealing with people. Tottenham is not a club that can consistently pay £50 million for a player. We have to make our players,” Mr Levy said.
 
I think we all knew Bale wanted to go and was not fully commited to us from the point he knew Real Madrid were in for him. The so called injury etc. I think also it may be obvious we could have got more from him from Man Utd but we did not want to sell him inside the premiership.

The question is. If we had made him stay the way that Liverpoop did with Suarez what player would we have got this season? would he have striked and not played like Berbatov? or would he have knuckled down and got on with it? to me Bale seems like a stroppy guy who would have got the hump and not played well. So we had no choice. In regard the Suarez i believe he just thinks he will go in the future. Maybe to RM as well.
 
Sandman said:
I think we all knew Bale wanted to go and was not fully commited to us from the point he knew Real Madrid were in for him. The so called injury etc. I think also it may be obvious we could have got more from him from Man Utd but we did not want to sell him inside the premiership.

The question is. If we had made him stay the way that Liverpoop did with Suarez what player would we have got this season? would he have striked and not played like Berbatov? or would he have knuckled down and got on with it? to me Bale seems like a stroppy guy who would have got the hump and not played well. So we had no choice. In regard the Suarez i believe he just thinks he will go in the future. Maybe to RM as well.
Click to expand...

Turning down £50m would be one thing but turning down £86m would be another.

After spending the other night watching Bale compilations I personally would have preferred to keep him, happily turning down £200m to see one more season of his jaw dropping brilliance. But the reality is we had one of the best players in the World last season and we still lacked the depth needed to qualify for the CL and make a decent run in the Europa League. What this money has given us is a chance to build a squad of astonishing depth, not just for this season but for seasons to come.

It's all reminiscent of that summer in 2008, we poured money into the team after the sale of Berba and Keane, it hurt in the short term a lot more than we anticipated but since that complete melt down we've seen the club finish top five for four consecutive seasons, something we haven't done for years if not decades. Hopefully last summer has the same effect: some pain, regrets and embarrassment in the short term but huge benefits in the long term.
 
didn't man u bid £125m or something like that? i wonder if bale really didn't want to go there and hence levy obliged by forgoing the extra £39m
 
metalgear said:
didn't man u bid £125m or something like that? i wonder if bale really didn't want to go there and hence levy obliged by forgoing the extra £39m
Click to expand...

Yeah even Fabio Capello said that's what happened. If SAF was still there I could see it but Moyes? Can't see Bale falling head over heals with the idea of playing for him.
 
metalgear said:
didn't man u bid £125m or something like that? i wonder if bale really didn't want to go there and hence levy obliged by forgoing the extra £39m
Click to expand...

Mad money. In saying that I can see a bid north of 100mil coming in for Suarez this summer.
 
Sandman said:
I think we all knew Bale wanted to go and was not fully commited to us from the point he knew Real Madrid were in for him. The so called injury etc. I think also it may be obvious we could have got more from him from Man Utd but we did not want to sell him inside the premiership.

The question is. If we had made him stay the way that Liverpoop did with Suarez what player would we have got this season? would he have striked and not played like Berbatov? or would he have knuckled down and got on with it? to me Bale seems like a stroppy guy who would have got the hump and not played well. So we had no choice. In regard the Suarez i believe he just thinks he will go in the future. Maybe to RM as well.
Click to expand...

Given the rather on/off season he's had at Real, I don't think keeping him would have been worth it for us. At some point we would have had to let him go or risk getting nothing.
 
Jordinho said:
Given the rather on/off season he's had at Real, I don't think keeping him would have been worth it for us. At some point we would have had to let him go or risk getting nothing.
Click to expand...

I thought he was doing alright when not injured. Although I suppose doing alright probably doesn't cut it for 85mil. How are the Madrid fans taking to him?
 
Jordinho said:
Given the rather on/off season he's had at Real, I don't think keeping him would have been worth it for us. At some point we would have had to let him go or risk getting nothing.
Click to expand...

Maybe this is a risk we need to consider taking at some point? I don't know, just a thought.
 
Jordinho said:
Given the rather on/off season he's had at Real, I don't think keeping him would have been worth it for us. At some point we would have had to let him go or risk getting nothing.
Click to expand...

I disagree - if he was still at us he'd be in the country he's always lived, playing for a team he knows,with players he knows, a language he knows, his family and a style of football he knows. You can't compare how he's doing at Madrid to how he would be doing for us.

Saying that though, I do think he wanted to leave and we couldn't turn down the money on offer.
 
markysimmo said:
From who ???
Click to expand...

Well RM have been linked in the past so I'd say they will throw their hat in the ring. And then there are the carbon circle clubs, so you'd never know which club will emerge. People tend to forget about his checkered past when you produce magic on the pitch like he does. Maybe £100mil is excessive but €100mil doesn't seem beyond the realms of possibility.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back