• 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

Harry Kane MBE

Modric THFC said:
You know why they sign such long contracts in the first place.
The signing bonus is a percentage of the total value of the contract.
Longer contract bigger means a signing on fee.
Pure greed was why they opted in to a 6 year deal.
Click to expand...

At the time of signing we looked like we were capable of winning stuff.

We've had a backward step since, but we've had them before and taken 2 steps forward.
 
Lilbaz said:
At the time of signing we looked like we were capable of winning stuff.

We've had a backward step since, but we've had them before and taken 2 steps forward.
Click to expand...

That's a risk that they must've factored in when considering the deal. We were overachieving under Poch, gravity is going to be a factor at some point.
 
milo said:
That's a risk that they must've factored in when considering the deal. We were overachieving under Poch, gravity is going to be a factor at some point.
Click to expand...

Yes. Unless the unlimited spending of the oil clubs is curtailed gravity will always be a problem.
The fan led review today hinted at a wage and spend cap. Hopefully that becomes a reality.
They did it in spain. So could happen.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Trying to enforce an NDA in the football world I believe would be nigh on impossible
There is too many people speculating facts or fiction to make it policeable
What’s comedy gold on this one is it’s at Kane’s brothers wedding FFS. What a place to talk business with a reporter even if she is a friend.
My wife would kill me if she thought I was doing business on our wedding day
Click to expand...

NDAs in general are highly questionable. But you'd still add one in, especially if you had 160 big ones burning a hole in your pocket. And if I was levy I'd look to tie some financial clause to it too.

I don't think anyone slipped with some drunken info. That's not how this ran. These kinds of stories are agreed and understood. The journo won't blow the cover without running is past the Kanes. They will value their relationship and future stories etc. The Kanes will have known about this. Whether they were helping out a friend when the Sun is struggling idk. Or it could all be made up. Chances are Spurs will have known about the story too. Most journalists run stories past the people involved, even if it's an expose.
 
Lilbaz said:
Levy has told us last month how much covid has cost us. £200m in lost revenue.
So it is that simple to work out what covid cost us. Levy has told us.

We just sold foyth and got some money for edwards which works out around £18m.

As for how clubs want to be paid, that's speculation. But even so. For the purpose of our accounts the cost of the player will be spread over his contract (player amortization). We also have cash due to the loan.

As i've said, levy may not decide to spend the money on transfers. But he can if he wanted to.
Click to expand...
I think it will have cost us a lot more than £200m. Our stadium generates considerably more than £100m as season of revenue from THFC games alone and it has sat empty for a whole season. We've also had zero additional events, reduced sponsorship revenue, reduced revenue from the PL. Year to June 2020 we lost £63 million. Compared to a usual season when we'd make profits. This season the losses will be WAY bigger.

I don't believe we took any money for Edwards, I think we instead retained a sell on fee on him.

Yes for the purpose of accounts players will be amortised over the length of their contract. That only reflects their asset value on the books though and has no bearing on the cash flow to pay the transfer fees for those players. Transfer fees for players tend to be spread over 3 years, often with half of fee payable in year 1 (though I admit that more creative deals are being done this past 18 months or so).

We won't know until the 2021 accounts are published exactly how much covid has decimated our finances. However with significant transfer fee instalments still to pay from 2019 and 2020, a £63m loss in 2020, a (likely) £100m+ loss in 2021, a bigger wage bill in 2021 (Bale), less income (no CL and reduced PL prize money) How much of the loan will actually be left? I'd argue only enough to give a bit of contingency against stadium usage being impacted in season 2021/22.

The only way that we have money to make significant signings is if we've had a liquidity injection (owners funds, owners releasing equity, more debt or perhaps a big sponsorship deal that we've kept under wraps and have managed to front load or borrow against).
 
Finney Is Back said:
I think it will have cost us a lot more than £200m. Our stadium generates considerably more than £100m as season of revenue from THFC games alone and it has sat empty for a whole season. We've also had zero additional events, reduced sponsorship revenue, reduced revenue from the PL. Year to June 2020 we lost £63 million. Compared to a usual season when we'd make profits. This season the losses will be WAY bigger.

I don't believe we took any money for Edwards, I think we instead retained a sell on fee on him.

Yes for the purpose of accounts players will be amortised over the length of their contract. That only reflects their asset value on the books though and has no bearing on the cash flow to pay the transfer fees for those players. Transfer fees for players tend to be spread over 3 years, often with half of fee payable in year 1 (though I admit that more creative deals are being done this past 18 months or so).

We won't know until the 2021 accounts are published exactly how much covid has decimated our finances. However with significant transfer fee instalments still to pay from 2019 and 2020, a £63m loss in 2020, a (likely) £100m+ loss in 2021, a bigger wage bill in 2021 (Bale), less income (no CL and reduced PL prize money) How much of the loan will actually be left? I'd argue only enough to give a bit of contingency against stadium usage being impacted in season 2021/22.

The only way that we have money to make significant signings is if we've had a liquidity injection (owners funds, owners releasing equity, more debt or perhaps a big sponsorship deal that we've kept under wraps and have managed to front load or borrow against).
Click to expand...

So levy is lying? Or he doesn't know?
 
I have no idea what our transfer budget is.

All i am saying is spending £60m net on transfer fees doesn't necessarily mean we are selling kane.

Nothing more, nothing less.
 
SpurMeUp said:
NDAs in general are highly questionable. But you'd still add one in, especially if you had 160 big ones burning a hole in your pocket. And if I was levy I'd look to tie some financial clause to it too.

I don't think anyone slipped with some drunken info. That's not how this ran. These kinds of stories are agreed and understood. The journo won't blow the cover without running is past the Kanes. They will value their relationship and future stories etc. The Kanes will have known about this. Whether they were helping out a friend when the Sun is struggling idk. Or it could all be made up. Chances are Spurs will have known about the story too. Most journalists run stories past the people involved, even if it's an expose.
Click to expand...
Thsi wasn’t a drunken chat
This was an open convo 100%
 
So have we come to a conclusion yet on whether its Levy who says £160m will do and City are yet to offer it or Kane’s agent trying his luck?
 
Last edited:
Yiddo said:
So have we come to a conclusion yet on whether its Levy who says £160m will do and City are yet to offer it or Kane’s agent trying his luck?
Click to expand...
Impossible to conclude
I’m assuming with some guesswork that it’s levy who has told Charlie it’s £160m and he can go
 
City deserved to be on the Backfoot today, it’s classic levy and a casual convo at a wedding ending up in a paper.

we get huge money or a route to reintegrate Kane.

Gentleman’s agreement or not he’s under contract for another 3 years.

levy knows they have twitchy bums regarding financial fair play, and with good reason, they will be putting themselves at massive risk again of more investigations that they absolutely do not want.

why Manchester news denied so heavily.

it doesn’t reflect well on them or Kane to see those figures branded about after the year every one has had.

regarding Kane I feel indifferent atm, if he goes Son will go down as more of a legend to me.
 
Lilbaz said:
I'm assuming she said she'd suck his dingdong if he told her how much kane was going for.

Assumption is meaningless.
Click to expand...

assumption is often all we have on here, and our differing thoughts and opinions I find most interesting.

I could tell you I was telepathically aligned to Levy, but that would have course be a lie.

But I won’t deny many important information moments throughout the ages have probably involved the sucking of ding dongs
 
Nigeyman said:
assumption is often all we have on here, and our differing thoughts and opinions I find most interesting.

I could tell you I was telepathically aligned to Levy, but that would have course be a lie.

But I won’t deny many important information moments throughout the ages have probably involved the sucking of ding dongs
Click to expand...

What did you learn?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back