Spurs new investment

[Bishop]

Surely though the portfolio increase comes as a result of the club trying to increase the revenue for which can be spent on the team i.e build a new stadium, it goes hand in hand no? yes it has not materialised into success on the pitch yet but surely its was the right way to do it based on the alternatives

It can do but it's not a direct colleration unless you still use that increased wealth actively. The thing is a lot of our increased wealth is not in a vacuum we of course do have the stadium which provides ancillary income but everyone in the PL benefits from the PL's world wide appeal. West Ham are in the top 15 and beyond the Europa Conference they've achieved nothing.

Achieving success on the pitch will more directly increase your income as sponsorships increase, the fan base increases, more prize money is won, more matches are televised etc, but again all of that should be with the express desire to achieve more success on the pitch not increase the value of your portfolio.

 

[Grays_1890]

It can do but it's not a direct colleration unless you still use that increased wealth actively. The thing is a lot of our increased wealth is not in a vacuum we of course do have the stadium which provides ancillary income but everyone in the PL benefits from the PL's world wide appeal. West Ham are in the top 15 and beyond the Europa Conference they've achieved nothing.

Achieving success on the pitch will more directly increase your income as sponsorships increase, the fan base increases, more prize money is won, more matches are televised etc, but again all of that should be with the express desire to achieve more success on the pitch not increase the value of your portfolio.

But without doubt the revenues have increased from the building and development of Tottenham and we are starting to see that have an impact on the investment in the team, yes it is yet to bare success on the pitch but its effectively year 3 post Covid so everything has to be judged within its own context.

Had we stay within the structure of old WHL and stuck to the "spend what we earn" philosophy, we would be worse off longer term and I am talking now and beyond 10 years or so

 

[Lilbaz]

To be fair he’s not whinging. I do think you’re projecting somewhat. He’s just presenting a different point of view to you and many others on here who would seemingly be content if we went another 16 years without a trophy provided we do things the right way so to speak. He’s also said many times before that winning isn’t the only that matters and that’s not why he supports Spurs but winning IS why you enter a competition in the first place. That’s why when the argument who is a bigger club etc comes up again no doubt many people will cite the stadium and CL appearances but conveniently leave out the lack of trophies which is what makes big clubs big clubs. That’s why I’m not having when people say United are a bigger club than Madrid. Literally no one engineers a move from Madrid to United but players have done it the other way round. When one club has 3 CL’s and the other has 15 there’s really no comparison.

We want owners that are great commercially but more importantly owners who make great football decisions which is not what we have got for a lot of ENIC’s tenure. Also owners that occasionally take a risk. Being financially prudent and responsible is lovely but being frugal to the level we are and have been has proven incompatible with winning, that’s not knee jerk, there’s 20+ years of evidence to support that.

We've not been financially frugal though. We just spent a lot of money over the years on infrastructure rather than playing squad. Which has changed in recent years. We are now one of the biggest spenders on players in europe (net). Year on year.

 

[Bishop]

But without doubt the revenues have increased from the building and development of Tottenham and we are starting to see that have an impact on the investment in the team, yes it is yet to bare success on the pitch but its effectively year 3 post Covid so everything has to be judged within its own context.

Had we stay within the structure of old WHL and stuck to the "spend what we earn" philosophy, we would be worse off longer term and I am talking now and beyond 10 years or so

That's cool, but I'm sort of a I believe it when I see it person. I do believe that building the stadium was in our best interests so I don't have any complaints in that regard.

It's good to talk the talk, but action is better. I'll judge the effectiveness of the post stadium after some time has passed rather than singing the plaudits prematurely (not saying you are).

So you see I'm not a burn Levy at the stake type I'm just a realist rather than a blind optimist.

 

[Finney Is Back]

If everton didn't overspend on players, why did they get deducted points?

Stadium has nothing to do with psr as the commission report stated (no matter what everton fans will have you believe).

Everton getting deducted points has nothing to do with them being likely to go into administration. If they had an owner that could/would inject capital then they would break FFP rules and get points deductions but still remain solvent.

The debt is the problem. How they accrued that debt is less important. It is the fact that they cannot service it that will likely see them go into administration.

 

[alekaras]

We are worth 3 billion without even doing much on the pitch and with minimal risk. Taking it to the next level requires boldness and some out of the box thinking that yes does incur some risk. The evidence so far shows that when push comes to shove, they would rather not take that risk because well it's just really worth it to them.

Edit: I honestly do not think ENIC are truly bothered if we win or not. It would nice if we did but it's clearly not the be all and end all. Increasing the bottom line is more important, hence the preference from CL qualification over everything else. Even the sacking of the cup specialist coach a week before a final because well, ENIC deemed the faint hope of CL football more important.

Winning is a nice bonus, it's not the motivation factor.

Winning is the motivation factor. But it's a very long game with multiple phases. First you stabilize the finances, then you try to establish yourself in the the top 5-6 teams, then you build out the finances (e.g. stadium, commercial agreements), and then you invest more for success on the pitch. We have just entered what I believe is the final phase. But just because we entered it, doesn't mean we will be successful overnight. It's a phase that might take anywhere from 3-10 years to come to fruition, because the rest of the league isn't standing still. I get it we all want success now, but it's going to take a little bit longer. And anyone who thinks that the current regime is satisfied to just get into the final phase and not see it through, is just reacting to what has happened in the past 20 years and not looking forward.

 

[alekaras]

As an aside, I never really understand how football clubs are worth anything at all, given they are likely to never make a sustained profit.

Also I never understand why Levy gets criticised for not spending more, when he doesn't personally have cash to spend. If people want a chairman/owner who has a bit more cash to spend, fair enough. But lets not criticise Levy for not having £10s or £100s of millions to spend.

That's a fair point, but football clubs are a bit of a different animal compared to your regular business entity. Their value is intrinsic, rather than calculated based on NPV of future cash flows. Much like a painting, that doesn't really generate any income, but still appreciates in value if properly maintained and cared for.

 

[SpurMeUp]

And there are all sorts of highly profitable futures for PL clubs. Imagine having both a wage cap in place and clubs selling their games direct to consumers.

The amount of people globally watching the Prem is huge, the most viewed league in the world; and has potential to grow further. With massive audiences all sort of monetisation is possible.

Spurs have not landed trophies but step back, and to be the 5th best football team in England isn’t shameful. Many many teams below us would give everything to be in our position with our transfer budgets. There is much more to come, but we are going in the right direction.

The biggest barrier to silverware are City. Thankfully they have blocked the goons and pool more than us. If we can develop over the next 2-5 years maybe we’ll get our shot as financial controls kick in and City transition to a new manager or get fined. We have to be ready. We have to keep improving incrementally and more so than other teams around us. No easy task. Stability and incremental development is the key now.

It is noticeable how much better PL football is. Mid table sides of today would challenge for the PL title of 10 years ago - imo.

What we are doing investing in youth prospects seems sensible. Our Swedish midfielder for example. Who knows where such players could take us. Fans were asking for investment and risk taking in this thread - well there it is. We’re spending millions on promising youth players and rolling the dice. They might be the next Bellingham…or Bently. We don’t know. But I am glad they are following this route as we’re not yet able to secure the absolute elite players via transfers, so buying the best prospects gives us a chance of securing the elite players of the (near) future.

 

[elltrev]

That's a fair point, but football clubs are a bit of a different animal compared to your regular business entity. Their value is intrinsic, rather than calculated based on NPV of future cash flows. Much like a painting, that doesn't really generate any income, but still appreciates in value if properly maintained and cared for.

Yeah interesting way of looking at it.

 

[DubSpur]

Because the shares they are buying would be coming from a smaller pot
The shares not owned by Enic are still worth 25% of the club and they won’t want theirs dilluted

Suppose there are 60 shares, the new share issue is 40 shares. The new investors buy those 40 new shares. They now own 40% of the club.
The only thing that matters is the number of shares they own.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Suppose there are 60 shares, the new share issue is 40 shares. The new investors buy those 40 new shares. They now own 40% of the club.
The only thing that matters is the number of shares they own.

No
What matters is whose shares they are buying
Is it 40% of ENICs shares

 

[DubSpur]

No
What matters is whose shares they are buying
Is it 40% of ENICs shares

It clearly says a 40% stake in the club, not how it's being done. So it's either a new share issue or they buy 40% of current shares which would mean buying ENIC shares. Either way they intend to end up with 40% of the club if the article is true.

 

[Lilbaz]

Everton getting deducted points has nothing to do with them being likely to go into administration. If they had an owner that could/would inject capital then they would break FFP rules and get points deductions but still remain solvent.

The debt is the problem. How they accrued that debt is less important. It is the fact that they cannot service it that will likely see them go into administration.

Sorry i don't remember saying they are going into administration because they got points deducted, could you point to the part where i did?

The reson that everton got points deducted was because they overspent on players. Which is also a part of the reason they are in a financial mess and possibly going into administration. They relied on cash from their owner. When that dried up they were in trouble. It is why the psr rules are there in the first place. Saying they're not connected is bs.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

It clearly says a 40% stake in the club, not how it's being done. So it's either a new share issue or they buy 40% of current shares which would mean buying ENIC shares. Either way they intend to end up with 40% of the club if the article is true.

We shall see

 

[Raziel]

But without doubt the revenues have increased from the building and development of Tottenham and we are starting to see that have an impact on the investment in the team, yes it is yet to bare success on the pitch but its effectively year 3 post Covid so everything has to be judged within its own context.

Had we stay within the structure of old WHL and stuck to the "spend what we earn" philosophy, we would be worse off longer term and I am talking now and beyond 10 years or so

The issue is context, because even the self sustaining statement is a little misleading/disingenuous

Levy & ENIC's true investment in the company has to be seen in some calculation of club profit (their money), lack of dividends taken over the 22+ years of ownership, somebody could do the math but I'd suspect it's probably an additional £1B of money put back into club.

Is that enough? different conversation and I think even Levy realizes it isn't, Arsenal has spent a lot of money in last 4 years to "get top 4" this is a game of diminishing returns (you spend a lot of money to move a very little bit), hence the looking for investors

The problem is, the new investors are no longer the sportswashing/vanity project types, they are the American PE types, and they want their money back with interest, in my opinion if that's what we end up with, we will wish for the days of Levy/ENIC ..

 

[Baleforce]

The issue is context, because even the self sustaining statement is a little misleading/disingenuous

Levy & ENIC's true investment in the company has to be seen in some calculation of club profit (their money), lack of dividends taken over the 22+ years of ownership, somebody could do the math but I'd suspect it's probably an additional £1B of money put back into club.

Is that enough? different conversation and I think even Levy realizes it isn't, Arsenal has spent a lot of money in last 4 years to "get top 4" this is a game of diminishing returns (you spend a lot of money to move a very little bit), hence the looking for investors

The problem is, the new investors are no longer the sportswashing/vanity project types, they are the American PE types, and they want their money back with interest, in my opinion if that's what we end up with, we will wish for the days of Levy/ENIC ..

Morgan Freeman pointing.

 

[Finney Is Back]

The mindset is not incompatible with the issue of actually winning. Once you get Spurs to where they are now, the only way to increase the club's value in any significant fashion is to also be successful on the pitch. That is what will boost brand awareness more than anything and increase the value way beyond the avenues the club has been and is currently pursuing. Television revenue and commercial revenue all shoot up significantly.

As an example (the numbers I am using are for illustration only), if Spurs are now worth £3 billion and continue along the same level of performances, they'll be worth £4 billion in 10 years. If they win 3 league titles, a couple of CLs, and are always contenders for both, they'll probably be worth £5-6 billion. So why wouldn't the owners want success on the pitch?

That’s not necessarily true…. Some sort of future world super league would increase the club’s value (why else did the owners try to join the eventually ill fated ESL?)

There is also huge future potential from direct streaming rights I think.

 

[Finney Is Back]

Sorry i don't remember saying they are going into administration because they got points deducted, could you point to the part where i did?

The reson that everton got points deducted was because they overspent on players. Which is also a part of the reason they are in a financial mess and possibly going into administration. They relied on cash from their owner. When that dried up they were in trouble. It is why the psr rules are there in the first place. Saying they're not connected is bs.

You said “Everton are on the verge of going into administration due to their owner investing in players. City face 115 charges and chelseas charges are yet to be determined. Forest have had a points deduction.”

I replied “Hmmmmm...... Not convinced Everton are on the verge of administration due to their owner investing in players? As far as I can see they are on the verge of administration due to taking far too much debt.”

You then said: “If everton didn't overspend on players, why did they get deducted points?”

Apologies if I have made a mistake in linking these comments.

However IMO they are on the verge of administration due to having too much debt and having no way to service it.

They could’ve bought hundreds more players and still been fine if they had a benefactor pumping money in.

 

[Lilbaz]

You said “Everton are on the verge of going into administration due to their owner investing in players. City face 115 charges and chelseas charges are yet to be determined. Forest have had a points deduction.”

I replied “Hmmmmm...... Not convinced Everton are on the verge of administration due to their owner investing in players? As far as I can see they are on the verge of administration due to taking far too much debt.”

You then said: “If everton didn't overspend on players, why did they get deducted points?”

Apologies if I have made a mistake in linking these comments.

However IMO they are on the verge of administration due to having too much debt and having no way to service it.

They could’ve bought hundreds more players and still been fine if they had a benefactor pumping money in.

Sorry i should are said in part due. But when the players wages were 95% of turnover it was a hell of a part.

Their out goings are A) players wages. B) transfer fees (these are mostly paid in installments these days, not a lump sum). C) day to day operations of the club. D) servicing the debt.

If they can't afford to meet their outgoings. Or renogitiate. Then they can't meet their obligations. Administration beckons.

A and b have a massive part of the reason they are in trouble. As the commission report stated. Some of theloans they got were used to buy/pay players. It's why the interest on those loans was counted towards psr. (Not as everton fans would hsve you believe for the stadium. Stadium spending/debt has nothing to do with the psr).

 

[Finney Is Back]

I agree with Bishop
I also agree with you
It’s all intrinsic to each other
What I don’t get is the fans who don’t seem to understand that income/revenue doenst mean money to spend. That where different owners can help

Lewis is out of the picture now and his family may want an exit to take their money (it’s his biggest value investment with his least amount of cash in proportionately)

That where the equity injection can come and help

An extra £50m each window (within PsR) can make a massive… massive difference

We won’t get that with ENIC as there is no one to fund it.

I really, really don't think Lewis cares about 'cash in'. I suspect the last thing that somebody as rich as Lewis wants cash that merely inflates away. Investments that achieve growth in asset value are far more attractive.