• 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

The We8Campbell Memorial ITK Thread

braineclipse said:
You come on to the forum moaning (your words) about our chairman and you don't expect people to respond to you?

If you just want to voice your frustration into the wilderness without anyone taking you seriously or responding to you I would suggest twitter.
Click to expand...

I didn't even mention the chairman in my original post. If you want to poke your oar in, at least do me the courtesy of reading what's been written, otherwise you can keep your suggestions to yourself. The moan was about the general shift in emphasis from a football culture to a corporate and business one, and about how that doesn't sit well with me, not about the chairman per se.
 
mudshark said:
I didn't even mention the chairman in my original post. If you want to poke your oar in, at least do me the courtesy of reading what's been written, otherwise you can keep your suggestions to yourself. The moan was about the general shift in emphasis from a football culture to a corporate and business one, and about how that doesn't sit well with me, not about the chairman per se.
Click to expand...

Considering that you talked about transfer strategy over the last 20 years (the majority of that under Levy), named Sugar and talked about the time after him (Levy), talked about the board (Levy being the chairman of that board), talked about haggling over price (Levy heads most of our negotiations) and talked about ENIC (who Levy runs the club on behalf of) it seemed to me obvious that part of your moan was directed at Levy.

If it wasn't that's fair enough, but I hope you see why I thought it was.

Regardless, my point stands, you can't expect to come onto a discussion forum to moan without people replying to you.

Edit: In the spirit of the weekend, just wanted to say that my comment about twitter was flippant. Sometimes I forget how these things come across over the net...

If you're going for a drink (like I am), then sláinte.
 
Last edited:
AdamB said:
I dont know about Spurs finances in particular however I have raised financing (largest would be several billion euros) dozens of times for clients to fund large capital projects, refinance debt, acquire other companies etc etc. I can therefore easily understand the position which Levy is therefore in when, at the moment, he is looking to raise capital to build the stadium and understand how, for a business the size of Spurs (which is quite small), it would be quite tough to raise a few hundred million. If lenders saw us starting to splash out millions on completely discretionary one-off items (ie Moutinho) it would make them a lot more reluctant to lend to us. Its why I havent been surprised that our spending has been constrained recently and expect it to carry on that way til we have raised the capital for the stadium
Click to expand...

I don't believe that lenders would disapprove of £20 million + deals as a matter of principle. They understand that operating in the transfer market is part and parcel of the football business. Clubs have to do it in order to stay competitive.

Lenders will look, instead, at Spurs' financial results over an extended period and their revenue forecasts for the coming years. They will look at the club's management to decide how much of a risk Spurs would be. They will see how prudently and cleverly the club has been run. They will see the security of a man like Joe Lewis behind the scenes. And while Lewis is unlikely to put a huge amount of his money into the club, it wouldn't surprise me at all if he was prepared to guarantee the borrowing - if that was the only way that it could be secured.

The thing is, £20 million is just a random figure. It's little different to £16 million - and we've made a number of signings at that level. If lenders were to be put off by Spurs spending £20 million on a player, then they would also be put off by Spurs spending £16 million on a player. And I simply don't believe that they work like that.

However, if Spurs are to spend £20 million + on a player, then they can't afford to get it wrong (as they did with Bentley, for instance). That wouldn't impress lenders. So I'd agree with you to the extent that the stadium has probably made it more difficult for Spurs to make big signings.
 
mudshark said:
"Cash in" might be overly pejorative a term, granted. Let's see what happens with Bale in the summer before we get too bullish about lack of precedent, though. Modrić wasn't approaching the end of his contract, and his creativity certainly wasn't in the surplus-to-requirements category. Obviously, if a player is nearing the end of his contract, your hands are tied, but that's why you need to put a proper system in place to bring in adequate replacements before you get into that position, not wait till the cupboard's bare. We never seem to be able to do that. We always end up with vital pieces missing, and that's the source of the frustration, not the selling of particular players per se.
Click to expand...

Modric was sold most reluctantly. Only after we had thwarted his wishes for 15 months. And only after he became a serious threat to dressing room morale. That's very far from a policy of, to paraphrase your post, "cashing in, regardless of the impact on the team, if a club meets our price for a player".
 
Hotspur said:
Why is there only itk when the transfer windows are open?

These chumps should have info between also.
Click to expand...

the 2 transfer windows are the only time they get the attention they so crave, nobody would bother listening to their tall tales and fantasies during other times.
 
jimmyb said:
Modric was sold most reluctantly. Only after we had thwarted his wishes for 15 months. And only after he became a serious threat to dressing room morale. That's very far from a policy of, to paraphrase your post, "cashing in, regardless of the impact on the team, if a club meets our price for a player".
Click to expand...

Please refer to my previous reply. I had hoped I'd made it clear that the main frustration is with our seemingly perpetual process of shuffling a deficit around the squad, rather than with the sale of particular players.
 
braineclipse said:
Considering that you talked about transfer strategy over the last 20 years (the majority of that under Levy), named Sugar and talked about the time after him (Levy), talked about the board (Levy being the chairman of that board), talked about haggling over price (Levy heads most of our negotiations) and talked about ENIC (who Levy runs the club on behalf of) it seemed to me obvious that part of your moan was directed at Levy.

If it wasn't that's fair enough, but I hope you see why I thought it was.

Regardless, my point stands, you can't expect to come onto a discussion forum to moan without people replying to you.

Edit: In the spirit of the weekend, just wanted to say that my comment about twitter was flippant. Sometimes I forget how these things come across over the net...

If you're going for a drink (like I am), then sláinte.
Click to expand...

Maith go leor :)
 
We should be all over Benteke now. Getting a deal ready and in place. Can see city, arsenal, probably Chelsea and Liverpool all in for him in the summer. Be happy if we paid
15 mil.
 
Best "Sunday World" headline ever was "Eireann Goes Bra-less"
I can't remember what the news story was about but there was much photographic evidence to back up the headline.
 
The Goat:

Well that didn't come off did it :-(

To justify ourselves a little bit, I'm glad that AVB's come out and said:

"Things were very, very close, almost to the point of being agreed," Villas-Boas said, on the move for Damião. "I think it's a question of a little more time, probably, that would have helped. There was a third-party with Atlético, the club who own 30%; that wasn't a problem. On the whole dealings of the whole agreement with all the parties, we needed more time. It was not specifically one party's fault."

As we understood it from several very good sources, we'd agreed everything with the club and sorted all the 3rd party stuff out and all that was left was sorting the "agent" fees out which should have been straightforward. People at Spurs thought it was "as good as done" and we were sorting all the paperwork out for the FA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back