Would you take, say, Quatari cash injection to allow transfer competition?

[mick cooper]

Joe Lewis is a billionaire. If you mean an interested billionaire, then possibly, although I'd still disagree. Funding our stadium, securing massive sponsorship deals through their own companies, etcetera, etcetera, is just pumping money in through the back door.

The vast majority of us criticize City (the club, not the fans) for their soul-destroying splurges of wealth, and are quick to declare their trophies meaningless.

Yet if the same happened to us, we'd be dancing in the streets? Come on, gentlemen. Hypocritical at best.

Speak for yourself.

I happen to care how I conduct my life, and I would apply the same outlook on the club.

I can't influence what happens, but if we got mansoured - I would cease to have the same interest in the club, and football as a whole.

I have always condemned Chelski - and took no differing stance with Emirates Marketing Project. One thing I'm not is a hypocrite. I would say exactly the same about Tottenham

As has been said, I would look at the results and take a passing interest in its fortunes. But I would feel exactly the same if I discovered my son had become a rent boy. There would be little love left, and no pride whatsoever in the clubs "achievements."

Some of us don't subscribe to the maxim "success at all costs."

 

[Jordinho]

I wouldn't be against someone paying for our stadium. I wouldn't like it, but I wouldn't be against it. Anyone who thinks we could just redevelop WHL needs a reality check.

A pure injection of cash for no apparent reason would be something else though. Some macaron billionaire buying a championship winning squad, skipping years of development, would make me give up on football completely. As it is, Tottenham is the only reason I'm even remotely interested.

 

[spasm]

I do wonder how much of this altruistic sentiment might waiver should things degenerate gradually...the older generation have lived through some highs and more then their fair share of lows and those that are still with us are more likely genuinely enamoured with the club. Whilst the geographic association still exists to a certain extent, the younger generation has been bred to subscribe to a higher level of expectation towards the club particularly over the last decade. I would postulate that although we have not won any major trophies, we have rarely "had it so good" with a highly talented squad of players that by and large play genuinely exciting football the "glory-glory" way if you will which has seen us take on the ruling echelon of Europe and come within a whisker of reaching the pinnacle.

What would happen if the "older' generation were to significantly diminish and over the course of the next few season Spurs were consigned to mid table obscurity through a mixture of poor management, the loss of our greatest talents, an inability to replenish said talent and the financial mayhem of being burdened with the exorbitant costs of a new stadium?

 

[Raziel]

The "old ways" are dead, and in someways I question if they ever really existed how people remember them.

Funny thing about City is even though they have spent more money than Cheat$ki, it's a little more respectful. Cheat$ki is RA's toy outright, he fudges around with everything, buys players nobody asked for, fires managers who win brick, it's just a joke. City's owners have hired a young, respectable manager, given him chance, allowed him mistakes and given him a chequebook, it's definetely more admirable.

I wouldn't mind a part owner scenario for Spurs, someone to come in, buy an interest in the club (35/40%) that the funds go directly to stadium costs and player investment, with a 60K seat stadium and 2-3 big additions to the team, we could do really well.

I will always follow Spurs, I'd like the fairytale, but if someone gave us 300-500M at that translated into success/trophies, I would not celebrate any less.

 

[Nutter-Naylor]

If we need more cash we should just follow the Arse & sell some of these

View attachment 611

 

[DubaiSpur]

Speak for yourself.

I happen to care how I conduct my life, and I would apply the same outlook on the club.

I can't influence what happens, but if we got mansoured - I would cease to have the same interest in the club, and football as a whole.

I have always condemned Chelski - and took no differing stance with Emirates Marketing Project. One thing I'm not is a hypocrite. I would say exactly the same about Tottenham

As has been said, I would look at the results and take a passing interest in its fortunes. But I would feel exactly the same if I discovered my son had become a rent boy. There would be little love left, and no pride whatsoever in the clubs "achievements."

Some of us don't subscribe to the maxim "success at all costs."

Erm.....I was agreeing with you?

It IS hypocritical to criticize Chelski and City for their unearned splurges, but cheer when we do the same. Ergo, we shouldn't want it to happen.

Calm down, mate.

 

[DubaiSpur]

I do wonder how much of this altruistic sentiment might waiver should things degenerate gradually...the older generation have lived through some highs and more then their fair share of lows and those that are still with us are more likely genuinely enamoured with the club. Whilst the geographic association still exists to a certain extent, the younger generation has been bred to subscribe to a higher level of expectation towards the club particularly over the last decade. I would postulate that although we have not won any major trophies, we have rarely "had it so good" with a highly talented squad of players that by and large play genuinely exciting football the "glory-glory" way if you will which has seen us take on the ruling echelon of Europe and come within a whisker of reaching the pinnacle.

What would happen if the "older' generation were to significantly diminish and over the course of the next few season Spurs were consigned to mid table obscurity through a mixture of poor management, the loss of our greatest talents, an inability to replenish said talent and the financial mayhem of being burdened with the exorbitant costs of a new stadium?

A lot of the young fans would demand a new owner, yes. But it's unlikely they'll get one. So they (including me, I suppose, so we)'ll have to grin and bear it.

The key to avoiding that fate, however, is building the new stadium. Once the money's committed in full and the ground construction's underway, even us younger fans would probably accept a few seasons of relative mediocrity, safe in the knowledge that we'd be able to compete again once the stadium's up and running. That's what would sustain hope. At the moment, the precariousness of our situation (we're fourth on a smaller budget than our rivals, with an ageing stadium with insufficient capacity, grand old gal though she may be) means every slip up is viewed with a lot more worry, because it could be the one that dumps us back into mediocrity.

And if that happened, the chances of us immediately coming out of it again, new stadium in hand, seem to be slim indeed.

 

[Yiddo]

Why do people seem to think City deserve the success and they have "been through it" have Norwich, Southampton and even leeds not been through similar "hard times"?

Do all these teams deserve a lottery win?

 

[jamonserrano]

If we need more cash we should just follow the Arse & sell some of these

View attachment 611

 

[DubaiSpur]

Why do people seem to think City deserve the success and they have "been through it" have Norwich, Southampton and even leeds not been through similar "hard times"?

Do all these teams deserve a lottery win?

Yep. But the key is making sure no one, including us, rises to the top on the basis of the lottery win alone.

Or we could just make every team lottery winners and end up right where we started.

 

[1882]

I think the argument is aimed in the wrong direction... rather than pointing the finger at whatever club 'gets lucky' (Chelsea, Emirates Marketing Project, and some might say on a smaller scale; Crawley!) the question should be more along the lines of transfer/wage caps so that everyone is on the same level... you can only have, say a ?ú50m budget each Summer to spend on players, and those could only be paid up to (ooh, let's say) ?ú80,000K, that should do it, and include most clubs in there. Whether you want to spend that ?ú50 on ONE superstar is up to you, but the financial restraints would at least mean you can't simply blow every other team out of the water, by hoovering up everyone's best players.

So regardless of how rich your owner is, that would perhaps allow you to build a state-of-the-art stadium (to no doubt generate funds THAT way) but in terms of how much you can spend on transfers, or wages, if there was a LIMIT, that fell within EVERY club's budget (and a sliding scale for lower leagues of course) then although you'd still have players WANTING to go to 'Manchester' they wouldn't be going for The Project (ie; The Money) as they could pick up exactly the same wages at Wigan (for example)... Jimmy Hill has a lot to answer for... he fudging started it, chinny busy-body!

I'd also go for a 5 player/10 mile quota rule whereby at LEAST 5 of the current squad (of 25) were FROM the nearby area... not saying you have to necessarily nurture them from birth (as someone like Defoe would count even though he was bought) or indeed play them in every game, but at least you'd know there was a bit of local blood flowing through the veins of the squad... that too is as important for generating an 'Our Club' mentality amongst fans, not to mention that Dinosaur word; LOYALTY! (I present Adam Smith, Ledley King, Jermaine Defoe, Scott Parker & Jake Livermore m'lud as Exhibit A!)

 

[Crab.C.Nesbitt]

Joe Lewis is a billionaire. If you mean an interested billionaire, then possibly, although I'd still disagree. Funding our stadium, securing massive sponsorship deals through their own companies, etcetera, etcetera, is just pumping money in through the back door.

The vast majority of us criticize City (the club, not the fans) for their soul-destroying splurges of wealth, and are quick to declare their trophies meaningless.

Yet if the same happened to us, we'd be dancing in the streets? Come on, gentlemen. Hypocritical at best.

Not in the same way as abramovich or Emirates Marketing Project's owners. He is estimated to be worth something like ?ú2.1 billion, but the vast majority of that money is tied up in assets. He does not have the liquid cash resources that cheslbricks and Emirates Marketing Project's owners have, which is probably part of te reason at we have not seen the same owner fuelled injection of cash (and as stated he is nowhere near as rich as them).

 

[Crab.C.Nesbitt]

That truly Is a thing of beauty!

 

[monkeybarry]

i dont think its possible to take the moral highground regarding where the money comes from as most of the time it is going to come from a company/person that has, somewhere, been a total dingdong to many people and seriously hurt them to get to where they are

so on that note - although i wouldnt like it, i would accept the money

but i wouldnt be able to accept us "doing a city" - we need to exist within th the realms of good financial mangement and stability (as we have and will have to with fair play).
if we "did a city", i would no longer follow the club as a fan - maybe from a far with a cursory look, but Tottenham Hotspur would did for me at that point

 

[monkeybarry]

Why do people seem to think City deserve the success and they have "been through it" have Norwich, Southampton and even leeds not been through similar "hard times"?

Do all these teams deserve a lottery win?

sounds like a typical reaction in the country thees days - "ive screwed up with money and had a crap time because if it. i think i deserve someone to give me some".

might just be the face of the modern fan?

 

[mick cooper]

Erm.....I was agreeing with you?

It IS hypocritical to criticize Chelski and City for their unearned splurges, but cheer when we do the same. Ergo, we shouldn't want it to happen.

Calm down, mate.

Why do you think I was excited?
The post I replied to doesn't read that way at all, to me and seemed to indicate that you felt that people are criticising the sugarar daddy clubs on the one hand but would dance in the street if it happened to us, on the other.

You wrote it, not me - I can only respond to what I read.

And expressed my opinion accordingly, without getting excited in the slightest. Far from it, the prospect saddens me beyond belief.

 

[mick cooper]

A lot of the young fans would demand a new owner, yes. But it's unlikely they'll get one. So they (including me, I suppose, so we)'ll have to grin and bear it.

The key to avoiding that fate, however, is building the new stadium. Once the money's committed in full and the ground construction's underway, even us younger fans would probably accept a few seasons of relative mediocrity, safe in the knowledge that we'd be able to compete again once the stadium's up and running. That's what would sustain hope. At the moment, the precariousness of our situation (we're fourth on a smaller budget than our rivals, with an ageing stadium with insufficient capacity, grand old gal though she may be) means every slip up is viewed with a lot more worry, because it could be the one that dumps us back into mediocrity.

And if that happened, the chances of us immediately coming out of it again, new stadium in hand, seem to be slim indeed.

our stadium isn't really all that old, it was just built without much (apparent) forethought, and was constrained by its environs.

Additionally, the new stadium isn't going to be cheap, and the club will lose money during its construction. In the aftermath of its build the club will be strapped for cash, and operating on a reduced budget (like anyone with a mortgage) this will be a really vulnerable time for the club.

The leagues are full of clubs that have died on their arse after a new stadium has been built for them (Derby, S'oton, Coventry etc) so I wouldn't be too full of hope that we will be flush with available cash for team development, why do you think l'arse are struggling after years of dominance?

 

[DubaiSpur]

our stadium isn't really all that old, it was just built without much (apparent) forethought, and was constrained by its environs.

Additionally, the new stadium isn't going to be cheap, and the club will lose money during its construction. In the aftermath of its build the club will be strapped for cash, and operating on a reduced budget (like anyone with a mortgage) this will be a really vulnerable time for the club.

The leagues are full of clubs that have died on their arse after a new stadium has been built for them (Derby, S'oton, Coventry etc) so I wouldn't be too full of hope that we will be flush with available cash for team development, why do you think l'arse are struggling after years of dominance?

You forgot Darlington and their monstrous white elephant arena. However, I'd like to believe that;

a) Our commercial and sponsorship deals would be heavily(though not completely) weighted towards immediate payment of the stadium costs (much like Arsenal's Emirates deal), and

b)once the stadium's up and running, a portion of our income would be set aside for debt servicing. Doesn't have to be a massive amount, mind, but a portion of it surely. With the near-doubling of matchday revenue, coupled with the likely larger commercial deals in place, we should at the very least see a quick return to the level we're at now, and eventually (I'm talking six to nine years after completion, if the current estimates of the loans necessary and the value of the sponsorship deal are correct) a move to the next level of competition.

 

[DubaiSpur]

Why do you think I was excited?
The post I replied to doesn't read that way at all, to me and seemed to indicate that you felt that people are criticising the sugarar daddy clubs on the one hand but would dance in the street if it happened to us, on the other.

You wrote it, not me - I can only respond to what I read.

And expressed my opinion accordingly, without getting excited in the slightest. Far from it, the prospect saddens me beyond belief.

I quote from my previous post;

'Yet if the same happened to us, we'd be dancing in the streets?'

The question mark at the end defines it, I think. I was asking a question; would we really be that hypocritical? I'd like to believe that most on here would be too proud to do o.

As for my request of you to calm down, it wasn't 'excitement' I was aiming at. Rather, you seem to be a wee bit too angry, for whatever reason.

Again, I agree with you. The prospect of a Mansour blasting to the title with unearned riches terrifies me. Supporting Spurs would then mean nothing, since it would simply mean 'supporting' a billionaire's bank account.

 

[Wriggly]

I am proud of the way we are ran. So bloody profitable and a genius like Levy running us we will always be like this. Why on earth would some people want to ruin that ? If you want a winning lottery ticket to keep up with the shallow, empty other clubs then go support one of them.