• 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

ENIC

SissokoWasGood (BoL) said:
The great thing about Levy is that he actually wanted us to be long term sustainable. He knew we needed to increase our revenues if we truly wanted to endure as a top club. It fudges me off no end this narrative that has formed around poor old Villa not being able to spend to compete, after doing oh so well in recent years. Well….we did exactly as well as Villa have done, and we did it while living through an age of austerity in order to finance a massive infrastructure project, constantly selling our best players and operating the lowest wages to turnover ratio in the league.

I tip my hat massively to Levy for what he was able to do with that. And agree with the comment that for so long, his strategy benefitted him, Lewis. And us. But at some point it stopped working, and last summer was simply not good enough. He had to go.

There is simply no way that under Levy or with Levy in any position of power we’d have pulled off this summer under him. It’s like a different club. That’s not to say he was all bad. In fact he was excellent and top of the range for so long. But he ran out of road. A quarter of a century is a great innings, and there’s no shame in that. But I’m glad we made the moves that we did.
Click to expand...

Levy was the right person to be in charge of running the club from 2001-2021. I’d argue had Lewis bought the club sooner and put Levy in charge we would be in a better position. But from 2021 onward we needed someone more ambitious on the pitch. You cannot charge the highest price season ticket in a £1B stadium and put out a mid table team.
 
robp135 said:
Levy was the right person to be in charge of running the club from 2001-2021. I’d argue had Lewis bought the club sooner and put Levy in charge we would be in a better position. But from 2021 onward we needed someone more ambitious on the pitch. You cannot charge the highest price season ticket in a £1B stadium and put out a mid table team.
Click to expand...

Totally agreed. This is exactly it.

I’m very interested in how the kids think about boosting the value here. The calculation of how much more cash is needed to boost the valuation by how much.

But I’m happy that at a minimum they want us competing like a top club for top players, and I hope this is now our level. I don’t expect the same amount every summer, but when we need a top replacement, we go for it. That’s all I really ask. The club with the most expensive stadium and highest prices should be doing that.
 
SissokoWasGood (BoL) said:
Totally agreed. This is exactly it.

I’m very interested in how the kids think about boosting the value here. The calculation of how much more cash is needed to boost the valuation by how much.

But I’m happy that at a minimum they want us competing like a top club for top players, and I hope this is now our level. I don’t expect the same amount every summer, but when we need a top replacement, we go for it. That’s all I really ask. The club with the most expensive stadium and highest prices should be doing that.
Click to expand...


The only way to grow the revenues now is on field success. Bigger prize money for starters. But we had got to the point where being the worst of the best teams was beginning to hurt the club in terms of commercial. Your can’t be the plucky North London underdog in a 60,000 state of the art billion pound stadium. But we’re also the not anywhere near challenging for the major honours. The 2 superstar players had left without being replaced. So what’s the incentive for a kid in x,y,z country to support Spurs?

That begins to impact what brands are prepared to pay us. It begins to hurt ticket sales. The firms that buy corporate boxes will just stick to Arsenal & Chelsea in London.
 
SissokoWasGood (BoL) said:
Totally agreed. This is exactly it.

I’m very interested in how the kids think about boosting the value here. The calculation of how much more cash is needed to boost the valuation by how much.

But I’m happy that at a minimum they want us competing like a top club for top players, and I hope this is now our level. I don’t expect the same amount every summer, but when we need a top replacement, we go for it. That’s all I really ask. The club with the most expensive stadium and highest prices should be doing that.
Click to expand...
Maybe they don’t care about the valuation? Maybe they believe that having a net worth of £5 billion is enough and they’d rather have some fun and leave a legacy of trophies instead of trying to get their net worth to £6 or £7 billion?
 
The value of the club (asset) is not just about being able to sell it. Its also about being able to borrow against it. They take that money, which is tax free, and invest in an asset with a return that’s greater than the interest rate on the loan. Rinse and repeat.

While Joe Lewis never took money out of the club, he will have used the club to secure those loans which have made him wealthier. The more valuable Spurs is the more they can borrow…..and it’s tax free.
 
robp135 said:
The value of the club (asset) is not just about being able to sell it. Its also about being able to borrow against it. They take that money, which is tax free, and invest in an asset with a return that’s greater than the interest rate on the loan. Rinse and repeat.

While Joe Lewis never took money out of the club, he will have used the club to secure those loans which have made him wealthier. The more valuable Spurs is the more they can borrow…..and it’s tax free.
Click to expand...
In most businesses borrowing to improve/expand has a more predictable roadmap...new factory/machinery/r&d etc.

The list of clubs that have taken Macquarie loans ain't great reading.
One Macquarie loan is equivalent to Tonalis transfer fee. Hold that up against traditional assets businesses buy, and the asset we bought is massively more at risk of NOT outrunning the interest rate on the loan.

But better players appears to be the common opinion of how we get better. (It might even be the only way we have left tbh). Other clubs have thought the same...and are now in the brick.

Now, we (and this is a rare exception in football) have foundations like no other, so I'm not particularly concerned (plus we might also be underpinned by the kids wealth, it's just not liquid).

Enics loans had all been mainly for infrastructure up to this point. Perfect.
Borrowing for player acquisitions is a slippery slope.

The point is football ain't easy peasy.
 
harr1984 said:
Don't see what the big debate is - we are moving in a different way now, and from a footballing perspective it's more positive. The only question is whether we sustain it or not, but in regards to how we moved under Levy it's apples and oranges....
Click to expand...
We shouldn't need to sustain this level of spending every summer going forward, but yes we should maintain this degree of decisiveness when it does come to whatever transfer business we intend on doing.
 
Finney Is Back said:
Maybe they don’t care about the valuation? Maybe they believe that having a net worth of £5 billion is enough and they’d rather have some fun and leave a legacy of trophies instead of trying to get their net worth to £6 or £7 billion?
Click to expand...
This would be my pathway in their position. What fun, what a motivation to get you out of bed in the morning.

I die with 4bn rather than 6bn ...so fudging what. I've still left my younger generations minted.
 
Bishop said:
We shouldn't need to sustain this level of spending every summer going forward, but yes we should maintain this degree of decisiveness when it does come to whatever transfer business we intend on doing.
Click to expand...
Yes that's basically what I meant - people getting wrapped up in the net spend and whatever are missing the point, that was never the issue. Long may it continue.....
 
SissokoWasGood (BoL) said:
The great thing about Levy is that he actually wanted us to be long term sustainable. He knew we needed to increase our revenues if we truly wanted to endure as a top club. It fudges me off no end this narrative that has formed around poor old Villa not being able to spend to compete, after doing oh so well in recent years. Well….we did exactly as well as Villa have done, and we did it while living through an age of austerity in order to finance a massive infrastructure project, constantly selling our best players and operating the lowest wages to turnover ratio in the league.

I tip my hat massively to Levy for what he was able to do with that. And agree with the comment that for so long, his strategy benefitted him, Lewis. And us. But at some point it stopped working, and last summer was simply not good enough. He had to go.

There is simply no way that under Levy or with Levy in any position of power we’d have pulled off this summer under him. It’s like a different club. That’s not to say he was all bad. In fact he was excellent and top of the range for so long. But he ran out of road. A quarter of a century is a great innings, and there’s no shame in that. But I’m glad we made the moves that we did.
Click to expand...

But we don’t know what we’ve pulled off this summer yet, it might work well, it could just as likely absolutely fudge us.
 
harr1984 said:
Don't see what the big debate is - we are moving in a different way now, and from a footballing perspective it's more positive. The only question is whether we sustain it or not, but in regards to how we moved under Levy it's apples and oranges....
Click to expand...

And both can be discussed and respectfully debated, both are massive parts of Tottenhams recent and current history
 
Baleforce said:
But we don’t know what we’ve pulled off this summer yet, it might work well, it could just as likely absolute fudge us.
Click to expand...

Exactly this, this is not a dig at the "new" regime, but we will only know the success of it when we know it. I think we have all been on this forum long enough to know that we have had exciting summers before, even under DL where fans got excited in the context of where we were, its only now in hindsight that everyone is hammer the history of it. But ultimately what it does prove is the proof will always be in the eating. And yeh I get this is a summer like no other but lets see..............BTW I am excited but that doesn't mean I know
 
MartyFunkhouser said:
Exactly this, this is not a dig at the "new" regime, but we will only know the success of it when we know it. I think we have all been on this forum long enough to know that we have had exciting summers before, even under DL where fans got excited in the context of where we were, its only now in hindsight that everyone is hammer the history of it. But ultimately what it does prove is the proof will always be in the eating. And yeh I get this is a summer like no other but lets see..............BTW I am excited but that doesn't mean I know
Click to expand...
Indeed, saying Levy would never have completed these deals when he did many many comparable ones, the likes of Ndombele and Soldado, people forget them because they failed.
 
MartyFunkhouser said:
And both can be discussed and respectfully debated, both are massive parts of Tottenhams recent and current history
Click to expand...
Sure I just don't see what the debate is - Levy operated his way, the 'Nepos' doing it a different way. Levy's way took us to some big highs but we plateaued and began to fall.

The way the new regime are acting is like that you would expect of a serious football club who want to achieve things beyond off the pitch results. Does it mean we will end up with more success? Of course not, and would certainly disagree with anyone who tries to undermine where Levy took this club.

But seemed clear in order to kick on or even get back to where we were we needed a different set of ideas and impetus and the signs are we have it. Time will tell....
 
harr1984 said:
Sure I just don't see what the debate is - Levy operated his way, the 'Nepos' doing it a different way. Levy's way took us to some big highs but we plateaued and began to fall.

The way the new regime are acting is like that you would expect of a serious football club who want to achieve things beyond off the pitch results. Does it mean we will end up with more success? Of course not, and would certainly disagree with anyone who tries to undermine where Levy took this club.

But seemed clear in order to kick on or even get back to where we were we needed a different set of ideas and impetus and the signs are we have it. Time will tell....
Click to expand...

I don’t agree with that, I don’t think we are acting like a serious club at all, I think we are taking massive risks and I don’t like the financial moves being made, it’s the kinda sketchy brick I’d expect from Chelsea or United.
 
harr1984 said:
Sure I just don't see what the debate is - Levy operated his way, the 'Nepos' doing it a different way. Levy's way took us to some big highs but we plateaued and began to fall.
Click to expand...

Its a debate on the history and why things happened as they did and where and why those things happened. I mean some people are interested in this stuff connected to the club, I think thats allowed no?

harr1984 said:
The way the new regime are acting is like that you would expect of a serious football club who want to achieve things beyond off the pitch results. Does it mean we will end up with more success? Of course not, and would certainly disagree with anyone who tries to undermine where Levy took this club.

But seemed clear in order to kick on or even get back to where we were we needed a different set of ideas and impetus and the signs are we have it. Time will tell....
Click to expand...

I don't thing anyone disagrees with the change of tact, I myself have said it was the right time for DL to leave, that has never been the debate. The debate has been was DL managing under owners constraints or his own and would he have scaled up spending given more resources.

We have always been a serious club, the idea we were never is a BS narrative built on an irrational hate for a man who dedicated alot of his working life to make us a serious club and the envy of a large portion of the footballing world. A club ironically who are now further the envy because of the financial work he did, meaning we have the basis to spend high and sell low.............There is no this years spending without DL...........I suppose thats the whole point. I make no bones or have no shame giving him props for that and respecting someone's hard work, I would do the exact same away from the emotion of football and I do it within

Anyway, given the day is the start of the new season, I will leave it there for now....................as Enic have and always been in charge of the club, as the great Bob Willis said about Joe Root "right young man when your little purple patch runs out, I'll have you back in the dock" :tearsofjoy: :tearsofjoy:
 
Last edited:
Baleforce said:
I don’t agree with that, I don’t think we are acting like a serious club at all, I think we are taking massive risks and I don’t like the financial moves being made, it’s the kinda sketchy brick I’d expect from Chelsea or United.
Click to expand...
A valid pov.

All dependent on how financially underpinned we are by the owners.

Are they lenders of last resort?
Eg. Lightweight versions of Roman
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back