• 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

Would relegation be that bad?

The question for me is what happens in the scenario where we go down but straight back up? Does that negate the PSR? I also wonder if it pushes a sale, and how that would effect it (assuming owners don’t buy more shares to generate income again).

Personally I think they will be arrogant enough to gamble on an immediate promotion and not get rid of as many players as people think.

Oh and from memory things like stadium development costs are immune from PSR, which would be alot of our non operating costs I expect
 
SissokoWasGood (BoL) said:
Are we ‘too big to fail’ (be relegated?). Perhaps it’s so existential that we can finish 18th but have to remain in the PL.
Click to expand...
Well obviously that isn't going to happen but it will be a big blow to the Premier League brand. We are one of their star attractions.

Now I can almost hear the fans of other clubs choking on their biscuits but in terms of global viewing figures, brand awareness and revenue generation its just a fact. It is why we pretty much have a permanent invite to a European Super League. BTW an idea pushed heavily by the larger Italian clubs a raft of whom did get relegated as part of "Calciogate".

If we go down, the PL instantly loses 12 of its most profitable, most watched fixtures.

It might even kickstart discussions for the superleague up again because the superleague concept is precisely bourne of the idea that Europe's largest clubs are almost expected to invest heavily in huge, state of the art stadiums and squads full of galacticos but are not given more protection than other clubs from the prospects of relegation or missing out on European football despute the huge overheads they incur in drawing in the viewers to the "enhanced show".

Now in a purely sporting context the idea of giving such clubs preferential protection is anathema, but these are not sporting clubs any more, they're billion dollar businesses.....
 
Mikey10 said:
The excellent Theo Delaney on The Spurs Show has been pushing that theory for a couple of years.

Income from concerts, boxing, Skywalks, go-karts, even an NFL franchise, is all much more predictable than football. In football, you might invest £60 million for an Ndombele and get very little for your outlay - footballing revenue is too unpredictable.

Better to have an entertainment venue, in which a football team may play an ever-decreasing part in the revenue steam.
Click to expand...
Maybe that was the plan all along. It sure isnt footballing decisions
 
Welshspur60 said:
Come off it mate. VAR and the endless 5 minute stoppages to look over goal, fouls, penalties, handballs etc. You cant celebrate a goal now as theres a fair chances someones rooster was 1mm offside a minute before the actual goal. Its fkn awful.
Click to expand...

I think accurate officiating is worth the disruption, I don’t care if they take 20 minutes working something out, as long as it ends up being right.

1mm offside is still offside.

The issue for me is the humans are still making mistakes, by not using VAR enough, or properly.
 
Mrs Vert said:
Maybe that was the plan all along. It sure isnt footballing decisions
Click to expand...
It was the plan all along. Spurs were the pioneers in this diversification and commercialisation approach. We floated on the stock market and were one of the primary drivers behind the establishment of the Premier League and preferrential TV rights. Read that in initial rights negotiations, the other "big" clubs were content to let it play out, it was Alan Sugar that got on the phone to Sky and convinced them to "blow ITV out of the water"....
 
Muttley said:
Nah, dont agree. It's all in how the messaging is delivered on forums. Admittedly, my post wasn't so great because I was more wondering whether we could or should consider loans as a viable option. It perhaps read was that I was advocating for it. I actually wasn't, at least in my head. I was just wondering why it's not been a big discussion point.

What you've kindly done is put some numbers to paper in one single scenario based on some facts and some guestimates. Based on many moving parts, there could be several different scenarios. We don't know to what level of accuracy any of these models will come out. As an example, you don't know things like whether the Lewis's / Tavistock will throw in another cash injection like they've done previously. That might be way more efficient in the mid to long term than removing balance sheet assets for less than their market value. It might be a strategy to help get THFC back to it's full saleable value if that is the agenda.

There is way more grey space in this equation than right or wrong to be fair.
Click to expand...

Your posting was fine IMO. You made a point/posed a question on a Spurs forum. If you're not happy for people to disagree with your point or answer your question in a way you don't like then you're probably in the wrong place.

In my long post that was split into two, I said at the very end that I think the only way we come back up is if the owners put liquidity in. In fact I think them putting liquidity in is an absolute necessity as I'm not convinced that we could survive financially without them doing so without selling such a large percentage of our first team squad that we'd basically have no chance of getting promoted and perhaps be a candidate for relegation.

Putting liquidity in only solves the cash flow problem however. It does not solve the PSR problem and I think it is this PSR problem that many Spurs fans aren't considering.

To solve the PSR problem we have to slash costs... MASSIVELY as well as bringing in a considerable amount of additional revenue, and the only real viable way of bringing in a decent amount of revenue is to sell players. So IMO we're left with the conundrum of - do we try to adhere to PSR (or at least look like we're having a good go at it) or do we ignore PSR, go all out for immediate promotion and take the consequences later.

Thinking about it there is one other potential way of raising revenue and that is to sell off some of our development land. Though I would assume it would already hold a net book value that would have to be written off against the sale - so that might not make much of a difference.

I'm still hoping that we can somehow avoid relegation but, as all on here know, I have thought we were a seriously good bet for relegation for a long while now and, if we do end up dropping, then we are in big, big trouble unless we have the double bubble advantage of a majority our first team squad on very large relegation contract clauses and our commercial contracts not having punitive clauses for us not being in the PL.
 
demotw said:
The question for me is what happens in the scenario where we go down but straight back up? Does that negate the PSR? I also wonder if it pushes a sale, and how that would effect it (assuming owners don’t buy more shares to generate income again).

Personally I think they will be arrogant enough to gamble on an immediate promotion and not get rid of as many players as people think.

Oh and from memory things like stadium development costs are immune from PSR, which would be alot of our non operating costs I expect
Click to expand...
They are in the premier league but not in the championship. As far as I'm aware the championship has different rules to the PL (and even league 1 & 2). In the championship the rule is much more simple with it being an allowable loss. All revenues and all costs are counted unfortunately.
 
Finney Is Back said:
They are in the premier league but not in the championship. As far as I'm aware the championship has different rules to the PL (and even league 1 & 2). In the championship the rule is much more simple with it being an allowable loss. All revenues and all costs are counted unfortunately.
Click to expand...
Interesting, this is what google says when asked (obviously pinch of salt and all that).

When a club the size of Tottenham Hotspur drops into the Championship, the Profitability and Sustainability Rules (PSR) "stretch" by creating a hybrid allowance based on the time spent in each league.

For the 2025/26 season, clubs calculate their permissible losses over a rolling three-year period. Because the Premier League (PL) and Championship have different thresholds, the total limit is the sum of the allowances for each specific season in that window.


1. The Hybrid Allowance Calculation
The total permitted loss is adjusted based on how many years were spent in the top flight versus the Championship:
  • Premier League Allowance: £35 million per season (if backed by owner equity).
  • Championship Allowance: £13 million per season.
  • Total Hybrid Limit: For a club relegated in 2025, their three-year lookback would include two PL seasons (£70m) and one Championship season (£13m), totaling £83 million in permitted losses.

2. High "Add-Backs" for Large Clubs
A club like Spurs has a massive advantage due to "allowable deductions"—spending that is completely exempt from PSR calculations.

  • Infrastructure & Stadium: Spurs have roughly £70 million per year in depreciation related to the stadium that can be "added back" to their profits.
  • Youth & Community: They typically spend an additional £15 million+ annually on their academy and women's team, which is also deductible.
  • Result: Even if their raw accounts show a significant loss, their "PSR-adjusted" loss might still be within the rules because so much of their spending is exempt.

3. Revenue vs. Cost Cliff
The biggest challenge for a "Big Six" club in the Championship is the sudden disappearance of Premier League broadcast revenue (£100m+ per year), replaced by much smaller EFL distributions and Parachute Payments.

  • Wage Reduction Clauses: To survive this, large clubs often include "relegation clauses" that automatically slash player wages (often by 50%) if they go down to keep the squad cost sustainable.
 
What Finney has done is really interesting, albeit scary. Spurs' accountant would have work to do with P45s to get our salary costs under control. Maybe mothball the training ground hotel when England or other clubs don't use it, fire half the ground staff, etc etc - go right back to Championship level basics. I guess the nightmare scenario would be someone buying the club for the commercial income from the ground, and simply letting the football side die. I wonder, if we are in the Championship, could it be time for the Board to go on bended knee to a certain Mr Daniel Levy CBE ???!!
 
Baleforce said:
I think accurate officiating is worth the disruption, I don’t care if they take 20 minutes working something out, as long as it ends up being right.

1mm offside is still offside.

The issue for me is the humans are still making mistakes, by not using VAR enough, or properly.
Click to expand...
There is no point in it being right, if it's boring abd tedious. All we need is the automated stuff, and someone watching to spot a Pedro Mendes goal etc.
 
lurker of old said:
What Finney has done is really interesting, albeit scary. Spurs' accountant would have work to do with P45s to get our salary costs under control. Maybe mothball the training ground hotel when England or other clubs don't use it, fire half the ground staff, etc etc - go right back to Championship level basics. I guess the nightmare scenario would be someone buying the club for the commercial income from the ground, and simply letting the football side die. I wonder, if we are in the Championship, could it be time for the Board to go on bended knee to a certain Mr Daniel Levy CBE ???!!
Click to expand...
Well, we certainly have sacked the best person to navigate us thru this potential situation.
 
lurker of old said:
What Finney has done is really interesting, albeit scary. Spurs' accountant would have work to do with P45s to get our salary costs under control. Maybe mothball the training ground hotel when England or other clubs don't use it, fire half the ground staff, etc etc - go right back to Championship level basics. I guess the nightmare scenario would be someone buying the club for the commercial income from the ground, and simply letting the football side die. I wonder, if we are in the Championship, could it be time for the Board to go on bended knee to a certain Mr Daniel Levy CBE ???!!
Click to expand...
They made a massive, massive mistake getting rid of him in the way they did it and the timing of it. And, if they intend to run the club the way they've run it for 25 years, Levy is the best man to operate that model in my opinion. He's a brilliant businessman whose shrewdness will mean we don't become Leeds United if we do go down.

However, bringing him back would be one of the few ways that the owners could ramp up the toxicity. Most of the fan base, not without cause, wanted Levy gone. To bring him back now would just reopen another massive wound when we have no shortage of them already.

It's probably not the time to discuss it but I really hope there is some form of demonstration going to happen after the Everton game come what may. I've never contemplated going to one before, mainly because they were targeted against Levy which I thought was unfair, but I really think the ownership need to feel the fury of the fan base. I'm beyond angry at them and would willingly join such a protest.
 
demotw said:
Interesting, this is what google says when asked (obviously pinch of salt and all that).

When a club the size of Tottenham Hotspur drops into the Championship, the Profitability and Sustainability Rules (PSR) "stretch" by creating a hybrid allowance based on the time spent in each league.

For the 2025/26 season, clubs calculate their permissible losses over a rolling three-year period. Because the Premier League (PL) and Championship have different thresholds, the total limit is the sum of the allowances for each specific season in that window.


1. The Hybrid Allowance Calculation
The total permitted loss is adjusted based on how many years were spent in the top flight versus the Championship:
  • Premier League Allowance: £35 million per season (if backed by owner equity).
  • Championship Allowance: £13 million per season.
  • Total Hybrid Limit: For a club relegated in 2025, their three-year lookback would include two PL seasons (£70m) and one Championship season (£13m), totaling £83 million in permitted losses.

2. High "Add-Backs" for Large Clubs
A club like Spurs has a massive advantage due to "allowable deductions"—spending that is completely exempt from PSR calculations.

  • Infrastructure & Stadium: Spurs have roughly £70 million per year in depreciation related to the stadium that can be "added back" to their profits.
  • Youth & Community: They typically spend an additional £15 million+ annually on their academy and women's team, which is also deductible.
  • Result: Even if their raw accounts show a significant loss, their "PSR-adjusted" loss might still be within the rules because so much of their spending is exempt.

3. Revenue vs. Cost Cliff
The biggest challenge for a "Big Six" club in the Championship is the sudden disappearance of Premier League broadcast revenue (£100m+ per year), replaced by much smaller EFL distributions and Parachute Payments.

  • Wage Reduction Clauses: To survive this, large clubs often include "relegation clauses" that automatically slash player wages (often by 50%) if they go down to keep the squad cost sustainable
Click to expand...

Interesting.

I hope the bean counters are hard at work gaming each and every scenario.

It might be a case, given the short time me frame nature of football, that we just wouldn't be able to meet the rules. In that case we need to accept we are going to break them, and game those scenarios as well.
 
lurker of old said:
What Finney has done is really interesting, albeit scary. Spurs' accountant would have work to do with P45s to get our salary costs under control. Maybe mothball the training ground hotel when England or other clubs don't use it, fire half the ground staff, etc etc - go right back to Championship level basics. I guess the nightmare scenario would be someone buying the club for the commercial income from the ground, and simply letting the football side die. I wonder, if we are in the Championship, could it be time for the Board to go on bended knee to a certain Mr Daniel Levy CBE ???!!
Click to expand...
What about if Levy came back with a hostile takeover with a different wedged up consortium...he contributing his 30% and his partners screwing the Lewis's family to the floor on price, due to championship club status and financial freefall? Levy just on commercial and/or replacing Carrington in the non Ex Chairman roll?
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
Interesting.

I hope the bean counters are hard at work gaming each and every scenario.

It might be a case, given the short time me frame nature of football, that we just wouldn't be able to meet the rules. In that case we need to accept we are going to break them, and game those scenarios as well.
Click to expand...
Funny i thought about that as well, what's the penalty for exceeding? few million and maybe 6pts? Not to mention with accounting periods some of the PL income will still fall into first year of championship if that happened. Might be worth keeping everyone and taking the hit from a point perspective, no reason can't get 6pts clear.
 
demotw said:
Funny i thought about that as well, what's the penalty for exceeding? few million and maybe 6pts? Not to mention with accounting periods some of the PL income will still fall into first year of championship if that happened. Might be worth keeping everyone and taking the hit from a point perspective, no reason can't get 6pts clear.
Click to expand...
Do you genuinely believe they wouldn’t find a way to make it a 12 point deduction?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back