• 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

Daniel Levy - Chairman

OK, put it like this.

Let's say we owe £720m on the stadium (because the £1B figure was inflated and we've already paid off chunks here and there, plus housing/Uni/Sainsbury/developments etc).

In 8 years we will have half of it paid off.

If you went to the bank and got a 25 year mortgage and paid off half in 8 years, that is bloody good going.

Obviously this is omitting all other revenue generation like PL money, CL money etc etc.

So the £360m is a MASSIVE chunk of the stadium paid for, guaranteed, in only 8 years which is very quick.

A bit like when your house mortgage seems massive... then 10 years later it seems doable... then 10 years later it is quite small... then you just pay the end off in a lump sum to stop fannying around.
 
spurspinter1 said:
Hmm, I think I'm just about getting it, I didn't quite understand you meant looking at the 20 year picture which would tend to skew figures somewhat! But you assume the next deal will be more worth taking in to account interest and wouldn't involve any potential necessary developments / maintenance costs to the stadium but this is probably being a bit picky on my part, cheers for clarifying.
Click to expand...

Here’s one way to think about it (it’s a risky one too and I’ve used very rounded up hypothetical numbers)

CL money is £80m a season ish although this season we’re getting £117m IIRC
Prem league payments £100m (currently £140m with foreign money)
Foreign TV £40m (this will increase under the new deal where the top sides take more)
AIA £45m (I was corrected)
NIke £30m
Naming rights £20m
Other sponsors £10m (complete guess)
Gate receipts and food and drink £100m (low imo by about 30m but we will see)

That’s £385m money in so call it £400m for round numbers, and is all low if you look here at a better article
https://twitter.com/x/status/1115143646158970881
were probably now at £450m upwards

Wages currently are at £150m ish but assume that jumps to £250m and we wanna pay £50m a year off to service the loan in the ground we would still have £100m/£150m to spend on players before sales which also bring in a healthy profit
 
Last edited:
Again, the comparisons to the Scum have been shown to be misleading (I.e. their spend reduction after stadium build)

- The stadium was a major cost (regardless of final exact figure)
- However, we had made several of the outlays over the years (e.g. land purchases, lilywhite house, etc.)
- Additionally our revenue stream has increased dramatically in past 4 years with CL and new TV rights
- Add the new shirt deal, potential naming rights, option sleeve sponsor and NFL numbers (unknown)

It's quite clear Levy as with all things money has done the job here, Spurs look to be in comfortable position with very manageable debt.

If he manages to close on a couple more players with a significant net spend, it will also be an interesting message to our competition and some of our fans.
 
Raziel said:
Again, the comparisons to the Scum have been shown to be misleading (I.e. their spend reduction after stadium build)

- The stadium was a major cost (regardless of final exact figure)
- However, we had made several of the outlays over the years (e.g. land purchases, lilywhite house, etc.)
- Additionally our revenue stream has increased dramatically in past 4 years with CL and new TV rights
- Add the new shirt deal, potential naming rights, option sleeve sponsor and NFL numbers (unknown)

It's quite clear Levy as with all things money has done the job here, Spurs look to be in comfortable position with very manageable debt.

If he manages to close on a couple more players with a significant net spend, it will also be an interesting message to our competition and some of our fans.
Click to expand...

But if you look at the sums I did above we can comfortably spend £150m before sales and be in credit... we’re currently £40m down ish)

So sessegnon with players going the other way may cost us actually £10m

Similarly I think with Dybala we may end up offering Lamela and £50m

That leaves us £60m for Le Celso for example
 
Bedfordspurs said:
But if you look at the sums I did above we can comfortably spend £150m before sales and be in credit... we’re currently £40m down ish)

So sessegnon with players going the other way may cost us actually £10m

Similarly I think with Dybala we may end up offering Lamela and £50m

That leaves us £60m for Le Celso for example
Click to expand...

I dont think Juve will want any players, they are trying to get Icardi in.
 
Raziel said:
Again, the comparisons to the Scum have been shown to be misleading (I.e. their spend reduction after stadium build)

- The stadium was a major cost (regardless of final exact figure)
- However, we had made several of the outlays over the years (e.g. land purchases, lilywhite house, etc.)
- Additionally our revenue stream has increased dramatically in past 4 years with CL and new TV rights
- Add the new shirt deal, potential naming rights, option sleeve sponsor and NFL numbers (unknown)

It's quite clear Levy as with all things money has done the job here, Spurs look to be in comfortable position with very manageable debt.

If he manages to close on a couple more players with a significant net spend, it will also be an interesting message to our competition and some of our fans.
Click to expand...
The other point we have lucked out on is base rates were 4-5% back then, 0.75% for us now. Massive saving when it comes to structuring the debt going forward.

Its the TV money that helps, as even if we zero net spend on transfers, the TV money last year was something like £210m ...basically a third of what we owe. I bet it was nothing like that, as a percentage, back in 2004.
 
Jurgen the German said:
A midfielder who gets nearly a goal every other game and is fit and healthy or a midfielder who scores around 1 in 7 and is injured constantly? Tough call.
Click to expand...
Neither are midfielders are they...
Dybala is very much a number 10
Lamela was brought for that role as well as a wide attacker role
The issue with Lamela as you say is he is made of glass
 
ricky2tricky4city said:
The other point we have lucked out on is base rates were 4-5% back then, 0.75% for us now. Massive saving when it comes to structuring the debt going forward.

Its the TV money that helps, as even if we zero net spend on transfers, the TV money last year was something like £210m ...basically a third of what we owe. I bet it was nothing like that, as a percentage, back in 2004.
Click to expand...

£140m TV money for the prem
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back