• 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

Raziel said:
- Their PL title was a fluke mate, a domestic cup win for a club challenging for European spots is not unheard of (it's difficult simply because of the dominance of 3 odd clubs). I said it, well done to them (I have a lot of grievances re that PL season, but that is a whole other story) but long term like a lot of clubs, they are fudged (money matters and even owners throwing cash, unless it's RA/Sheik kind of cash it isn't enough to permanently close the gap)

- Trophies matter, no one should deny that.

From my perspective, I think I back Levy/ENIC because I really don't see a lot of other doing "so much better" (last time we had this discussion on the board, there was some barrel scrapping with people saying Everton is doing a better job, I guess today it's Leicester), I don't see myself as "pro", same as with any manger, I'm "pro" Spurs.

The thing I think most people put forward is you can't have a real conversation about success/failure without acknowledging circumstance
- The stadium had an impact
- "Luck" our best year in recent memory (unbeaten at home, good team/manager combination) rolls into playing at Wembley, that further gets delayed
- Truly weird brick like Lasagne, 4th but no CL, 72 points but no CL
- The fact that trophies dominated by a very small group of clubs

and to @Bedfordspurs point, it's not that we are completely out of the running, 21 times in a QF, SF or final means the basic infrastructure is there but for whatever reason it hasn't worked (we can't even fluke a final win).

Wanting Levy/ENIC out is quite honestly a lazy answer, lets go at it

- What are the new owners going to do differently? (only answer I've seen is spend money)
- How much money are we talking about? is that taking into account the £150-£200M each Pool/United/City/Chelsea are likely to spend per season (so are we matching them? or outspending them, if outspend by how much to close the gap?)
- What miracle method are they going to use to get a better hit/miss ratio with players/coach vs. everyone else in the league
- And what is the expectation, 1 cup per 10 years, 2, 3? what's that number?
- And is that including getting European qualification (cause current management has us in Europe for over 12 season)?

I'm amazed that people really believe if Levy/ENIC had managed to buy 1 player here or there (in their mind every major buy works out) it would have fundamentally changed the direction of the club.

The reason I'm ok with where we are is I look at the best case scenario and we might do better (maybe that cup or two) but the fudging odds are we might do worse as well (probably significantly more likely to go that route) and the hold option (lets see Stadium impact in next two years) is the most pragmatic/sensible for now.
Click to expand...

This is where I come back a bit. As if the decisions ENIC made were optimal, the only ones they could have made, and any positive or negative consequences we just have to live with. Other owners do things differently. ENIC is clearly a strategy to not fall too far below 6th. But I don't get the impression just yet we are trying to pull of what Atletico are trying to do, which we ideally should be.

Finney makes a good point, and maybe we can be more creative about how we finance our business in order to balance risk and reward a little more. At the end of the day we don't want to really push for it, if it's going to eat into ENIC's profit on the investment too much. There's not too many other clubs that are trying to pull of what we are doing; I'd say Atletico and to a lesser extent Dortmund. Atletico invest to compete. I know they have been creative around how they finance their business on the pitch so they can continue to be successful. Have ENIC done everything they can in that regard? Or have they done as much as they can without jeopardising the ROI?
 
Finney Is Back said:
1. Change the scouting structure. Leave transfers to a top class DoF (there are two readily available right now). Ensure far more continuation between managers so that the signings one makes are not rendered obsolete by the next manager coming in with a completely different philosophy. Not go three whole transfer windows without making a signing. Ensure that the manager's needs are met (i.e. if they need a CF to fill in or want a proper first team centre half then they get those players... This should easily be achievable with a reasonable DoF). Look to put in place a system like Emirates Marketing Project's and Chelsea's to bring in and loan out young players. If necessary operate a separate budget for that, that after initial seed funding is paid for in transfer fees received for those players. Don't sack managers who have overachieved compared to resources for several seasons the first time they have a sticky patch. Operate a wage to turnover ratio that is more in line with our competitors. Stop throwing away money by paying the government tax on profits (i.e. invest back into the playing side instead of announcing a profit).

2. I think right now we probably need about £150m pumped in to the transfer fund. That amount would likely make us amongst the 4 favourites for CL qualification next season (well assuming we had a good DoF and manager in charge of spending it - not Levy, Hitchen and a cheap managerial option). This summer will be a buyers market and we could rebuild for half of what it might cost in a 'normal' year. After that (assuming we don't do something silly again like going 3 windows with no signings) then 3 signings for the first team squad a year is all we would need and those could probably be purchased out of the clubs operational funds. An injection of £150m would actually only represent about 10% of ENICs paper profit on THFC and, arguably, could even boost the value of the club further. If ENIC don't have that liquidity themselves then they should do the decent thing and dilute their stake a little for a new investor.

3. We go back to item 1. Get in a DoF and scouting team who actually have a track record of good hit ratios. Read the article on how Campos operates.... identified players in each position for 3 different transfer bands, so that if the manager decides positions A and B are most important and take most of the budget then there are still players identified for positions C and D

4. This depends on the resources provided by the owners. If running us at 55% wage to turnover and looking for zero declared profit each year then 2 trophies in a decade would be a reasonable initial target I think.

5. Again this depends on the resources provided by the owners. If giving top 6 resources then the expectation should be top six finishes. If top 4 resources then top 4 finishes.
Click to expand...

So thanks for the answer, some thoughts

1. Are you willing to have effectively the DoF choose the manager as well? what happens when the DoF & manager don't agree? who do you back. Are you ok with us never hiring the "next big thing" because most top managers will want more control or their own DoF? What would stop a City/Chelsea from poaching that great DoF?
- I wouldn't use the Chelsea example re young players, they use it as a revenue stream not a development engine
- re not sacking managers, not going to happen mate, managers are going to get at best a bad 3rd of a season

2. If we spend £150M and City/Pool/Chelsea/United spend the same, how do we improve?

3. Is there any data to show any one club having a consistently better hit/miss ratio or this just anecdotal? It's real easy to see the hits of clubs you don't follow and point to that.

4. Ok

5. Based on that, fans should be happy with top 6 finish now?

Again, a lot in there I agree with, e.g DoF with aligned manager (hilarious that people beat Levy with that stick as he was pretty much the first top chairman in PL to go with that model), fan expectations (fans will never accept top whatever, in the end with Poch we were already having the 4th place trophy comments), etc.
 
BrainOfLevy said:
This is where I come back a bit. As if the decisions ENIC made were optimal, the only ones they could have made, and any positive or negative consequences we just have to live with. Other owners do things differently. ENIC is clearly a strategy to not fall too far below 6th. But I don't get the impression just yet we are trying to pull of what Atletico are trying to do, which we ideally should be.

Finney makes a good point, and maybe we can be more creative about how we finance our business in order to balance risk and reward a little more. At the end of the day we don't want to really push for it, if it's going to eat into ENIC's profit on the investment too much. There's not too many other clubs that are trying to pull of what we are doing; I'd say Atletico and to a lesser extent Dortmund. Atletico invest to compete. I know they have been creative around how they finance their business on the pitch so they can continue to be successful. Have ENIC done everything they can in that regard? Or have they done as much as they can without jeopardising the ROI?
Click to expand...

Atleti are a great example - great manager, back him to the hilt, have a new stadium, and also fight for trophies every season despite being disadvantaged relative to Barca and Madrid. The difference between us and them is partly down to different league systems, but also the priorities of the board - winning things on their end, preserving ENIC's investment at zero cost to them on our end.

Leicester are another - whether they 'threaten the order of the league', as @Raziel puts it, is less important than the fact that they have won a league title that we last won in 1961, and an FA Cup that we last won in 1991 - the memories their owners have given their fans will last them a lifetime, while ENIC's goal is to give the fans memories of the best balance sheets, the lowest wage ratio and the lowest bet spend in the league. Hoo-ray.

It's about priorities, and treating a football club as it is, a vehicle for the dreams of players and fans - not as an investment vehicle to buy property in Haringey. Sadly, ENIC will never, ever realize that. They are the limiter holding us back - nothing else.
 
DubaiSpur said:
Atleti are a great example - great manager, back him to the hilt, have a new stadium, and also fight for trophies every season despite being disadvantaged relative to Barca and Madrid. The difference between us and them is partly down to different league systems, but also the priorities of the board - winning things on their end, preserving ENIC's investment at zero cost to them on our end.

Leicester are another - whether they 'threaten the order of the league', as @Raziel puts it, is less important than the fact that they have won a league title that we last won in 1961, and an FA Cup that we last won in 1991 - the memories their owners have given their fans will last them a lifetime, while ENIC's goal is to give the fans memories of the best balance sheets, the lowest wage ratio and the lowest bet spend in the league. Hoo-ray.

It's about priorities, and treating a football club as it is, a vehicle for the dreams of players and fans - not as an investment vehicle to buy property in Haringey. Sadly, ENIC will never, ever realize that. They are the limiter holding us back - nothing else.
Click to expand...

@DubaiSpur I really love your passion but ..lets look at Atleti

- New stadium -> yep, built/funded by the City of Madrid for Olympic bid, so effectively they did a West Ham and got a freebie.
- They are a bigger club than us, league titles, domestic cups, european cups, classic UK arrogance that puts them at par in anyway but revenue.
- 3rd place in a 3 horse race gets CL, fudge, even 4th gets you a pre group qualifying for CL, 5th & 6th get Europa = effectively they will never not qualify for Europe

I'm all for someone putting more money in .. but the real examples always come back to -> City/Chelsea
 
Raziel said:
@DubaiSpur I really love your passion but ..lets look at Atleti

- New stadium -> yep, built/funded by the City of Madrid for Olympic bid, so effectively they did a West Ham and got a freebie.
- They are a bigger club than us, league titles, domestic cups, european cups, classic UK arrogance that puts them at par in anyway but revenue.
- 3rd place in a 3 horse race gets CL, fudge, even 4th gets you a pre group qualifying for CL, 5th & 6th get Europa = effectively they will never not qualify for Europe

I'm all for someone putting more money in .. but the real examples always come back to -> City/Chelsea
Click to expand...
Their also in debt to the best part of a €B
 
Raziel said:
@DubaiSpur I really love your passion but ..lets look at Atleti

- New stadium -> yep, built/funded by the City of Madrid for Olympic bid, so effectively they did a West Ham and got a freebie.
- They are a bigger club than us, league titles, domestic cups, european cups, classic UK arrogance that puts them at par in anyway but revenue.
- 3rd place in a 3 horse race gets CL, fudge, even 4th gets you a pre group qualifying for CL, 5th & 6th get Europa = effectively they will never not qualify for Europe

I'm all for someone putting more money in .. but the real examples always come back to -> City/Chelsea
Click to expand...

I think the point on Atletico though is not that they finish top 3, but that they actually win. Ahead of clubs that should be way out ahead of even them.
 
BrainOfLevy said:
This is where I come back a bit. As if the decisions ENIC made were optimal, the only ones they could have made, and any positive or negative consequences we just have to live with. Other owners do things differently. ENIC is clearly a strategy to not fall too far below 6th. But I don't get the impression just yet we are trying to pull of what Atletico are trying to do, which we ideally should be.

Finney makes a good point, and maybe we can be more creative about how we finance our business in order to balance risk and reward a little more. At the end of the day we don't want to really push for it, if it's going to eat into ENIC's profit on the investment too much. There's not too many other clubs that are trying to pull of what we are doing; I'd say Atletico and to a lesser extent Dortmund. Atletico invest to compete. I know they have been creative around how they finance their business on the pitch so they can continue to be successful. Have ENIC done everything they can in that regard? Or have they done as much as they can without jeopardising the ROI?
Click to expand...

See my answer to dubai re Atleti (hint = not a good example)

- ENIC's goal isn't around 6th, we fire managers who get 6th or lower, so clearly not the goal. You could argue if the execution matches the goal but lets not pretend anyone at ENIC/Levy/Spurs is happy with 6th.

- I'd completely agree ENIC/Levy have always (with possible exception of Stadium) defaulted to a lower risk approach, could they have done more? = absolutely, should they? = see next point

- The issue is people see that less risk approach = lack of ambition, I disagree numerous examples show different (the stadium, NFL & £15M/yr for Jose -> may be a bad appointment, it isn't one that "lacks ambition"), the problem for most supporters with Levy is timeline, I'll say it again, he's playing a long game, it's taken him 20 years to get Spurs here, is he going to suddenly risk something for a return in a year or wait for the plan (Stadium/NFL) to kick in and maybe that = answer is he will take the long view.
 
BrainOfLevy said:
I think the point on Atletico though is not that they finish top 3, but that they actually win. Ahead of clubs that should be way out ahead of even them.
Click to expand...

- A bigger club than us with a free stadium with effectively same amount of debt as us
- They win domestic cups (which they can concentrate on because a bad run in La Liga will still lead to CL qualification, so very little risk), a grand total of two in last decade btw.
- They win european trophies (see above point), but again 2 in last decade, Sevilla has way outperformed them in this aspect if you wanted a better example of winning out of your bracket.
- They have won a single league title in the last 25 years (effectively La Liga's Leicester season)
 
Raziel said:
See my answer to dubai re Atleti (hint = not a good example)

- ENIC's goal isn't around 6th, we fire managers who get 6th or lower, so clearly not the goal. You could argue if the execution matches the goal but lets not pretend anyone at ENIC/Levy/Spurs is happy with 6th.

- I'd completely agree ENIC/Levy have always (with possible exception of Stadium) defaulted to a lower risk approach, could they have done more? = absolutely, should they? = see next point

- The issue is people see that less risk approach = lack of ambition, I disagree numerous examples show different (the stadium, NFL & £15M/yr for Jose -> may be a bad appointment, it isn't one that "lacks ambition"), the problem for most supporters with Levy is timeline, I'll say it again, he's playing a long game, it's taken him 20 years to get Spurs here, is he going to suddenly risk something for a return in a year or wait for the plan (Stadium/NFL) to kick in and maybe that = answer is he will take the long view.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I’m also not sure the Wanda was entirely a freebie. I’ve been doing a bit of reading on Atletico recently as I’m interested in their strategy given some similarities to us, and it seems like one of the interesting things they did was getting HNW people to finance their business with loans which they will ultimately pay back. Eg Carlos Slim.

Is it risky? Maybe. But they go for it. And I think it shows that the ENIC way isn’t the only way. There are many other approaches, different decisions to take. It’s fair enough to still be on their journey and back them, I also think it’s fair enough to see what else is out there, what other interesting projects are happening and how different people think about it.

Another ridiculous example, but I think demonstrates a different approach. When Liverpool sold Torres and signed Carroll, John Henry was quoted as saying they were happy with the amounts of those deals, as long as Carroll was 15m less than Torres. Now, taking away from the idea of whether Carroll was good or not, could you ever imagine ENIC acting that way? Losing a top player, and being absolutely decisive that they were going to replace them firmly in that way. I think ENIC would have judged Carroll to not be worth it, and would have spread the risk across 4 or 5 different players, and judged them to be good investments, rather than trying to maintain a level and make a push. I’m not saying the approach is flawless, but I think it was that kind of thinking that informed their process of building a squad. Eg get top proven players in the position the manager wants them. Not chickening out because we can’t get the deal to work exactly as we need it to.

Also, someone who works more on the finance side might be able to explain this better to me, but how does revenue ‘kick in’. How long do we need to wait for it? Could we not hypothetically take some loans out against expected revenues now our base is higher and we can command better / higher rates / amounts? In order to strike while the iron is hot? Are we literally waiting for cash to flow in so it can then flow out on transfers and wages? It was my understanding that much of football transfer business was financed via loans in any case?
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Their also in debt to the best part of a €B
Click to expand...

So are we. More than them, in fact.

But we don't have league titles and cups to show for it.
Raziel said:
@DubaiSpur I really love your passion but ..lets look at Atleti

- New stadium -> yep, built/funded by the City of Madrid for Olympic bid, so effectively they did a West Ham and got a freebie.
- They are a bigger club than us, league titles, domestic cups, european cups, classic UK arrogance that puts them at par in anyway but revenue.
- 3rd place in a 3 horse race gets CL, fudge, even 4th gets you a pre group qualifying for CL, 5th & 6th get Europa = effectively they will never not qualify for Europe

I'm all for someone putting more money in .. but the real examples always come back to -> City/Chelsea
Click to expand...

Fair, and I acknowledged that the league system is different. but you're comparing them to us now, using Simeone's past five years as a barometer as to where Atleti usually are.

Look at where they were when Enrique Cerezo took over from Jesus Gil in 2002 - almost exactly where we were. 12th place, 11th place, 14th place, 9th place. Europe was a distant dream.

That they qualify regularly now is no indicator of state of things, because during their rise, the top four in Spain has historically changed several times, and not to their benefit. It was Madrid-Barca-Depor-Valencia when Cerezo took over, and Madrid- Barca-Sevilla-Valencia for a while. Villarreal were in the top four, Malaga were in the top four.

But once Atleti won their first trophy under Cerezo, they didn't stop and today, in 2021, on the verge of their second title under Simeone, they are big enough that you can say that their ever-present status in the top four helps them. Wasn' t always like that.

In fact, the clubs, Spurs and Atleti, had their inflection points at about the same time under Levy and Cerezo respectively. Atleti won the Europa League in 09-10, at the same time that we finished in the top four for the first time.

But they went on to win titles because they made it their goal - they were decisive in the market, and they've spent tons backing Simeone even when it hasn't always worked out.

Us? We did the opposite. Again, it's ENIC's nature, they don't give a damn about Spurs and will never invest a single penny in us. They see us as a way to buy property in Haringey and buff up Joe Lewis's portfolio - both Lewis and Levy see us this way, since Levy is nothing but Lewis's sidekick/lackey and has never given any indication that he disagrees.

So we'll continue to meander, Atleti will continue to dream. And win.
 
DubaiSpur said:
So are we. More than them, in fact.

But we don't have league titles and cups to show for it.


Fair, and I acknowledged that the league system is different. but you're comparing them to us now, using Simeone's past five years as a barometer as to where Atleti usually are.

Look at where they were when Enrique Cerezo took over from Jesus Gil in 2002 - almost exactly where we were. 12th place, 11th place, 14th place, 9th place. Europe was a distant dream.

That they qualify regularly now is no indicator of state of things, because during their rise, the top four in Spain has historically changed several times, and not to their benefit. It was Madrid-Barca-Depor-Valencia when Cerezo took over, and Madrid- Barca-Sevilla-Valencia for a while. Villarreal were in the top four, Malaga were in the top four.

But once Atleti won their first trophy under Cerezo, they didn't stop and today, in 2021, on the verge of their second title under Simeone, they are big enough that you can say that their ever-present status in the top four helps them. Wasn' t always like that.

In fact, the clubs, Spurs and Atleti, had their inflection points at about the same time under Levy and Cerezo respectively. Atleti won the Europa League in 09-10, at the same time that we finished in the top four for the first time.

But they went on to win titles because they made it their goal - they were decisive in the market, and they've spent tons backing Simeone even when it hasn't always worked out.

Us? We did the opposite. Again, it's ENIC's nature, they don't give a damn about Spurs and will never invest a single penny in us. They see us as a way to buy property in Haringey and buff up Joe Lewis's portfolio - both Lewis and Levy see us this way, since Levy is nothing but Lewis's sidekick/lackey and has never given any indication that he disagrees.

So we'll continue to meander, Atleti will continue to dream. And win.
Click to expand...
Would be great to play in such an uncompetitive league
 
If Atletico win the title this season it's as much to do with the failure of Barca and Real as it is anything else.
 
BrainOfLevy said:
Fair enough. I’m also not sure the Wanda was entirely a freebie. I’ve been doing a bit of reading on Atletico recently as I’m interested in their strategy given some similarities to us, and it seems like one of the interesting things they did was getting HNW people to finance their business with loans which they will ultimately pay back. Eg Carlos Slim.

Is it risky? Maybe. But they go for it. And I think it shows that the ENIC way isn’t the only way. There are many other approaches, different decisions to take. It’s fair enough to still be on their journey and back them, I also think it’s fair enough to see what else is out there, what other interesting projects are happening and how different people think about it.

Another ridiculous example, but I think demonstrates a different approach. When Liverpool sold Torres and signed Carroll, John Henry was quoted as saying they were happy with the amounts of those deals, as long as Carroll was 15m less than Torres. Now, taking away from the idea of whether Carroll was good or not, could you ever imagine ENIC acting that way? Losing a top player, and being absolutely decisive that they were going to replace them firmly in that way. I think ENIC would have judged Carroll to not be worth it, and would have spread the risk across 4 or 5 different players, and judged them to be good investments, rather than trying to maintain a level and make a push. I’m not saying the approach is flawless, but I think it was that kind of thinking that informed their process of building a squad. Eg get top proven players in the position the manager wants them. Not chickening out because we can’t get the deal to work exactly as we need it to.

Also, someone who works more on the finance side might be able to explain this better to me, but how does revenue ‘kick in’. How long do we need to wait for it? Could we not hypothetically take some loans out against expected revenues now our base is higher and we can command better / higher rates / amounts? In order to strike while the iron is hot? Are we non-figuratively waiting for cash to flow in so it can then flow out on transfers and wages? It was my understanding that much of football transfer business was financed via loans in any case?
Click to expand...

We owe the banks £800million and the government £175million. We made a £60m loss last season and this season it's expected to be over £100m. Nobody will lend us money to buy players.
 
Baleforce said:
They are a much bigger club than those mentioned, historically the third most successful club in Spain.
Click to expand...

I’m not sure that matters. What is impressive is how they have made good decisions, kept a good manager in place, signed good players, grown revenues, won things. It is not that impressive that they are ahead Malaga, it’s impressive they are competing with Real and Barca.
 
Baleforce said:
They are a much bigger club than those mentioned, historically the third most successful club in Spain.
Click to expand...

At the dawn of the Prem, we were the 4th most historically successful side.

When ENIC took over, we were the 5th most successful.

Didn't mean jack brick to us in these twenty long years under ENIC's mediocre stewardship.

It's how you use it.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
I’ll add that since Leicester won the league we have had numerous chances to win things... and completely blew it
The league the year after
FA cup semis
League cup finals
Champions league final
Click to expand...

Could not agree more, we sadly have lacked a winning mentality on so many occasions. I am sure s ome will dismiss that as being important but the proof is in the pudding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back