ENIC

[Bedfordspurs]

the strategy is obvious, spend what we make on making the club better

It is that simple
The issue of course is transfers are a gamble
Signing players is a gamble
Selling players is gamble
Good clubs do everything they can to mitigate the risk but at the end of the day it’s down the player and the coach once that player joins
For all of Hugo’s current failings.. he has actually saved the club money by being here is long performing
People said we missed out on a fortune not selling dele at his peak… who knew he was going to become so bad and we still got amazing value for his fee
We have spent a fortune on players like Tanguy and Lo Celso that I personally thought would be great signings…. But I was wrong
Money has to be spent, and we as a club, to date have only spent what we bring in. That’s the model as you say

 

[Raziel]

It’s been 22 years under their ownership, we still lack any clear footballing strategy from the owners( in my
Opinion ) . Yes we may be worth much more if we were successful but is the risk of doing that worth the reward to ENIC, I suspect not…

@Baleforce answered your question already

- The club is self funded, whatever money we make goes into the squad, with increased revenue (stadium) we should be able to buy more/better players.

That is the strategy, it has been for 22 years, build the club infrastructure and brand to where you narrow the gap financially between Spurs and top clubs to be able to compete more (not totally), and over time success or improved results should follow.

The problem is, that isn't the answer you want to hear, so you say they have no strategy.
It's the same as fans that refuse to acknowledge that the game is broken, that allowing a state fund worth £320B to purchase a club is wrong, so lets blame our owners for not matching that or spending money the club doesn't have.

I'm tired of saying it

- We all know that if you want top success in this league, ENIC isn't the answer, you need a cheat code
- The difference remains, I don't need to blame ENIC to justify it, just fudging say the vast majority of fans want a sugar daddy and don't give a fudge where/how the money came about (Chelsea fans still think RA was a great owner)

 

[Lilbaz]

@Baleforce answered your question already

- The club is self funded, whatever money we make goes into the squad, with increased revenue (stadium) we should be able to buy more/better players.

That is the strategy, it has been for 22 years, build the club infrastructure and brand to where you narrow the gap financially between Spurs and top clubs to be able to compete more (not totally), and over time success or improved results should follow.

The problem is, that isn't the answer you want to hear, so you say they have no strategy.
It's the same as fans that refuse to acknowledge that the game is broken, that allowing a state fund worth £320B to purchase a club is wrong, so lets blame our owners for not matching that or spending money the club doesn't have.

I'm tired of saying it

- We all know that if you want top success in this league, ENIC isn't the answer, you need a cheat code
- The difference remains, I don't need to blame ENIC to justify it, just fudging say the vast majority of fans want a sugar daddy and don't give a fudge where/how the money came about (Chelsea fans still think RA was a great owner)

Or wanting football to sort itself out and be more fair.

Yes i know it is the least likely outcome, but it is the one i want the most.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Or wanting football to sort itself out and be more fair.

Yes i know it is the least likely outcome, but it is the one i want the most.

Imagine that
An actual sport rather than an entertainment empire
Shame it’s now just a way for billionaires to go dingdong swinging….
As an aside, did anyone know about PSG and Parc De Prince? they are holding the Paris council to ransom (fairly IMO) to buy the ground off them cheap. The ground isnt great and needs a lot of investment (apparently they cite ours for reference as the benchmark), and it will need at least £300m to get it how the owners want it. The council can’t afford it and will sell to but not for the offer PSG are offering.
You may ask why it’s relevant… and my answer is it’s again dingdong swinging from the new rich

 

[Bedfordspurs]

@Baleforce answered your question already

- The club is self funded, whatever money we make goes into the squad, with increased revenue (stadium) we should be able to buy more/better players.

That is the strategy, it has been for 22 years, build the club infrastructure and brand to where you narrow the gap financially between Spurs and top clubs to be able to compete more (not totally), and over time success or improved results should follow.

The problem is, that isn't the answer you want to hear, so you say they have no strategy.
It's the same as fans that refuse to acknowledge that the game is broken, that allowing a state fund worth £320B to purchase a club is wrong, so lets blame our owners for not matching that or spending money the club doesn't have.

I'm tired of saying it

- We all know that if you want top success in this league, ENIC isn't the answer, you need a cheat code
- The difference remains, I don't need to blame ENIC to justify it, just fudging say the vast majority of fans want a sugar daddy and don't give a fudge where/how the money came about (Chelsea fans still think RA was a great owner)

He was a great owner
Clearly he was dodgy as fudge but in football terms he delivered success
Fans only care about that until it be becomes something they have had so much of….
It’s always my comment to the ENIC out gang… who do you want to buy us. Generally the answer is anyone would be biter but in reality it would likely be for sports washing of another investment vehicle. Neither is morally appealing and IMOmonky a sports washing entity is likely to bring real success

 

[Lilbaz]

Imagine that
An actual sport rather than an entertainment empire
Shame it’s now just a way for billionaires to go dingdong swinging….
As an aside, did anyone know about PSG and Parc De Prince? they are holding the Paris council to ransom (fairly IMO) to buy the ground off them cheap. The ground isnt great and needs a lot of investment (apparently they cite ours for reference as the benchmark), and it will need at least £300m to get it how the owners want it. The council can’t afford it and will sell to but not for the offer PSG are offering.
You may ask why it’s relevant… and my answer is it’s again dingdong swinging from the new rich

Hope the mayor of london is as strong when it comes to west ham.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Hope the mayor of london is as strong when it comes to west ham.

No chance

 

[Baleforce]

No chance

dunno, I'm pretty sure this one isn't shagging their vice chair, unlike his predecessor

 

[Lilbaz]

dunno, I'm pretty sure this one isn't shagging their vice chair, unlike his predecessor

At least thanks to levy, they'd have to pay for a new home for athletics if they buy the stadium.

 

[billyiddo]

Ignoring the charity shield it is still grim to see the facts. To make it worse, ENIC have done nothing to suggest that they will buck the trend ... with one bad decision to the next.

I think they should just say it how it is, they are here for a massive payday when they sell the club eventually but until then make do with what we have.

The stadium investment is there to fatten up profit when they sell and keep us looking ripe and relavent.

Off the field done very very well, but again it's for their gain.

Our club is being used as a tool to make people wealthy on the backs of supporters. If you can't see that, then good luck.

I think that table actually highlights that over the course of history we're not really that successful - the best trophy era comes in at 2.4 trophies per decade according to the image, with ENIC coming in 0.5, so we're arguing over 4 trophies over a 20 year period to go from worst to best?

 

[billyiddo]

The club is self funded, whatever money we make goes into the squad, with increased revenue (stadium) we should be able to buy more/better players.

That is the strategy, it has been for 22 years, build the club infrastructure and brand to where you narrow the gap financially between Spurs and top clubs to be able to compete more (not totally), and over time success or improved results should follow.

The problem is, that isn't the answer you want to hear

Nailed it.

 

[RigorMortis]

@Baleforce answered your question already

- The club is self funded, whatever money we make goes into the squad, with increased revenue (stadium) we should be able to buy more/better players.

That is the strategy, it has been for 22 years, build the club infrastructure and brand to where you narrow the gap financially between Spurs and top clubs to be able to compete more (not totally), and over time success or improved results should follow.

The problem is, that isn't the answer you want to hear, so you say they have no strategy.
It's the same as fans that refuse to acknowledge that the game is broken, that allowing a state fund worth £320B to purchase a club is wrong, so lets blame our owners for not matching that or spending money the club doesn't have.

I'm tired of saying it

- We all know that if you want top success in this league, ENIC isn't the answer, you need a cheat code
- The difference remains, I don't need to blame ENIC to justify it, just fudging say the vast majority of fans want a sugar daddy and don't give a fudge where/how the money came about (Chelsea fans still think RA was a great owner)

I actually disagree
That is your opinion on the strategy and buying players is only part of it. I see a hierarchy which lurches from one approach to the other over 22 years in the hope of somehow stumbling to some form of success.

The game is broken is the new excuse but it didn’t stop Liverpool from a sustained run of success under Klopp, unfortunately it doesn’t look like it’s stopping the woolwich from winning the title and overtaking us.

ENIC aren’t whiter than white ( the Patagonia issue springs to mind). It’s not about just having owners with deep pockets, it’s about having owners with a high degree of competence at the top table. In my opinion ENIC are great at maximising revenue as owners of a football club they are average and average isn’t good enough

 

[Gazza]

I actually disagree
That is your opinion on the strategy and buying players is only part of it. I see a hierarchy which lurches from one approach to the other over 22 years in the hope of somehow stumbling to some form of success.

The game is broken is the new excuse but it didn’t stop Liverpool from a sustained run of success under Klopp, unfortunately it doesn’t look like it’s stopping the woolwich from winning the title and overtaking us.

ENIC aren’t whiter than white ( the Patagonia issue springs to mind). It’s not about just having owners with deep pockets, it’s about having owners with a high degree of competence at the top table. In my opinion ENIC are great at maximising revenue as owners of a football club they are average and average isn’t good enough

Nailed it!

 

[Raziel]

I actually disagree
That is your opinion on the strategy and buying players is only part of it. I see a hierarchy which lurches from one approach to the other over 22 years in the hope of somehow stumbling to some form of success.

The game is broken is the new excuse but it didn’t stop Liverpool from a sustained run of success under Klopp, unfortunately it doesn’t look like it’s stopping the woolwich from winning the title and overtaking us.

ENIC aren’t whiter than white ( the Patagonia issue springs to mind). It’s not about just having owners with deep pockets, it’s about having owners with a high degree of competence at the top table. In my opinion ENIC are great at maximising revenue as owners of a football club they are average and average isn’t good enough

The problem with this answer is it makes my answer look like I'm trying to defend ENIC, see my quote above "We all know that if you want top success in this league, ENIC isn't the answer"

But taking your answer at face value, here's how basically nothing you said stands even minor scrutiny

"in hope of stumbling to some form of success"

Off field
brick training ground -> World Class training facility (77 acres) that even top International sides leverage
33K seat aging stadium -> 63K Multipurpose top Stadium in UK
In addition significant work done improving cloud brand and revenue - Top 10 club in Europe

On Field
Ten seasons before ENIC -> 10th, 15th, 8th, 15th, 7th, 8th, 10th, 14th, 11th, 10th -> 10 years prior to ENIC -> zero top 6 finishes
First ten years of ENIC -> 12th, 9th, 10th, 14th, 9th, 5th, 5th, 11th, 8th, 4th -> First 10 years of ENIC -> 3 top 6 finishes
Post first decade of ENIC -> 5th, 4th, 5th, 6th, 5th, 3rd, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 6th, 7th, 4th -> Last 13 years strait -> only been out of top 6 once, In 5 out of last 7 CL campaigns, including reaching final
Top players in ENIC era -> Lloris, Walker, Toby, Jan, Bale, Carrick, Modric, Eriksen, Dembele, VDV, Keane, JD, Berbatov, Son, Kane

That's a lot of progress for a club with zero strategy, just hoping for some success

Now lets address the "others"
- You conveniently ignored we are not in the same bracket as Pool (they are absolutely a global brand, and along with the United and Arsenal had 20 years of PL & CL money advantage because our previous owners did not have us in position to take advantage of PL, basically costing us decades of catch up). We can go into detail if you really want but basically they started at a much different fiscal/brand perspective, got lucky with owner changer (they actually failed and banks called the loans) that wiped out significant debt and managed to fleece Barca with a sale that allowed them to back Klopp (again hardly what I would call some grand strategy)
- Arsenal, this again is the kind of brick that is just annoying, would you have said this last year? or any of the last six years? even if Arsenal won the PL this season they are a shadow of the club of the Wenger era, what is their strategy? (having the first manager in 10 years work isn't a strategy, and I could easily argue Arteta was a lack of ambition signing)

No billionaires are "white" but again the comparison to Russian Oligarchs or Oil States with extremely shady human rights is disingenuous

To close (we are highly unlikely to agree), to beat the dead horse, to compete at top we need to change owners, but to call ENIC out on strategy and say the progress was average is just wrong.

So back to you -> ENIC are average, no strategy, anything they have achieved is luck
So my question -> in that case it must be really easy to find 5 clubs (not money doping or clubs with significant financial advantages, e.g United, Pool, Arsenal) who have consistently improved and outperformed Spurs in last 20 years and are still ahead of us?

 

[braineclipse]

The problem with this answer is it makes my answer look like I'm trying to defend ENIC, see my quote above "We all know that if you want top success in this league, ENIC isn't the answer"

But taking your answer at face value, here's how basically nothing you said stands even minor scrutiny

"in hope of stumbling to some form of success"

Off field
brick training ground -> World Class training facility (77 acres) that even top International sides leverage
33K seat aging stadium -> 63K Multipurpose top Stadium in UK
In addition significant work done improving cloud brand and revenue - Top 10 club in Europe

On Field
Ten seasons before ENIC -> 10th, 15th, 8th, 15th, 7th, 8th, 10th, 14th, 11th, 10th -> 10 years prior to ENIC -> zero top 6 finishes
First ten years of ENIC -> 12th, 9th, 10th, 14th, 9th, 5th, 5th, 11th, 8th, 4th -> First 10 years of ENIC -> 3 top 6 finishes
Post first decade of ENIC -> 5th, 4th, 5th, 6th, 5th, 3rd, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 6th, 7th, 4th -> Last 13 years strait -> only been out of top 6 once, In 5 out of last 7 CL campaigns, including reaching final
Top players in ENIC era -> Lloris, Walker, Toby, Jan, Bale, Carrick, Modric, Eriksen, Dembele, VDV, Keane, JD, Berbatov, Son, Kane

That's a lot of progress for a club with zero strategy, just hoping for some success

Now lets address the "others"
- You conveniently ignored we are not in the same bracket as Pool (they are absolutely a global brand, and along with the United and Arsenal had 20 years of PL & CL money advantage because our previous owners did not have us in position to take advantage of PL, basically costing us decades of catch up). We can go into detail if you really want but basically they started at a much different fiscal/brand perspective, got lucky with owner changer (they actually failed and banks called the loans) that wiped out significant debt and managed to fleece Barca with a sale that allowed them to back Klopp (again hardly what I would call some grand strategy)
- Arsenal, this again is the kind of brick that is just annoying, would you have said this last year? or any of the last six years? even if Arsenal won the PL this season they are a shadow of the club of the Wenger era, what is their strategy? (having the first manager in 10 years work isn't a strategy, and I could easily argue Arteta was a lack of ambition signing)

No billionaires are "white" but again the comparison to Russian Oligarchs or Oil States with extremely shady human rights is disingenuous

To close (we are highly unlikely to agree), to beat the dead horse, to compete at top we need to change owners, but to call ENIC out on strategy and say the progress was average is just wrong.

So back to you -> ENIC are average, no strategy, anything they have achieved is luck
So my question -> in that case it must be really easy to find 5 clubs (not money doping or clubs with significant financial advantages, e.g United, Pool, Arsenal) who have consistently improved and outperformed Spurs in last 20 years and are still ahead of us?

It's always the same. Comparisons to teams that are right now successful and how their great strategy got them there.

It's rarely if ever comparisons to teams with a good strategy that are yet to see the results.

Levy hasn't consistently gotten it right over these 20 years. There's been plenty of mistakes. But none of these other teams have either. Many of them have had shorter spells of relative success than we've had in the not so distant past.

When they drop off they're no longer the basis for comparison. It's whoever is then looking good, being run well.

Meanwhile we got a good DoF in place, we got a top level manager in place. We're recruiting well. We're trying to fix the mistakes from the past. We're finally in a position to invest fairly consistently. Thanks to Levy. Yet it's ENIC out, answers/consequences now. Abandon Conte and what he's been building for a year for something new. Because Arsenal managed to build something good over 3 years.

I imagine it was the same on Arsenal fan boards a year or two ago. Wasn't it the same on here when we got Pochettino and he struggled a bit at first?

 

[P.D.]

@Baleforce answered your question already

- The club is self funded, whatever money we make goes into the squad, with increased revenue (stadium) we should be able to buy more/better players.

That is the strategy, it has been for 22 years, build the club infrastructure and brand to where you narrow the gap financially between Spurs and top clubs to be able to compete more (not totally), and over time success or improved results should follow.

The problem is, that isn't the answer you want to hear, so you say they have no strategy.
It's the same as fans that refuse to acknowledge that the game is broken, that allowing a state fund worth £320B to purchase a club is wrong, so lets blame our owners for not matching that or spending money the club doesn't have.

I'm tired of saying it

- We all know that if you want top success in this league, ENIC isn't the answer, you need a cheat code
- The difference remains, I don't need to blame ENIC to justify it, just fudging say the vast majority of fans want a sugar daddy and don't give a fudge where/how the money came about (Chelsea fans still think RA was a great owner)

I think the strategy is more than that, all that describes is the funding model but what about the style of play, approach to developing players etc. A few years back we used to buy young decent players who would likely bring in decent sell on fees due to their age and some of them would develop into first teamers. We then used managers who would develop those players and started to play a bit more possession based dominating football.

That's also a similar model used by Leipzig, Dortmund, Atletico Madrid, Ajax over varying times, I think we would evolve our original approach to say a Dortmund ++ where the £10-20m youngster is now a £25-35m youngster. Being realistic £12m got us Spence but I think in the higher category we could get some decent players and potentially 2-4 of them a season. To an extent we're doing that with Bissouma, Romero, Rich, Bentacur, Kulu but they were all from established teams or proven in this league. With a wider scouting network we could look to other regions or players with less of a name like City with Alvarez etc.

To do that Levy and Patrici need to decide on the style of play and buy players to suit it and also get a manager in to implement it, that's how a sporting director model works. If they want to go with Conte's style then fine but I think there's mixed messages between them all.

 

[RigorMortis]

@Baleforce answered your question already

- The club is self funded, whatever money we make goes into the squad, with increased revenue (stadium) we should be able to buy more/better players.

That is the strategy, it has been for 22 years, build the club infrastructure and brand to where you narrow the gap financially between Spurs and top clubs to be able to compete more (not totally), and over time success or improved results should follow.

The problem is, that isn't the answer you want to hear, so you say they have no strategy.
It's the same as fans that refuse to acknowledge that the game is broken, that allowing a state fund worth £320B to purchase a club is wrong, so lets blame our owners for not matching that or spending money the club doesn't have.

I'm tired of saying it

- We all know that if you want top success in this league, ENIC isn't the answer, you need a cheat code
- The difference remains, I don't need to blame ENIC to justify it, just fudging say the vast majority of fans want a sugar daddy and don't give a fudge where/how the money came about (Chelsea fans still think RA was a great owner)

I didn’t speak about the infrastructure, there is no dispute that the infrastructure is great. However tangible growth on the pitch or a ceiling is my issue.

The bug bear is comparing ENIC to Sugar. Sugar was not a good chairman of the football club. I have said ENIC are average owners not awful ones who have a ceiling that again in my option they are both unable and unwilling to break

I would agree with Liverpool and Arsenal if this was 2010 but it’s 2022, we had gone ahead of Liverpool and Arsenal but didn’t ram home that advantage. Liverpool almost went bankrupt, the new owners had a coherent strategy and took some risks.
ENIC continue to jump from one type of manager to the next.

I can’t see anyone saying that ENIC haven’t improved on Sugar, it’s what the future holds and I don’t see us being competitive under ENIC.
Would I have said the same about Arsenal last year, I would have said the owners of Arsenal had a plan yes, I had my doubts over Arteta but unfortunately he looks to have proven me wrong.

 

[DubSpur]

I think the strategy is more than that, all that describes is the funding model but what about the style of play, approach to developing players etc. A few years back we used to buy young decent players who would likely bring in decent sell on fees due to their age and some of them would develop into first teamers. We then used managers who would develop those players and started to play a bit more possession based dominating football.

That's also a similar model used by Leipzig, Dortmund, Atletico Madrid, Ajax over varying times, I think we would evolve our original approach to say a Dortmund ++ where the £10-20m youngster is now a £25-35m youngster. Being realistic £12m got us Spence but I think in the higher category we could get some decent players and potentially 2-4 of them a season. To an extent we're doing that with Bissouma, Romero, Rich, Bentacur, Kulu but they were all from established teams or proven in this league. With a wider scouting network we could look to other regions or players with less of a name like City with Alvarez etc.

To do that Levy and Patrici need to decide on the style of play and buy players to suit it and also get a manager in to implement it, that's how a sporting director model works. If they want to go with Conte's style then fine but I think there's mixed messages between them all.

I'd say we are in the middle of a transition on that strategy.

Prior to the stadium we didn't have much option but to buy young players and develop them as we didn't have the budget. Now with the increased income it's a mix of players to improve the team/squad now and still looking for top young talent to develop.

Paratici has been overhauling the scouting dept (and others), but the benefits won't be seen in a few weeks or months, it's long term that this will be seen. He also has the responsibility for selecting managers etc so I would expect to start seeing some sort of continuity of style (never going to get two managers that are exactly the same). Of course Levy will still have some input on the budget side of things.

 

[Lilbaz]

I think the strategy is more than that, all that describes is the funding model but what about the style of play, approach to developing players etc. A few years back we used to buy young decent players who would likely bring in decent sell on fees due to their age and some of them would develop into first teamers. We then used managers who would develop those players and started to play a bit more possession based dominating football.

That's also a similar model used by Leipzig, Dortmund, Atletico Madrid, Ajax over varying times, I think we would evolve our original approach to say a Dortmund ++ where the £10-20m youngster is now a £25-35m youngster. Being realistic £12m got us Spence but I think in the higher category we could get some decent players and potentially 2-4 of them a season. To an extent we're doing that with Bissouma, Romero, Rich, Bentacur, Kulu but they were all from established teams or proven in this league. With a wider scouting network we could look to other regions or players with less of a name like City with Alvarez etc.

To do that Levy and Patrici need to decide on the style of play and buy players to suit it and also get a manager in to implement it, that's how a sporting director model works. If they want to go with Conte's style then fine but I think there's mixed messages between them all.

Gil, saar, ndogie, lankshear?

 

[Raziel]

I didn’t speak about the infrastructure, there is no dispute that the infrastructure is great. However tangible growth on the pitch or a ceiling is my issue.

The bug bear is comparing ENIC to Sugar. Sugar was not a good chairman of the football club. I have said ENIC are average owners not awful ones who have a ceiling that again in my option they are both unable and unwilling to break

I would agree with Liverpool and Arsenal if this was 2010 but it’s 2022, we had gone ahead of Liverpool and Arsenal but didn’t ram home that advantage. Liverpool almost went bankrupt, the new owners had a coherent strategy and took some risks.
ENIC continue to jump from one type of manager to the next.

I can’t see anyone saying that ENIC haven’t improved on Sugar, it’s what the future holds and I don’t see us being competitive under ENIC.
Would I have said the same about Arsenal last year, I would have said the owners of Arsenal had a plan yes, I had my doubts over Arteta but unfortunately he looks to have proven me wrong.

I'd still not agree with the average label, it's lazy
I'd also not agree on the progress, I've shown you the on pitch progression
I again have to disagree with the Sugar statement, lets be clear, Sugar was the problem, if Spurs had been well run in the early years of the PL, had managed to get regular CL in that timeframe, we would not have had to play 15 years of financial catchup.

Lets get to where we do agree, ENIC has hit a ceiling, the self funded model has maxed itself out, because too many other clubs simply spend money their income doesn't support.

I don't agree on Arsenal, honestly it would have been the same if we had appointed Mason (or Hughton/Parker) post Poch, spent money and got 8th, 8th, 5th (I've said it dozens of times, Spurs fans are bricking the bed with Antonio Conte being 5th half way through a season, can you imagine a Mason delivering 8th two seasons in a row? you think the club saying trust the process, we have a strategy would have worked? I really don't think you/me or any Spurs fan would have accepted that. Btw for context, we haven't been 8th in 13+ years). Arsenal is having a very good season, but it isn't done and even if they do, I'm not sure how you or anyone can realistically say they will be part of the challengers next season, how is this anything more than a Leicester season for them? how will they be better than United (who actually seem to have stumbled on to a plan), City, Chelsea (spending more money than everyone else combined) and Saudi Sportswashing Machine? they have a moment but I don't see how it's anything more than that (and compared to where they were a decade ago, it's actually a disaster, their stadium gamble turned out to be an epic fudgeup).