ENIC

[DubSpur]

Top ten sponsor deals in epl, not suprisingly, undoubtedly huge success on the pitch and huge deals:
https://sportsbrowser.net/richest-sponsorship-deals-of-soccer/

i think success figures heavily in sponsorship deals.

As has been pointed out, multiple errors in that graph.

You really don't seem to get that a stadium sponsorship is different to sponsoring a team. A multi-purpose stadium has plenty of events that don't involve the team. The heavy weight boxing world title fights alone is huge. Why do you think the Saudis pay such big money to attract them?

 

[Grays_1890]

we certainly need the funds to strengthen key positions to stay in CL next season.

Found a quote from Levy:

Speaking in 2019, Spurs chairman Daniel Levy said there would only be a naming rights deal “if we get the right brand, in the right sector, on the right money.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/robert...siness-for-tottenham-hotspur/?sh=28a9bc7d376b

right brand v right sector v right money... will be interesting to know how Levy rates these in relative importance to each other

The last sentence is key, I would say right brand comes first, you can see from our commercial partners now there is a high end feel to them from suit, car, watch partners to shirt sponsors so in that aspect they all feed in to each other and there is more value to each through high end brand recognition. If Aldi came in tomorrow to brand the stadium for the money he wanted, I doubt very much he would sign the deal

As I said previously, the stadium sponsorship will work totally different to shirts, its about volume and exposure for which the stadium will have more than anyone. Brands will pay for the recognition of seeing their brand fed into 10m homes on PPV boxing x how many events etc. We deliver more of those events than any other stadium in the country.

 

[Baleforce]

Pretty much every team in the pyramid has a sponsor, most of them are brick and will never get anywhere close to success.

We could have sold the naming rights a thousand times over, it’s not that nobody wants it.

 

[Grays_1890]

Pretty much every team in the pyramid has a sponsor, most of them are brick and will never get anywhere close to success.

We could have sold the naming rights a thousand times over, it’s not that nobody wants it.

Spot on

The fans want to see a ground sponsor, the same fans that did not want to leave WHL claiming heritage, so I struggle to rationalise that but with even that aside surely even the most critical of fans realise the club will sign a sponsorship that suits the club and not to appease the fans

 

[Baleforce]

Also, what we can see from other big stadium naming rights deals in football, it’s being used as an avenue for owners to divert money from other companies they have financial interest in, the deals were inflated to aid FFP compliance.

 

[Grays_1890]

Also, what we can see from other big stadium naming rights deals in football, it’s being used as an avenue for owners to divert money from other companies they have financial interest in, the deals were inflated to aid FFP compliance.

Yeh not as common as people think TBH, Brighton have Amex who had their european HQ in the area or still do can't remember, which makes sense (goes back to deals that make sense) and then like you say, the others, like Etihad are deals to divert cash. I would suspect Saudi Sportswashing Machine will become aligned with Aramco or the like in future

 

[Gazza]

I dont think the majority of people want a sugar daddy but question Enics strategy and intentions.

 

[Baleforce]

Yeh not as common as people think TBH, Brighton have Amex who had their european HQ in the area or still do can't remember which makes sense (goes back to deals that make sense) and then like you say, the others, like Etihad are deals to divert cash. I would suspect Saudi Sportswashing Machine will become aligned with Aramco or the like in future

Yeah, I was thinking of City and the Red Bull clubs.

Also, with Juve, Jeep are not the headline stadium sponsor, but they have massive branding presence there and have strong links to the Agnelli family.

 

[DubSpur]

I dont think the majority of people want a sugar daddy but question Enics strategy and intentions.

The strategy has been to increase revenue and spend that on the team. What other strategy would you like if not a sugar daddy throwing money at the team?

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

we certainly need the funds to strengthen key positions to stay in CL next season.

Found a quote from Levy:

Speaking in 2019, Spurs chairman Daniel Levy said there would only be a naming rights deal “if we get the right brand, in the right sector, on the right money.”

https://www.forbes.com/sites/robert...siness-for-tottenham-hotspur/?sh=28a9bc7d376b

right brand v right sector v right money... will be interesting to know how Levy rates these in relative importance to each other

I thought Levy only cared about pocketing money for himself and Uncle Joe, so there must be a bug in the thought process.

 

[braineclipse]

The strategy has been to increase revenue and spend that on the team. What other strategy would you like if not a sugar daddy throwing money at the team?

I think there are valid criticisms of Levy on the strategy that goes beyond that.

The way I see it mostly football decisions are down to the people Levy hire to figure out those decisions.

There have been mistakes made on who has been hired/trusted with those decisions. A better alternative would be a chairman with great knowledge about football, being able to make better hiring decisions.

When people talk about a takeover though. Do takeovers usually end up with a chairman with a great, or even better than Levy, understanding of the game?

I think Levy's mistakes in this regard are fairly common. Managers, head scouts, directors of football. These are not easy decisions to make even for someone with a very good understanding. I'm not particularly optimistic about a takeover leading to better decisions from the top on this.

 

[DubSpur]

I think there are valid criticisms of Levy on the strategy that goes beyond that.

The way I see it mostly football decisions are down to the people Levy hire to figure out those decisions.

There have been mistakes made on who has been hired/trusted with those decisions. A better alternative would be a chairman with great knowledge about football, being able to make better hiring decisions.

When people talk about a takeover though. Do takeovers usually end up with a chairman with a great, or even better than Levy, understanding of the game?

I think Levy's mistakes in this regard are fairly common. Managers, head scouts, directors of football. These are not easy decisions to make even for someone with a very good understanding. I'm not particularly optimistic about a takeover leading to better decisions from the top on this.

How many chairmen have a great knowledge of football and have a great knowledge of the business side? Sounds like a unicorn.
There's a great deal of luck involved with hiring a football manager

 

[braineclipse]

How many chairmen have a great knowledge of football and have a great knowledge of the business side? Sounds like a unicorn.
There's a great deal of luck involved with hiring a football manager

I'm not particularly knowledgeable about these things, but I haven't heard about such a chairman. I think the likelihood of a takeover leading to us getting such a chairman is low.

That's not to completely remove the responsibility of Levy on these issues of course. It seems like Paratici has had a lot of work to do to improve the structure behind the scenes after coming in. It seems to me we were stronger in that regard in the past. That decline is not good and it shouldn't have been allowed to happen.

To me that's not a "Levy out" sized issue though. Not as long as he's taking good steps to sort it out.

 

[MKSpur]

In terms of the naming rights I do think it's a case of proving the stadium exposure to achieve a higher fee but I wonder if there will be some sensitivities around what can be changed to reflect the brand - so we probably wouldn't change the seat colours or have anything particularly permanent that would make it not seem like a Spurs stadium, but we have also not gone overboard with anything other than the badger on the roof to make it (No ends have been named after players, no statues etc)

In terms of the current dissatisfaction with ENIC / the team it does seem heightened by the Goons position. If we were having the season they are having but they'd finished above us last year and were in contention for 4th, I imagine ATV would be in meltdown, yet if they were 4th and we were 8th they'd be a lot happier (as we would be in reverse)

 

[metalgear]

Would arsenal have comparable revenues as thfc? Do they have a larger budget for transfers and wages or do they just buy better players than us right now.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Would arsenal have comparable revenues as thfc? Do they have a larger budget for transfers and wages or do they just buy better players than us right now.

They haven’t actually had that much success in the market as people think

They have had some for sure but they have plenty of flops too

Of the 3 signed this summer, so far, Viera for £35 is a jury out call
Last season they signed 6 players and 3 of them start regularly in Odegaard (my player of the season is far), Ben white (overpaid and now playing right back and doing really well) and Ramsdale.
They also signed Lokonga who they are trying to replace
Tavares who they have on loan now in France
And Tomiyasu who doesn’t start no due to white playing his role

from the season before that they have 2 still here in partey and Gabrielle. The others have left

but…. That’s 2 starters signed this season
3 the year before
2 the year before that
So 7 starters

they also still have players like Pepe on their books who cost £75m which they will be writing off and in the same period they gave Aubemenyang a new deal then had to pay him to leave

it’s not all perfect but it looks good today

 

[parklane1]

All transfers are a risk ( or at least 9O% are), you really never know how they will turn out we ( and most other clubs as well) have had their fingers burnt.

 

[Finney Is Back]

Would arsenal have comparable revenues as thfc? Do they have a larger budget for transfers and wages or do they just buy better players than us right now.

Yes revenues reasonably similar (our revenue is higher if we're in a better European competition than them and vice versa). They typically operate a higher wage bill than us. Assuming things stay the same (i.e. neither of us gets sugar daddy type investment) then ourselves and Arsenal are likely to be close to each other for the foreseeable future. We should have the edge on stadium income but Arsenal should have the edge on commercial income as they have considerably more supporters around the World than we do on account of the paucity of our trophy success compared to theirs.

 

[braineclipse]

They haven’t actually had that much success in the market as people think

They have had some for sure but they have plenty of flops too

Of the 3 signed this summer, so far, Viera for £35 is a jury out call
Last season they signed 6 players and 3 of them start regularly in Odegaard (my player of the season is far), Ben white (overpaid and now playing right back and doing really well) and Ramsdale.
They also signed Lokonga who they are trying to replace
Tavares who they have on loan now in France
And Tomiyasu who doesn’t start no due to white playing his role

from the season before that they have 2 still here in partey and Gabrielle. The others have left

but…. That’s 2 starters signed this season
3 the year before
2 the year before that
So 7 starters

they also still have players like Pepe on their books who cost £75m which they will be writing off and in the same period they gave Aubemenyang a new deal then had to pay him to leave

it’s not all perfect but it looks good today

And also taken time with several of those signings to get to the level they've been at this season.

In a couple of years players like Sarr and Spence may equally look like excellent deals even though their impact so far has been limited.

I think variance gets overlooked on this way too often. Say you sign 10 players. Say the baseline is half of them being properly good signings. The difference between that baseline and 2 more proper success stories can be massive. But we're talking about a small sample size and as parklane1 points out in situations with risk and uncertainty.

Not to say Arsenal haven't done well, they have. Unfortunately they're looking well run again.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

And also taken time with several of those signings to get to the level they've been at this season.

In a couple of years players like Sarr and Spence may equally look like excellent deals even though their impact so far has been limited.

I think variance gets overlooked on this way too often. Say you sign 10 players. Say the baseline is half of them being properly good signings. The difference between that baseline and 2 more proper success stories can be massive. But we're talking about a small sample size and as parklane1 points out in situations with risk and uncertainty.

Not to say Arsenal haven't done well, they have. Unfortunately they're looking well run again.

Again I think it’s early days to call them well run
They was gonna sack Arteta but didn’t know who to get in. That’s luck with that call
What they are doing well on is buying young and future providing issues like trying to get another DM in, in case parteys case happens. Win win for them with more bodies