• 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

ENIC

scaramanga said:
So the people with money see Spurs and the peasants go and watch West Ham.

Plus ça change.
Click to expand...

Which might be fine now. Those peasant kids might grow up and earn money though. Look at Singapore 2 generations ago.

West ham have already got more people going to watch them each week than us.
 
Lilbaz said:
Which might be fine now. Those peasant kids might grow up and earn money though. Look at Singapore 2 generations ago.

West ham have already got more people going to watch them each week than us.
Click to expand...
Only because of capacity. Had we been able to build a 66k+ stadium on the footprint we had then we'd have more attending than them.
 
scaramanga said:
Only because of capacity. Had we been able to build a 66k+ stadium on the footprint we had then we'd have more attending than them.
Click to expand...

We didn't though. And in years to come they will rebuild, with a much bigger footprint than us, a stadium with 80-100k capacity and fill it with all those poor kids that grew up and made money. Aswell as their kids.
 
Lilbaz said:
Which might be fine now. Those peasant kids might grow up and earn money though. Look at Singapore 2 generations ago.

West ham have already got more people going to watch them each week than us.
Click to expand...
How are you getting West Ham attendances higher than ours?
There ground always has chunks of empty seats
They are another that report sales rather than attendances
 
Raziel said:
My experience with matchdays is they are way more parents with their kids now than they ever were at WHL.

And that's acknowledging the tickets are expensive, lots of people in the UK with money
Click to expand...
Agreed
Loads every week now as fans are selling tickets on as they don’t want to go and they are being picked up by families
 
alekaras said:
I think those with the knives out for ENIC see anything that tries to explain the way they operate and the actions they have taken as going along with everything they do. It's like there is no middle ground: you're either "ENIC out" or you're in bed with ENIC. Given how polarized our society is today, I can't say I'm surprised. People don't take the time to read and understand other people's arguments and just latch on to the fact that someone is countering the argument they're making to paint him or her with a broad brush.
Click to expand...
That’s the modern world
You either and ally or the enemy
I think enic have done some great things to get us where we are
I’d like them to sell though to someone with deeper pockets as it think they have maxed out
I think that’s a reasonable view
Levy isn’t a leach or even worse language that some people use
Joe Lewis hasn’t been taking Kirby out to pay for his yacht
They have a right to ask for whatever they see fit for the club they own
I don’t agree with the rumoured values but I’m not a £B either
I think we have culturally problem that runs through our club
We would prefer to win and lose games playing exciting football over winning titles playing full
brick. That’s the Tottenham way. But when we don’t win things we ain’t happy…
You cAn have it both ways but that needs a lot of variables to align including things you. Any control (other clubs fudge ups)
I 100% think ENICs plan was the right way for a club of our stature to do things. It’s now limited and as such is like them to go with my blessing and a lot of ££
 
Lilbaz said:
We didn't though. And in years to come they will rebuild, with a much bigger footprint than us, a stadium with 80-100k capacity and fill it with all those poor kids that grew up and made money. Aswell as their kids.
Click to expand...
And if we choose to move somewhere with more space then we'll build and fill a significantly larger stadium than them.

If the Earth stops circling the Sun, entropy is somehow reversed and West Ham end up being a bigger club than Spurs, I categorically guarantee it won't be because a bunch of mentally subnormal racists got cheap tickets.
 
Lilbaz said:
Wtf do you think average attendance means?
Click to expand...
So you really think that West Ham with a capacity of 62,500 is getting an attendance of 62,458? I must be imagining those empty seats.

Lilbaz said:
We didn't though. And in years to come they will rebuild, with a much bigger footprint than us, a stadium with 80-100k capacity and fill it with all those poor kids that grew up and made money. Aswell as their kids.
Click to expand...
You're really stretching here. Nobody knows the future, but the likelihood of them ever needing a capacity of that size is barely above zero.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
I 100% think ENICs plan was the right way for a club of our stature to do things. It’s now limited and as such is like them to go with my blessing and a lot of ££
Click to expand...
Is it limited now, though? Or has ENIC put us now in an even better position than we think we are? FFP, toothless and bypassable as it was, mandated that a club not spend more than it earns. "Earns" is not a rich owner pumping unlimited cash into the club. It's the revenue a club generates. And with the new rules taking effect this summer, it will become even more important because spend on the squad (wages + transfers) will be limited to 70% of revenue. The only way to spend more will be to increase revenue and ENIC has been masterful in that area. These silly F1 Kart deals all count towards revenue. Appointing this Munn guy is also geared towards revenue expansion. And the fact that we have kept our wages-to-turnover ratio low gives us more wiggle room to increase our spending than any other club. Chelsea, Arsenal, and even Saudi Sportswashing Machine and Brighton, who are currently past that threshold will need to cut back, if they can't increase their revenues.

Technically, the only thing a rich owner would do would be to pay the infrastructure financing costs out of his own pocket, but we still won't be able to go over 70% of our turnover on wages and transfers. So as long as the remaining 30% covers all other expenses, it really doesn't matter if the financing costs are paid out of revenues or out of the owners' pockets. Which means it doesn't matter how deep the owners' pockets are, but it does matter how good the owner is at growing revenue. If there's someone better than ENIC at that, that's the one I would want. But I don't think there are many. Bottom line, I think we're fine with the current ownership in this regard. Now if they get their act together and set up a proper football structure, then we'll be cooking.
 
alekaras said:
Is it limited now, though? Or has ENIC put us now in an even better position than we think we are? FFP, toothless and bypassable as it was, mandated that a club not spend more than it earns. "Earns" is not a rich owner pumping unlimited cash into the club. It's the revenue a club generates. And with the new rules taking effect this summer, it will become even more important because spend on the squad (wages + transfers) will be limited to 70% of revenue. The only way to spend more will be to increase revenue and ENIC has been masterful in that area. These silly F1 Kart deals all count towards revenue. Appointing this Munn guy is also geared towards revenue expansion. And the fact that we have kept our wages-to-turnover ratio low gives us more wiggle room to increase our spending than any other club. Chelsea, Arsenal, and even Saudi Sportswashing Machine and Brighton, who are currently past that threshold will need to cut back, if they can't increase their revenues.

Technically, the only thing a rich owner would do would be to pay the infrastructure financing costs out of his own pocket, but we still won't be able to go over 70% of our turnover on wages and transfers. So as long as the remaining 30% covers all other expenses, it really doesn't matter if the financing costs are paid out of revenues or out of the owners' pockets. Which means it doesn't matter how deep the owners' pockets are, but it does matter how good the owner is at growing revenue. If there's someone better than ENIC at that, that's the one I would want. But I don't think there are many. Bottom line, I think we're fine with the current ownership in this regard. Now if they get their act together and set up a proper football structure, then we'll be cooking.
Click to expand...

Just a clarification (not a dig). The new rules started in jan. It's jan to dec. So any breaches can be dealt with by the beginning of the next season.

It's also 90% this year. 80% next year. Then 70% the year after and then on.

There is a £60m overspend allowed over 3 years (not sure how that works).
 
Lilbaz said:
Just a clarification (not a dig). The new rules started in jan. It's jan to dec. So any breaches can be dealt with by the beginning of the next season.

It's also 90% this year. 80% next year. Then 70% the year after and then on.

There is a £60m overspend allowed over 3 years (not sure how that works).
Click to expand...
That's correct. It was already a long message, so I omitted some of the details!
 
Lilbaz said:
There are plenty of parents that can't afford to. So they take them to watch west ham instead.
Click to expand...
I agree with your argument on prices stopping people going but I don't think in a game with such territoriality it means you choose a cheaper club, generally you just stay home.

I can't see someone who is a Spurs fan deciding to go to West Ham because its cheaper, could be wrong of course I just don't think it works like that.

They might be able to vacuum up more hard up West Ham fans with their £15 european cup tickets

Sent from my SM-A127F using Fapatalk
 
Grays_1890 said:
I agree with your argument on prices stopping people going but I don't think in a game with such territoriality it means you choose a cheaper club, generally you just stay home.

I can't see someone who is a Spurs fan deciding to go to West Ham because its cheaper, could be wrong of course I just don't think it works like that.

They might be able to vacuum up more hard up West Ham fans with their £15 european cup tickets

Sent from my SM-A127F using Fapatalk
Click to expand...

I know of fans of Woolwich and West Ham who take their kids to watch Orient instead. I guess a lower league team as an alternative is more likely than another PL team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back