ENIC

[DeanoAustin]

Specifics yeah, but like @DubSpur says, can probably be summed up by the deal getting to the point where we couldn’t afford it, so we were right to walk away.

There isn’t really a magic point at which you can’t afford a deal for most transfers. That’s a judgement call based on many factors. Levy is fiscally conservative- our wages to turnover ratio has always been the lowest in the league.

The point here seems to be that Levy is more involved in transfers than most chairmen and than even Jordan thought when he was defending Levy. And he has vetoed deals that the manager and recruitment team thought we should have signed.

Does that make Levy “wrong” or a bad chairman? No.

Does it add weight to the arguments of those who want him out? Yes.

 

[Baleforce]

There isn’t really a magic point at which you can’t afford a deal for most transfers. That’s a judgement call based on many factors. Levy is fiscally conservative- our wages to turnover ratio has always been the lowest in the league.

The point here seems to be that Levy is more involved in transfers than most chairmen and than even Jordan thought when he was defending Levy. And he has vetoed deals that the manager and recruitment team thought we should have signed.

Does that make Levy “wrong” or a bad chairman? No.

Does it add weight to the arguments of those who want him out? Yes.

I think there is, it’s not a magic point, it’s a calculated one.

 

[DeanoAustin]

I think there is, it’s not a magic point, it’s a calculated one.

There isn't - Levy will make a judgement on what he is willing to pay. It's not a case that anything beyond that will bankrupt the club. And I guess the most extreme example you would take on that, albeit there were other factors involved, was the Jack Grealish one.

 

[Bishop]

If Levy stood in the way, there was a reason. He's spent his whole life doing what he 'thinks' is best for Spurs, whilst insuring we spend within our means. I think the only way Levy would stand in the way, is if it didn't make sense financially. And don't forget about hindsight; for anyone coming out and saying I recommended Levy buy X player but he didn't, I bet they also recommended one that turned to brick.

Of course there was a reason no one does anything for "no reason". The argument is that the decision he made was wrong and it's not only in hindsight that these judgements were made.

Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Fapatalk

 

[Lilbaz]

For all we know we might have had adeal with the banks in order to get the loan. Similar to utd.

 

[DubSpur]

Of course there was a reason no one does anything for "no reason". The argument is that the decision he made was wrong and it's not only in hindsight that these judgements were made.

Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Fapatalk

If the transfer wasn't made we don't know if the decision was right or wrong. There's no transfer that is a guaranteed success. Great players have gone to one team and been a flop, only to move on and be a great success elsewhere.
There are probably some that Levy got wrong, nobody gets transfers 100% right. I guarantee Webb has made plenty of wrong decisions as well as right ones. If he had a 100% hit rate we'd have heard a lot more of him.

 

[DeanoAustin]

If the transfer wasn't made we don't know if the decision was right or wrong. There's no transfer that is a guaranteed success. Great players have gone to one team and been a flop, only to move on and be a great success elsewhere.
There are probably some that Levy got wrong, nobody gets transfers 100% right. I guarantee Webb has made plenty of wrong decisions as well as right ones. If he had a 100% hit rate we'd have heard a lot more of him.

Let's be fair to Webb here - he was very balanced and did not come across as someone with an axe to grind. He was lead on to Levy by Jordan - he didn't go there himself.

The argument against Levy is that he hasn't spent enough money to achieve success and he has gotten too involved in transfers. What Webb has confirmed, and others have hinted strongly at it, is that Levy has been more involved in transfers than most chairmen and there are players we haven't signed because of him. So what Webb has to say adds weight to the anti-Levy argument and it's head in the sand stuff to deny it. Jordan, a perennial Levy supporter, was surprised himself by what Webb had to say because it undermined some of his defence of Levy.

The argument for Levy is that he is fiscally very responsible and a very clever businessman who has kept our club on a slow but upward trajectory over the last 20 years.

Both of those arguments can be true.

 

[DubSpur]

Let's be fair to Webb here - he was very balanced and did not come across as someone with an axe to grind. He was lead on to Levy by Jordan - he didn't go there himself.

The argument against Levy is that he hasn't spent enough money to achieve success and he has gotten too involved in transfers. What Webb has confirmed, and others have hinted strongly at it, is that Levy has been more involved in transfers than most chairmen and there are players we haven't signed because of him. So what Webb has to say adds weight to the anti-Levy argument and it's head in the sand stuff to deny it. Jordan, a perennial Levy supporter, was surprised himself by what Webb had to say because it undermined some of his defence of Levy.

The argument for Levy is that he is fiscally very responsible and a very clever businessman who has kept our club on a slow but upward trajectory over the last 20 years.

Both of those arguments can be true.

What Webb has said is very vague. He said Poch had the final say on players, Levy was involved in the end of transfers, deals fell through but he wasn't privy to why they fell through. As I said before you can read into that anything you want and it adds weight to the anti-Levy argument if you want to read that into it.

 

[RunTMC]

Of course there was a reason no one does anything for "no reason". The argument is that the decision he made was wrong and it's not only in hindsight that these judgements were made.

Sent from my XQ-BC72 using Fapatalk

Webb says he doesn’t know why the deals didn’t go through. Tough to then conclude the decision was wrong

 

[Lemonade Money]

There isn’t really a magic point at which you can’t afford a deal for most transfers. That’s a judgement call based on many factors. Levy is fiscally conservative- our wages to turnover ratio has always been the lowest in the league.

The point here seems to be that Levy is more involved in transfers than most chairmen and than even Jordan thought when he was defending Levy. And he has vetoed deals that the manager and recruitment team thought we should have signed.

Does that make Levy “wrong” or a bad chairman? No.

Does it add weight to the arguments of those who want him out? Yes.

If you were having your house decorated, would you do a better job than an interior designer? Probably not. Would you give the interior designer full control of your bank account? Definitely not. Any chairman that doesn't get involved with the final say is incompetent.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

There isn’t really a magic point at which you can’t afford a deal for most transfers. That’s a judgement call based on many factors. Levy is fiscally conservative- our wages to turnover ratio has always been the lowest in the league.

The point here seems to be that Levy is more involved in transfers than most chairmen and than even Jordan thought when he was defending Levy. And he has vetoed deals that the manager and recruitment team thought we should have signed.

Does that make Levy “wrong” or a bad chairman? No.

Does it add weight to the arguments of those who want him out? Yes.

How does it add to the weight of argument of those who want him out?

 

[DeanoAustin]

How does it add to the weight of argument of those who want him out?

Their argument has been that Levy should go because he won’t spend enough on transfers and he gets too involved in the football side of things and, the natural follow on from that, is that Levy’s interference is preventing us from being successful on the pitch. For some, Levy’s involvement in transfers and reluctance to spend is not necessarily a bad thing. For some, it is.

Webb’s interview strongly suggests that there is substance to those two accusations. For some people who defend Levy on the basis that they don’t believe he is any more involved than any chairman, those with similar opinions to Simon Jordan, their argument has been discredited.

 

[Lemonade Money]

Their argument has been that Levy should go because he won’t spend enough on transfers and he gets too involved in the football side of things and, the natural follow on from that, is that Levy’s interference is preventing us from being successful on the pitch. For some, Levy’s involvement in transfers and reluctance to spend is not necessarily a bad thing. For some, it is.

Webb’s interview strongly suggests that there is substance to those two accusations. For some people who defend Levy on the basis that they don’t believe he is any more involved than any chairman, those with similar opinions to Simon Jordan, their argument has been discredited.

How do you know how involved other chairman get?

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

Let's be fair to Webb here - he was very balanced and did not come across as someone with an axe to grind. He was lead on to Levy by Jordan - he didn't go there himself.

The argument against Levy is that he hasn't spent enough money to achieve success and he has gotten too involved in transfers. What Webb has confirmed, and others have hinted strongly at it, is that Levy has been more involved in transfers than most chairmen and there are players we haven't signed because of him. So what Webb has to say adds weight to the anti-Levy argument and it's head in the sand stuff to deny it. Jordan, a perennial Levy supporter, was surprised himself by what Webb had to say because it undermined some of his defence of Levy.

The argument for Levy is that he is fiscally very responsible and a very clever businessman who has kept our club on a slow but upward trajectory over the last 20 years.

Both of those arguments can be true.

Yes let's be fair to Webb.

He hasn't named any players. So impossible, even with everyone's favourite running a football club tool 'hindsight', to figure out whether bouncer Levy has 'stood' in the way of a signing success or failure. For every Grealish there's a Schneiderlin.

Furthermore, during the period being talked about there was pretty much Poch and Levy discussing transfers with Hitchen providing input as well. I'm not sure how Levy would NOT be 'too involved', especially given the period of stadium costs being at there peak.

I pretty much certain Levy might curtail a discussion based on deal structure, image rights, greedy agent, unreasonable demands etc rather than suggesting the player hasn't got a sweet left foot or is mentally weak, so I don't fancy him. And that's his prerogative given that's the element he brings to the transfer discussion.

And times move along. Let's say that video was 4 years ago...then the fact that we have moved to a DofF model and bouncer Levy has softened allowing the Auriers Sissokos Deles Dohertys to disappear, paid off or gone for free. But of course it wasn't 4 years ago, but the changes I mention are they taken into account when forming an 'hes too involved' opinion?

 

[DeanoAustin]

Yes let's be fair to Webb.

He hasn't named any players. So impossible, even with everyone's favourite running a football club tool 'hindsight', to figure out whether bouncer Levy has 'stood' in the way of a signing success or failure. For every Grealish there's a Schneiderlin.

Furthermore, during the period being talked about there was pretty much Poch and Levy discussing transfers with Hitchen providing input as well. I'm not sure how Levy would NOT be 'too involved', especially given the period of stadium costs being at there peak.

I pretty much certain Levy might curtail a discussion based on deal structure, image rights, greedy agent, unreasonable demands etc rather than suggesting the player hasn't got a sweet left foot or is mentally weak, so I don't fancy him. And that's his prerogative given that's the element he brings to the transfer discussion.

And times move along. Let's say that video was 4 years ago...then the fact that we have moved to a DofF model and bouncer Levy has softened allowing the Auriers Sissokos Deles Dohertys to disappear, paid off or gone for free. But of course it wasn't 4 years ago, but the changes I mention are they taken into account when forming an 'hes too involved' opinion?

Again, Webb has said the opposite of this. Jordan explicitly asked him if Levy was just involved in terms of the economic aspects of the deal and Webb has said Levy would always have an opinion on the football side of it.

The charge from his detractors is that Levy is too involved in the football side of things. It's pretty much confirmed in this interview that he is. You may view that as a responsible thing or a good thing, many others don't. However, it's now very hard to credibly deny that it happens.

 

[Lemonade Money]

I'd like to see actual proof of any situation where Levy has made a decision knowing it was detrimental to THFC.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

Their argument has been that Levy should go because he won’t spend enough on transfers and he gets too involved in the football side of things and, the natural follow on from that, is that Levy’s interference is preventing us from being successful on the pitch. For some, Levy’s involvement in transfers and reluctance to spend is not necessarily a bad thing. For some, it is.

Webb’s interview strongly suggests that there is substance to those two accusations. For some people who defend Levy on the basis that they don’t believe he is any more involved than any chairman, those with similar opinions to Simon Jordan, their argument has been discredited.

I've largely answered above but the 'not spending enough' is just wanting a sugar daddy Saudi Sportswashing Machine/City type owner (and realistically that's what it might take these days). ENIC have never pretended they'd be that, so they're not breaking any promises. They're actually doing what they say. Increased revenues will increase investment in the football team. It still doesn't put us on a level playing field with 3 or 4 teams but we can contend with being smarter.

The lazy tropes will continually be used all the time we don't win something.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

Again, Webb has said the opposite of this. Jordan explicitly asked him if Levy was just involved in terms of the economic aspects of the deal and Webb has said Levy would always have an opinion on the football side of it.

The charge from his detractors is that Levy is too involved in the football side of things. It's pretty much confirmed in this interview that he is. You may view that as a responsible thing or a good thing, many others don't. However, it's now very hard to credibly deny that it happens.

Yes, he'd have an opinion on the football side of it BUT Poch would have final say. Jeez

I've agreed he is close to the football side of things, and so he should be at that time.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Again, Webb has said the opposite of this. Jordan explicitly asked him if Levy was just involved in terms of the economic aspects of the deal and Webb has said Levy would always have an opinion on the football side of it.

The charge from his detractors is that Levy is too involved in the football side of things. It's pretty much confirmed in this interview that he is. You may view that as a responsible thing or a good thing, many others don't. However, it's now very hard to credibly deny that it happens.

Webb doesn’t even have a job currently
So why should we trust a guy who is now trying to build his profile publicly?

 

[DeanoAustin]

I'd like to see actual proof of any situation where Levy has made a decision knowing it was detrimental to THFC.

That's not the argument. Levy would never do that. However, he makes decisions weighing up lots of factors. Two of those factors are the economics of a deal and the football benefits of a deal. A lot of the time, they are conflicting factors so Levy has to decide which one he gives more weight to.

The argument is that he too often puts economic considerations above football considerations.