ENIC

[Muttley]

Thanks, I now understand what you are saying.
Putting it in very crude terms and using completely incorrect figures, if our revenue is £550m and we spent £300m on wages, the ratio of wages to turnover would be 300/550 = 55%
Whereas you note we might be spending £50m on financing the stadium so the ratio should be 300/500=60%

Obviously these actual figures are wrong, I'm just using figures to make your point, that the ratio we spend on wages is actually higher than advertised.


Meanwhile, one cannot have the huge revenue (the £550m) without having to finance it (the £50m) and we are far better off with this net £500m than if we had stayed in the old WHL with £200m revenue (or whatever figure, I know these are not the correct figures) so the new stadium is a huge success financially.

Is that what you're saying? I don't want to twist your words.

Exactly that. The only way we would ever know is if Spurs run 2 P&Ls (football vs non-football) and shared the detail of the one we currently see which is the rolled up version. They've obviously got no incentive to tell us what goes where. Nor should they.

 

[Muttley]

We are only servicing the debt pile (akin to interest only mortgage)................circa £20-25m a year.

(Edit: £45m in the last accounts, which appears hefty given most of the £851m debt is secured at 2.8% average??)

Maybe it did include capital

I was always assuming that the amortisation cost is against the P&L. So if we spent £800m on a stadium and amortised it over 60 years then the P&L cost each year would be £13m. Then you add the 2.8% interest on the debt and that is another £22m. So basically to do nothing, we would need to find £35m. That obviously doesn't work forever because at some point Levy and co will need to renegotiate that interest rate which is only fixed for a number of years. As we've all seen with our mortgages, this new era of interest rates can be brutal even if the stadium build just about missed the rising costs of raw materials.

Either way you'd like to think we are trying to bring down the debt and doing some capital repayment out of the £550m turnover each year. Alternatively, that can also be displaced into building more things like the hotel and the debt stays where it is, or even goes up.

Also, if the club is valued at something like £4b then if Levy sells small shares to investors then that money can reduce the stadium debt. 1/16th of the club is valued at £250m. If an investor genuinely believes that £250m will grow and we'll become a £6b or £8b club eventually then we might see investment soon.

One caveat - I'm not an accountant

 

[Muttley]

Now if we had sold a few players each season for moderate money it would all look a little better but we have brought so much crap that we couldn’t sell it hurts us most years. We will thus summer be seeing go in a free another high value purchase in Reggie and we will take a huge hit on Brian Gil. Unless we counter that with a skipp we’re at a deficit to start with.

This is what I always talk about. A club's job is to have a squad where every player has a current or future 1st team impact. Spurs go in cycles, mostly because of manager change and poor recruitment, where we keep ending up with these bloated squads and players current values are less than their current amortised value. Levy has been way too kind to prior managers (e.g. Redknapp). We've often ended up with 30-35 senior pros on our books. We end up loaning out over-25's and selling them for a loss. As you say, you then don't realise your full value of players like Winks, Kane, Skipp etc that generate profits.

Saying that, I feel the direction is way better at the moment. I think the squad is appreciating in value again and will look very lean by Aug 2025. I hope we keep it this way, this time. It would be the first time we ever did.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

I was always assuming that the amortisation cost is against the P&L. So if we spent £800m on a stadium and amortised it over 60 years then the P&L cost each year would be £13m. Then you add the 2.8% interest on the debt and that is another £22m. So basically to do nothing, we would need to find £35m. That obviously doesn't work forever because at some point Levy and co will need to renegotiate that interest rate which is only fixed for a number of years. As we've all seen with our mortgages, this new era of interest rates can be brutal even if the stadium build just about missed the rising costs of raw materials.

Either way you'd like to think we are trying to bring down the debt and doing some capital repayment out of the £550m turnover each year. Alternatively, that can also be displaced into building more things like the hotel and the debt stays where it is, or even goes up.

Also, if the club is valued at something like £4b then if Levy sells small shares to investors then that money can reduce the stadium debt. 1/16th of the club is valued at £250m. If an investor genuinely believes that £250m will grow and we'll become a £6b or £8b club eventually then we might see investment soon.

One caveat - I'm not an accountant

iirc we are amortatising the stadium at around £70m per accounting period.
That's why we have recorded a loss in the last accounts and will probably continue to do so. The plus side of that is even as revenue increases it's probably saving us a corporation tax bill on profits.

I don't think there's any indication that we are paying down any of the capital. With the rates we've secured...why would you?. The average date of maturity is 23 years out.
Plus by all reports the stadium cost £1.2bn, we have approx £850m debt but 200-250m of that was COVID losses, so without COVID we'd be at £600-650m debt for the stadium, so in theory have already paid down half the cost for it.

Not forgetting we have been running with approx a £150-200m cash balance in the bank. So even less when looking at the net debt total. (Although caveat that with not fully knowing our transfers owed figure).

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

This is what I always talk about. A club's job is to have a squad where every player has a current or future 1st team impact. Spurs go in cycles, mostly because of manager change and poor recruitment, where we keep ending up with these bloated squads and players current values are less than their current amortised value. Levy has been way too kind to prior managers (e.g. Redknapp). We've often ended up with 30-35 senior pros on our books. We end up loaning out over-25's and selling them for a loss. As you say, you then don't realise your full value of players like Winks, Kane, Skipp etc that generate profits.

Saying that, I feel the direction is way better at the moment. I think the squad is appreciating in value again and will look very lean by Aug 2025. I hope we keep it this way, this time. It would be the first time we ever did.

I think we've certainly had a bad time of it.
Firstly some iffy signings and then the arse falling out of the transfer world made buyers in the room (to offload to) scarce. (Especially Europe)

Ironically, as one of the few clubs with money, I thought we'd be able to bottom feed and screw some clubs to the floor who were desperate BUT I don't really feel it's worked out like that.

We do appear to have moved on though, and in loose terms have adopted a more Brighton approach but on steroids (ie we can still snag a £60m+ player as well).
We are in the very last throws of shedding the mistakes of the past and it appears are in the early days of fruitful recruiting. Lots of upside.

 

[Muttley]

iirc we are amortatising the stadium at around £70m per accounting period.
That's why we have recorded a loss in the last accounts and will probably continue to do so. The plus side of that is even as revenue increases it's probably saving us a corporation tax bill on profits.

I don't think there's any indication that we are paying down any of the capital. With the rates we've secured...why would you?. The average date of maturity is 23 years out.
Plus by all reports the stadium cost £1.2bn, we have approx £850m debt but 200-250m of that was COVID losses, so without COVID we'd be at £600-650m debt for the stadium, so in theory have already paid down half the cost for it.

Not forgetting we have been running with approx a £150-200m cash balance in the bank. So even less when looking at the net debt total. (Although caveat that with not fully knowing our transfers owed figure).

Thanks, makes sense. As I said, I'm no accountant but do get the concept that we're on this journey and the apples to apples comparison to other clubs don't always work.

The £150m equity investment definitely helped that COVID issue as well. Whether we call it against the overall debt or the reason for the bank balance, it certainly helped. Didn't Joe Lewis sell a property or something and redirected the money our way, or did I imagine that?

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

Thanks, makes sense. As I said, I'm no accountant but do get the concept that we're on this journey and the apples to apples comparison to other clubs don't always work.

The £150m equity investment definitely helped that COVID issue as well. Whether we call it against the overall debt or the reason for the bank balance, it certainly helped. Didn't Joe Lewis sell a property or something and redirected the money our way, or did I imagine that?

I'm not sure how it came about BUT by all accounts DL did well to get JL to put his hand in his pocket. I think we have only drawn £100m of that £150m to date...and I'm not sure whether the timescale of when we can draw the rest down was extended?

In some ways we are on a far progressed unique model....so club comparisons aren't much use...plus I'm sure a large percentage of clubs would love to be in our position.

 

[Gazza]

Enic

Matters Off the field: 8/10
Matters on the field: 3/10

average total: 5.5/10

Just my opinion

 

[Muttley]

Enic

Matters Off the field: 8/10
Matters on the field: 3/10

average total: 5.5/10

Just my opinion

If only it was that simple but I do think you've captured what the masses feel about our chairman.

 

[Jurgen the German]

Enic

Matters Off the field: 8/10
Matters on the field: 3/10

average total: 5.5/10

Just my opinion

Think 3/10 is a little harsh, but there’s no doubt the owners excel in the commercial area and not so much when it comes to the football side which is ultimately why we support the club.

 

[SpurMeUp]

Think 3/10 is a little harsh, but there’s no doubt the owners excel in the commercial area and not so much when it comes to the football side which is ultimately why we support the club.

Although if we had remained with villa and Everton and their revenue ranges (where we were appx pre-enic) would we be spending 100m a year on transfers?

 

[Jurgen the German]

Although if we had remained with villa and Everton and their revenue ranges (where we were appx pre-enic) would we be spending 100m a year on transfers?

We’re able to do that mainly because the club have maximised the earning potential of the club off the pitch, with the exception of naming rights for the stadium.

 

[Baleforce]

Enic

Matters Off the field: 8/10
Matters on the field: 3/10

average total: 5.5/10

Just my opinion

you can't be good on the field, without being good off of it, unless you cheat

 

[RunTMC]

Enic

Matters Off the field: 8/10
Matters on the field: 3/10

average total: 5.5/10

Just my opinion

Sometimes it does feel that way.

The problem with the scoring metric for on the field is that it can get a skewed view.

For instance if someone said that Enic would take that average club/team from the 90s and would turn them into Europe and Champions League regulars and along the way we would even own several bonafide world class players, I probably wouldn’t go meh that’s a 3/10 performance.

Since Poch the on field has been poor. However it looks like Levy has learnt from this and put a new footballing structure in place that’s only a year in. Personally I’m willing to reset and see how this new structure plays out rather than lump it in with the previous 5 years.

 

[Batspur]

Sometimes it does feel that way.

The problem with the scoring metric for on the field is that it can get a skewed view.

For instance if someone said that Enic would take that average club/team from the 90s and would turn them into Europe and Champions League regulars and along the way we would even own several bonafide world class players, I probably wouldn’t go meh that’s a 3/10 performance.

Since Poch the on field has been poor. However it looks like Levy has learnt from this and put a new footballing structure in place that’s only a year in. Personally I’m willing to reset and see how this new structure plays out rather than lump it in with the previous 5 years.

I genuinely think this is our problem with our fans. We accept the constant mistakes. We constantly say that if we just wait 2 or 3 more years Levy will get it right.

There is no proof of this over a quarter of a century. We are the equivalent of modern day serfs paying for a rich guy to play football chairman. There is no backing from him. No cash. Just investment from debt he has accrued in our name. I can't understand how folks can't see that any money Enic/Tavistock invests has come from us or borrowed in our name. We have the biggest debt pile in world football. Tavistock say they only take dividends and plough the rest back into the team. But I see no proof of this. Where are the financials? I'd be grateful to see this shown. On paper we are a billion in the hole. Great match day revenue for sure. But again. That's our money. Off field activities are also a boon. But I don't get why we should be happy for an initial outlay of 28m, they now sit on a 4 billion asset (their figures) Folks need to wake up and realise we are the marks.

We should be outraged at the management of our financials. They're not fans. They just profit off us. If we had success on the pitch I'd accept their profit. Happily. But we don't.

 

[Batspur]

Someone seems a bit upset.

I am upset. We break every football manager we've ever had from Jol to Poch. To Mou to probably Ange. Even today, which was a great result, we all know we could never relax. Even if we went 3 up. That's madness. We have no culture apart from sexy. And that comes from the top.

 

[DubSpur]

I genuinely think this is our problem with our fans. We accept the constant mistakes. We constantly say that if we just wait 2 or 3 more years Levy will get it right.

There is no proof of this over a quarter of a century. We are the equivalent of modern day serfs paying for a rich guy to play football chairman. There is no backing from him. No cash. Just investment from debt he has accrued in our name. I can't understand how folks can't see that any money Enic/Tavistock invests has come from us or borrowed in our name. We have the biggest debt pile in world football. Tavistock say they only take dividends and plough the rest back into the team. But I see no proof of this. Where are the financials? I'd be grateful to see this shown. On paper we are a billion in the hole. Great match day revenue for sure. But again. That's our money. Off field activities are also a boon. But I don't get why we should be happy for an initial outlay of 28m, they now sit on a 4 billion asset (their figures) Folks need to wake up and realise we are the marks.

We should be outraged at the management of our financials. They're not fans. They just profit off us. If we had success on the pitch I'd accept their profit. Happily. But we don't.

If it was constant mistakes we wouldn't have improved from being a mid table team at best with no European football to a top 4-6 team with constant European football and going close in the league and CL. Is Levy perfect? No, but constant mistakes...

You see no proof that ENIC takes no money out of the club? Where are the financials??? fudging hell, they're published every year with them dissected by loads of football financial experts.

It's not your money. It's a simple concept, once you give your money to somebody for a product or a service it's no longer your money it's their's. Once you pay for a good from the club it's their money to do as they want with it, it's no longer yours, just the way if you go into a supermarket and buy shopping you can't claim it's still your money. If you don't like it don't spend your money, simples.

 

[braineclipse]

If it was constant mistakes we wouldn't have improved from being a mid table team at best with no European football to a top 4-6 team with constant European football and going close in the league and CL. Is Levy perfect? No, but constant mistakes...

You see no proof that ENIC takes no money out of the club? Where are the financials??? fudging hell, they're published every year with them dissected by loads of football financial experts.

It's not your money. It's a simple concept, once you give your money to somebody for a product or a service it's no longer your money it's there's. Once you pay for a good from the club it's there money to do as they want with it, it's no longer yours, just the way if you go into a supermarket and buy shopping you can't claim it's still your money. If you don't like it don't spend your money, simples.

From mid table to that during a time when fotball financials got super polarised with CL etc that meant we were already lagging behind when Levy/ENIC took over. And after that two clubs (in particular) buying their way to the top with ridiculous spending/financial doping.

Constant mistakes would not have seen us still mid table. Constant mistakes would have seen us relegated over that time frame at least once. As we nearly were in the 90s.

Levy isn't perfect, no owner, no chairman is. He's better than most though.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

I genuinely think this is our problem with our fans. We accept the constant mistakes. We constantly say that if we just wait 2 or 3 more years Levy will get it right.

There is no proof of this over a quarter of a century. We are the equivalent of modern day serfs paying for a rich guy to play football chairman. There is no backing from him. No cash. Just investment from debt he has accrued in our name. I can't understand how folks can't see that any money Enic/Tavistock invests has come from us or borrowed in our name. We have the biggest debt pile in world football. Tavistock say they only take dividends and plough the rest back into the team. But I see no proof of this. Where are the financials? I'd be grateful to see this shown. On paper we are a billion in the hole. Great match day revenue for sure. But again. That's our money. Off field activities are also a boon. But I don't get why we should be happy for an initial outlay of 28m, they now sit on a 4 billion asset (their figures) Folks need to wake up and realise we are the marks.

We should be outraged at the management of our financials. They're not fans. They just profit off us. If we had success on the pitch I'd accept their profit. Happily. But we don't.

I've never seen a glass so half empty.

 

[Jurgen the German]

I genuinely think this is our problem with our fans. accept the constant mistakes. We constantly say that if we just wait 2 or 3 more years Levy will get it right.

There is no proof of this over a quarter of a century. We are the equivalent of modern day serfs paying for a rich guy to play football chairman. There is no backing from him. No cash. Just investment from debt he has accrued in our name. I can't understand how folks can't see that any money Enic/Tavistock invests has come from us or borrowed in our name. We have the biggest debt pile in world football. Tavistock say they only take dividends and plough the rest back into the team. But I see no proof of this. Where are the financials? I'd be grateful to see this shown. On paper we are a billion in the hole. Great match day revenue for sure. But again. That's our money. Off field activities are also a boon. But I don't get why we should be happy for an initial outlay of 28m, they now sit on a 4 billion asset (their figures) Folks need to wake up and realise we are the marks.

We should be outraged at the management of our financials. They're not fans. They just profit off us. If we had success on the pitch I'd accept their profit. Happily. But we don't.

I’m not quite in full agreement with how bleak things are but I actually think you make some good points, the first paragraph especially. There’s definitely an element of “let’s just give ENIC more time” when they’ve had over 20 years. The current line is “let’s give them 5-10 years once the stadium is paid off” and I’m sure it will be something else when that time has lapsed. Like I’ve said many times, they’ve done great with the off the field stuff with the exception of naming rights, but someone made a point recently which I agreed with that most big companies don’t keep the same person in charge for over 20 years. It almost feels like people are happy with Levy indefinitely with no timeframe for him moving on when players and managers don’t get anywhere near the same luxury.