We have to sell to buy; it's been that way for a number of years now, this doesn't mean we'll have no transfers fund this Summer providing we move some fringe players on.
-
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
General Transfer Rumour Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Sandman
- Start date
We have to sell to buy; it's been that way for a number of years now, this doesn't mean we'll have no transfers fund this Summer providing we move some fringe players on.
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
More like Bacary for 3 million
DubaiSpur
Ian Walker
We`ll make a profit this summer, as we nearly always do these days. But beyond that, fair enough: these players are from Ligue 1, and you`re right that this makes them more gettable for us than equivalent players in other leagues.
El Guepardo
Rafael Van Der Vaart
Why are we so skint? Is it solely the new ground?
No, it's the lack of new ground. Levy and ENIC have done a lot of work increasing revenue streams and increasing the club's turnover. We've hit a ceiling now though with limited match-day income that can't be increased. The extra TV money and increased sponsorship deals aren't increasing our income faster than players wages are rising. The market in player wages has mushroomed due to the doping clubs like Chelsea, City, PSG and for a while Monaco.
We've hit a ceiling in the wages we are able to offer and financial fair play rules mean we're restricted even further because ENIC can't invest much money in the club for player transfers and so we're almost entirely reliant on club revenue. that won't be increased until we have a new stadium. As inflation in player wages increase it means the standard of player we can realistically buy reduces we need to now be smart, develop academy players and buy young players before they've realised their potential and are on low to moderate wages,
Of course, we are also paying for a lot of mistakes of the recent past. The following players account for a huge portion of our current wage bill but contribute very little to our performances:
Adebayor (clubs highest earner)
Soldado
Kaboul
Paulinho
Capoue
Lennon
Without a considerable improvement in commercial revenue (one of those sponsors City's got) or CL money, there's very little left to spend.
An additional 30-40 million in match day income will go some way, but wages eat up everything over time. We do overpay our players IMO. 1k a week each for 20 players is one million a year.
I
indianspur
Guest
im surprised that Argentine Poch didnt bring in Cambiasso last summer. He has done very well at Leicester
Wasn't suitable for a high intensity pressing game.
El Guepardo
Rafael Van Der Vaart
But, haven't we been making a profit for each of the last few years?
We usually break even. Even if there's a 5 million profit, not much to do with that kind of money. Last year was special as we got a lot of Bale money.
Gutter Boy
Tim Sherwood
We've just built 1 of the top 2-3 training facilities in the world, and have spend £200m acquiring the site for the new ground and doing associated development and groundworks, yet are debt free.
So in the 7 years we've had zero net transfer spend, we've invested roughly £250m in estates/infrastructure projects. We've paid for about half the stadium (the price was originally estimated at £200m for land/associated, plus £250m for the build itself) upfront with no naming rights or mortgage.
paxtonwolf
Tony Marchi
Tottenham planning to use Aaron Lennon as bait for Everton in Kevin Mirallas move
The Daily Mirror thinks you are spot on Milo
The Daily Mirror thinks you are spot on Milo
Profit is the bare minimum to keep a business alive. Making a profit doesn't equate to being competitive.
If we didn't make a profit the very future existence of THFC would be in question
Rorschach
Sonny Walters
As GB says additonal revenue has been reinvested in the training ground, NDP land grab, etc. so the book profit reflects that spend. If that stuff wasn't going on there would have been considerable more funds to 'waste' on the players. Our track record on that front hasn't been great so maybe the money has been wisely spent!!
Of course I don't mean that. I want some shiny new players that are going to transform our team like Falcao and Di Maria. What could go wrong?
Of course I don't mean that. I want some shiny new players that are going to transform our team like Falcao and Di Maria. What could go wrong?
Maltese Falcon
Niko Kranjcar
I suggest you start with substantiating your own ridiculous claim first.
Mate, that actually is quite untrue a statement
- Very few football clubs make year over year profit
- Profit is not the only measurement of any business, growth, market share, assets can all be used as well as, or in place of, profit for a period of time
- The measure of Spurs as a potential business is really measured by looking at the growth of tv income over last decade and doing projections for next decade
DubaiSpur
Ian Walker
True, to an extent. You're still talking about long-term profitability though. For example, going into the red to grow market share only works if there is a long-term increase in profitability as a result. Spurs, as most clubs, are in the unique position of being unable to effectively grow market share. Our share of the market depends on our on pitch performance but we're at a ceiling now (5th/6th place with the odd 4th if we're lucky or 7th if we have a poor/transitional season. To push higher requires a huge increase in income/investment but the return isn't guaranteed as this investment would only equal the standard investment of the club's above us. So we need to be able to increase the investment in wages and fees in a low-risk environment, I.e. from pretty much guaranteed income via increased match-day income and naming rights income from a new stadium and not from speculative borrowing (a la Leeds United).
The increased TV money is meaningless in terms of making us more competitive as all the other clubs get it too and it will just lead to inflation in player wages again.
Much longer conversation and not doing it justice with a short reply
- the market is growing (international), so by just keeping our position we are in fact growing
- tv revenue is doubling every 2-4 years, even with additional wages, it will create a better margin for us
- and it is about long term stability, that is what Levy has succeeded in delivering ..