Spurs finances

[Finney Is Back]

The UK is meant to be able to do 100k tests per day by the end of April, and that'll presumably continue to climb from there so by the time the PL resumes we'll be in the millions per week.

50 players + staff per club * 20 clubs = 1000 people for the PL team. Even 100 per club is 2000, so test everyone at a PL team once per week when they walk through the door on a Monday morning - if they fail the test, they go home. Then get them to continue to obey the rules which the rest of the country it observing.

Problem is that I think those tests are the IgG/IgM antibody tests. These will tell you (reasonably accurately) whether somebody has had the virus a week or more ago but not really as accurately whether somebody currently has the virus (as reasonably newly infected people would not yet have created the antibodies).

In theory your idea may work when these sorts of test kits are properly available: http://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2020-03-18-oxford-scientists-develop-rapid-testing-technology-covid-19 (assuming that the virus doesn't need some sort of gestation period before its RNA appears in a persons bodily fluids)

What happens though if N% (somebody else will have to define N) of a squad tests positive? Would failed tests just be considered to be injuries?

 

[Finney Is Back]

Testing people without symptoms is useless. The test (if negative) will only be valid for the exact moment the test was taken. A person could get infected seconds after the test was taken.

Currently it's not even that good.... At present it only really tells you that you were most probably negative about 1 week ago.

 

[Benny_Lad]

I think that’s a big unknown
Surely the whole team is then quarantined and it’s game over again

Exactly. And the team they’ve just played. Coughing and heavy breathing around the pitch.

 

[Benny_Lad]

The UK is meant to be able to do 100k tests per day by the end of April, and that'll presumably continue to climb from there so by the time the PL resumes we'll be in the millions per week.

50 players + staff per club * 20 clubs = 1000 people for the PL team. Even 100 per club is 2000, so test everyone at a PL team once per week when they walk through the door on a Monday morning - if they fail the test, they go home. Then get them to continue to obey the rules which the rest of the country it observing.

I just don’t see it happening. If at any stage someone in the general public is being placed in danger due to games going ahead too quickly (security, chefs, physios, officials) then it won’t happen imo.

Imagine the uproar. “Yeah we’re using the testing on PL players but might not be enough to test all front line NHS”.

 

[SteveAWOL]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1249951316824281093

https://twitter.com/x/status/1249951336529047558

 

[SteveAWOL]

The UK is meant to be able to do 100k tests per day by the end of April, and that'll presumably continue to climb from there so by the time the PL resumes we'll be in the millions per week.

50 players + staff per club * 20 clubs = 1000 people for the PL team. Even 100 per club is 2000, so test everyone at a PL team once per week when they walk through the door on a Monday morning - if they fail the test, they go home. Then get them to continue to obey the rules which the rest of the country it observing.

Fingers crossed the government has some new manufacturing ongoing to get those 100,000 tests per day ready for the end of the month but we’ve only just broke the 13K barrier in past week, so it seems a tall order.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1250062028712153091

Problem is that I think those tests are the IgG/IgM antibody tests. These will tell you (reasonably accurately) whether somebody has had the virus a week or more ago but not really as accurately whether somebody currently has the virus (as reasonably newly infected people would not yet have created the antibodies).

In theory your idea may work when these sorts of test kits are properly available: http://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2020-03-18-oxford-scientists-develop-rapid-testing-technology-covid-19 (assuming that the virus doesn't need some sort of gestation period before its RNA appears in a persons bodily fluids)

What happens though if N% (somebody else will have to define N) of a squad tests positive? Would failed tests just be considered to be injuries?

Looks like PCR tests can detect infection pretty much straight away, so hopefully those new rapid versions have a high enough sensitivity to not suffer false negatives but ideally an antibody test will confirm the diagnosis.

 

[Mikey10]

I’d be very surprised if we see any football before September.

I’d also be pretty surprised if we see any football in September.

 

[Finney Is Back]

I’d be very surprised if we see any football before September.

I’d also be pretty surprised if we see any football in September.

I think we'll see football in September but not before.

 

[Grays_1890]

They won’t risk it, no chance

 

[StephenH]

que sera sera, as Doris would say!

 

[Doctor76]

Not sure how accurate this is?

 

[Bedfordspurs]

View attachment 8676
Not sure how accurate this is?

It’s the sun

 

[Gazza Dazzla]

View attachment 8676
Not sure how accurate this is?

It says according to the clubs latest accounts, so should be pretty easy to fact check. If we’ve borrowed £800m then yea we’ll have to pay it back, but we won’t have to pay it back tomorrow!

 

[elltrev]

View attachment 8676
Not sure how accurate this is?

What are the most recent estimates of how much our annual revenue will increase due to the new stadium?

In hindsight it seems we might have been better off staying at WHL and spending our money on players instead - might have won the league, kept Poch, and seen a bigger increase in commercial revenue - without the stadium debt.

That’s only with hindsight though - don’t think anyone would have predicted us to get close to winning the league around the time our stadium plans started.

 

[spurspinter1]

What are the most recent estimates of how much our annual revenue will increase due to the new stadium?

In hindsight it seems we might have been better off staying at WHL and spending our money on players instead - might have won the league, kept Poch, and seen a bigger increase in commercial revenue - without the stadium debt.

That’s only with hindsight though - don’t think anyone would have predicted us to get close to winning the league around the time our stadium plans started.

There is a strong presence of gallows humour in all this isn't there?

"It's all going to befine once we move in to our new stadium, we're on the right track"

*Moves in to new stadium and form gets even worse and manager gets sacked

"Well at least we have the increased income from matchdays and all of the other events"

*Covid 19 rears it's ugly head and all events for the foreseeable future are cancelled

"..........."

 

[AdamB]

It says according to the clubs latest accounts, so should be pretty easy to fact check. If we’ve borrowed £800m then yea we’ll have to pay it back, but we won’t have to pay it back tomorrow!

Our year end is June so our latest accounts are up to 30 June 2019. Based on that we had £658m loans and £123m cash so net debt of £535m.

The Sun's figure ignores the cash on our balance sheet and must include a variety of other things, in particular deferred income (which is primarily cash which we've received from fans and sponsors but wihch relates to future seasons, so not something to be 'repaid', but services (ie tickets etc) which the club need to provide to those people).

The main loan is repayable in 2 years time' though we'll refinance it then, rather than repay it. The bigger risk for us from that is if the interest rate on the replacement loan is higher

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

Our year end is June so our latest accounts are up to 30 June 2019. Based on that we had £658m loans and £123m cash so net debt of £535m.

The Sun's figure ignores the cash on our balance sheet and must include a variety of other things, in particular deferred income (which is primarily cash which we've received from fans and sponsors but wihch relates to future seasons, so not something to be 'repaid', but services (ie tickets etc) which the club need to provide to those people).

The main loan is repayable in 2 years time' though we'll refinance it then, rather than repay it. The bigger risk for us from that is if the interest rate on the replacement loan is higher

Back in September.....
We converted £525m of that to different length BUT all long term bonds..

And the remaining £112m was refinanced at around 2.6%

Looking at how things are, getting this finance restructure done before the current and probable future meltdown is MASSIVE. As although rates (for a while) are cheap, the ability to borrow big in this climate must be restricted. (Unless you ask the government for it).

The bottom line, simplistically, if WE keep going, even if we turn a bit sh.it, we'll be ok.

 

[AdamB]

Back in September.....
We converted £525m of that to different length BUT all long term bonds..

And the remaining £112m was refinanced at around 2.6%

Looking at how things are, getting this finance restructure done before the current and probable future meltdown is MASSIVE. As although rates (for a while) are cheap, the ability to borrow big in this climate must be restricted. (Unless you ask the government for it).

The bottom line, simplistically, if WE keep going, even if we turn a bit sh.it, we'll be ok.

I remember the refi now - thanks! Agreed that if we tried to do it now, rates would be a lot worse. I think we'll see crowds back in stadia next year, even if limited to 25% or 50% of cpacity for a while

 

[Bedfordspurs]

Just borrowed £175m from the Bank of England

 

[Notmegov]

Just borrowed £175m from the Bank of England

?

Sent from my SM-J510FN using glory-glory.co.uk mobile app