-
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
Tottenham Hotspur Stadium - Licence To Stand
- Thread starter Jordinho
- Start date
spurs' magna carter
Ronnie Rosenthal
Re: Northumberland Development Project
Found this on Skyscr@percity.com
These are a rough breakdown of the figures that I have done. I admit my maths is a bit rusty and please by all means correct me if wrong as I did this by myself and would be happy to accept any help or advice.
Revenue per capita over the season
1 - Chelsea £70.7m ÷ 42,000 = £1683.33
2 - Arsenal £92.8m ÷ 60,000 = £1546.66
3 - Man Utd £109.1m ÷ 76,000 = £1435.52
4 - Tottenham £40.2m ÷ 36,000 = £1116.66
5 - Liverpool £44.6m ÷ 45,000 = £991.11
6 - Emirates Marketing Project £39.6M ÷ 47000 = £842.55
Over the course of season Chelsea played five more home game than Arsenal, as a result of this Chelsea earned more per fan over the course of the season than Arsenal. This goes to show how important success on the pitch is, regardless as to how big and brilliant your stadium is in fact Chelsea finished one place above Arsenal in the Money League. If Arsenal played the same number of home games as Chelsea they would’ve received £110.6m in matchday revenue (which would’ve been the highest in the country).
Revenue per game
1 - Man Utd 28 ÷ £109.1m = £3,896,428.57
2 - Arsenal 26 ÷ £92.8m = £3,569,230.76
3 - Chelsea 31 ÷ £70.7 = £2,261,290.32
4 - Liverpool 26 ÷ £44.6m = £1,715,384.61
5 - Tottenham 26 ÷ £40.2 = £1,546,153.84
6 - Emirates Marketing Project 26 ÷ £39.6m = £1,523,076.92
You can tell just how outdated a stadium like WHL is now, despite being modern in comparison to grounds like Goodison Park and not the worse. If you doubled the capacity at WHL to 72,000 (12,000 more than the Emirates) with the current and now outdated configuration then you would earn just below £3.1m a game which would still be under half a million less than what Arsenal are getting per game and would be £10-15m less than them over the course of a season.
Revenue per seat from each home game
1 - Arsenal – £3,569,230.76 ÷ 60,000 = £59.48
2 – Chelsea – £2,261,290.32 ÷ 42,000 = £53.84
3 - Man Utd – £3,896,428.57 ÷ 76,000 = £51.26
4 - Tottenham – £1546153.84 ÷ 36,000 = £42.94
5 - Liverpool – £1,715,384.61 ÷ 45,000 = £38.11
6 - Emirates Marketing Project - £1,523,076.92 ÷ 47,000 = 32.40
This is another good example of configuration and corporate seating but also location, as you can see there is a big gap between the North and South. Both Spurs and Chelsea have smaller capacities than Liverpool and Emirates Marketing Project respectively yet have better Matchday revenues with the location of London being the most likely cause.
Over all Arsenal are still miles ahead of the rest when it comes to matchday revenues, whilst Man Utd do have the largest there isn’t much of a gap between the two despite Man Utd having 16,000 more seats.
What this shows is how important getting this stadium right is for Spurs, if they can avoid the vast debt or short term trouble that affected Arsenal’s transfer outlay and competitive side for the past ten years then, even with 56,000, Spurs could have a very competitive foundation to build on.
Also Chelsea’s success shows that it’s not just the stadium that helps with financial muscle, it’s also how many games and trophies you win. Above all else though winning is what attracts players, just look at Borussia Dortmund they have the full package – the largest average crowd in Europe, were recently back to Bundesliga Champions, have a great manager, a very good team, last year’s CL runners up and are in the competition for the third year running. Yet, two of their best players have left them for their bitter title rivals Bayern Munich in the same calendar year, Why? Because Bayern win, they did the treble last year and they have one hell of a history of winning.
Levy once stated that the increase in capacity would only happen if he knew that it would not have any effect on the club’s ability to strengthen the first team squad, he did not want to see the club incur a huge debt as a result of the project with Arsenal being the example of what he wanted to avoid. There are a lot of ‘what ifs’ in football but one that sends shivers down my spine is ‘what if Arsenal incurred no debt whatsoever when moving into the Emirates?’ They would literally still be streets ahead of us.
We need the right balance with the new stadium, the right revenues but also the right costs. We don’t have the vast pockets that Chelsea and Emirates Marketing Project have nor have we had the success that Arsenal enjoyed and Man Utd have enjoyed. Whilst Liverpool have been struggling for well over a decade for an increase in capacity and have some similarities they have one of the largest fan bases in Europe, if not the World.
The fact that we had a demand for 60,000+ from just a string of top five finishes, winning only one League Cup and qualifying for the CL just once shows that Spurs have a potentially very big, if not huge, revenues to tap in to with they were to become Cl regulars and start winning trophies. On top of this Spurs are located in one of the most popular and richest cities in the World whilst also being in the most populated and wealthy regions in the whole of the UK.
As a result of the success of the Bill Nicholson era and other successes in the club’s history, Spurs boast one of the largest fans basses in the Premier League with the past 5-8 years showing that the club can also attract the younger generation and can develop stars of the future, with Bale being the best example, to also help add to the already impressive size of its supporters. To put it simply, you could say that Spurs are the Shale Gas of the Premier League right now, untouched atm but with a lot of potential.
Found this on Skyscr@percity.com
These are a rough breakdown of the figures that I have done. I admit my maths is a bit rusty and please by all means correct me if wrong as I did this by myself and would be happy to accept any help or advice.
Revenue per capita over the season
1 - Chelsea £70.7m ÷ 42,000 = £1683.33
2 - Arsenal £92.8m ÷ 60,000 = £1546.66
3 - Man Utd £109.1m ÷ 76,000 = £1435.52
4 - Tottenham £40.2m ÷ 36,000 = £1116.66
5 - Liverpool £44.6m ÷ 45,000 = £991.11
6 - Emirates Marketing Project £39.6M ÷ 47000 = £842.55
Over the course of season Chelsea played five more home game than Arsenal, as a result of this Chelsea earned more per fan over the course of the season than Arsenal. This goes to show how important success on the pitch is, regardless as to how big and brilliant your stadium is in fact Chelsea finished one place above Arsenal in the Money League. If Arsenal played the same number of home games as Chelsea they would’ve received £110.6m in matchday revenue (which would’ve been the highest in the country).
Revenue per game
1 - Man Utd 28 ÷ £109.1m = £3,896,428.57
2 - Arsenal 26 ÷ £92.8m = £3,569,230.76
3 - Chelsea 31 ÷ £70.7 = £2,261,290.32
4 - Liverpool 26 ÷ £44.6m = £1,715,384.61
5 - Tottenham 26 ÷ £40.2 = £1,546,153.84
6 - Emirates Marketing Project 26 ÷ £39.6m = £1,523,076.92
You can tell just how outdated a stadium like WHL is now, despite being modern in comparison to grounds like Goodison Park and not the worse. If you doubled the capacity at WHL to 72,000 (12,000 more than the Emirates) with the current and now outdated configuration then you would earn just below £3.1m a game which would still be under half a million less than what Arsenal are getting per game and would be £10-15m less than them over the course of a season.
Revenue per seat from each home game
1 - Arsenal – £3,569,230.76 ÷ 60,000 = £59.48
2 – Chelsea – £2,261,290.32 ÷ 42,000 = £53.84
3 - Man Utd – £3,896,428.57 ÷ 76,000 = £51.26
4 - Tottenham – £1546153.84 ÷ 36,000 = £42.94
5 - Liverpool – £1,715,384.61 ÷ 45,000 = £38.11
6 - Emirates Marketing Project - £1,523,076.92 ÷ 47,000 = 32.40
This is another good example of configuration and corporate seating but also location, as you can see there is a big gap between the North and South. Both Spurs and Chelsea have smaller capacities than Liverpool and Emirates Marketing Project respectively yet have better Matchday revenues with the location of London being the most likely cause.
Over all Arsenal are still miles ahead of the rest when it comes to matchday revenues, whilst Man Utd do have the largest there isn’t much of a gap between the two despite Man Utd having 16,000 more seats.
What this shows is how important getting this stadium right is for Spurs, if they can avoid the vast debt or short term trouble that affected Arsenal’s transfer outlay and competitive side for the past ten years then, even with 56,000, Spurs could have a very competitive foundation to build on.
Also Chelsea’s success shows that it’s not just the stadium that helps with financial muscle, it’s also how many games and trophies you win. Above all else though winning is what attracts players, just look at Borussia Dortmund they have the full package – the largest average crowd in Europe, were recently back to Bundesliga Champions, have a great manager, a very good team, last year’s CL runners up and are in the competition for the third year running. Yet, two of their best players have left them for their bitter title rivals Bayern Munich in the same calendar year, Why? Because Bayern win, they did the treble last year and they have one hell of a history of winning.
Levy once stated that the increase in capacity would only happen if he knew that it would not have any effect on the club’s ability to strengthen the first team squad, he did not want to see the club incur a huge debt as a result of the project with Arsenal being the example of what he wanted to avoid. There are a lot of ‘what ifs’ in football but one that sends shivers down my spine is ‘what if Arsenal incurred no debt whatsoever when moving into the Emirates?’ They would literally still be streets ahead of us.
We need the right balance with the new stadium, the right revenues but also the right costs. We don’t have the vast pockets that Chelsea and Emirates Marketing Project have nor have we had the success that Arsenal enjoyed and Man Utd have enjoyed. Whilst Liverpool have been struggling for well over a decade for an increase in capacity and have some similarities they have one of the largest fan bases in Europe, if not the World.
The fact that we had a demand for 60,000+ from just a string of top five finishes, winning only one League Cup and qualifying for the CL just once shows that Spurs have a potentially very big, if not huge, revenues to tap in to with they were to become Cl regulars and start winning trophies. On top of this Spurs are located in one of the most popular and richest cities in the World whilst also being in the most populated and wealthy regions in the whole of the UK.
As a result of the success of the Bill Nicholson era and other successes in the club’s history, Spurs boast one of the largest fans basses in the Premier League with the past 5-8 years showing that the club can also attract the younger generation and can develop stars of the future, with Bale being the best example, to also help add to the already impressive size of its supporters. To put it simply, you could say that Spurs are the Shale Gas of the Premier League right now, untouched atm but with a lot of potential.
Superhudd
Simon Davies
Re: Northumberland Development Project
What it will come down to is the interest rates put on the bonds that we sell. This is where IMO Uncle Joe comes in and buys a large percentage at next to no interest. If he cannot do this we find someone that can or will. If we are saddled with any debt above the cost price, people should ask the question what is the point of Uncle Joe. Almost anyone can run this club the way it has IMO, its not rocket science to run a business like this. Levy in recent times has even hired an outside firm to bring in the sponsorship deals as of late.
It will be interesting whether it is Joe Lewis that buys up all the bonds and what price we as a club would be paying him for the privilege of said loan. Some will say that's business for you, I will say he's taking the ****. I find it very hard to believe that those that have season tickets would want to make money out of Tottenham, the way the Glazers have, and how I believe Uncle Joe will. Hopefully I am proved wrong.
What it will come down to is the interest rates put on the bonds that we sell. This is where IMO Uncle Joe comes in and buys a large percentage at next to no interest. If he cannot do this we find someone that can or will. If we are saddled with any debt above the cost price, people should ask the question what is the point of Uncle Joe. Almost anyone can run this club the way it has IMO, its not rocket science to run a business like this. Levy in recent times has even hired an outside firm to bring in the sponsorship deals as of late.
It will be interesting whether it is Joe Lewis that buys up all the bonds and what price we as a club would be paying him for the privilege of said loan. Some will say that's business for you, I will say he's taking the ****. I find it very hard to believe that those that have season tickets would want to make money out of Tottenham, the way the Glazers have, and how I believe Uncle Joe will. Hopefully I am proved wrong.
Re: Northumberland Development Project
The majority of clubs seem incapable of it. Unless you want a sugar daddy, we couldn't hope for a better owner and chairman.
The majority of clubs seem incapable of it. Unless you want a sugar daddy, we couldn't hope for a better owner and chairman.
greatwhitenorf
Edgar Davids
Re: Northumberland Development Project
Nice post, magna. Some good numbers to ponder on.
If the rumoured NFL franchise comes on board as a co-occupant in the new stadium project, it may not put money directly into Spurs pockets, but it does allow for a very bold approach to stadium design. A capacity of around 70,000 would likely more than double Spurs match day revenue as upgraded corporate hospitality facilities would be a priority.
Naming rights and shirt sponsorship value would benefit tremendously. I would think Spurs receive most if not all the naming rights income because it's their property the stadium is being built on. There's some interesting times ahead. In Tim Leiweke, Spurs have an ambitious ally, a man looking to make his mark in a manner we should all relate to, by 'doing things in style, with a flourish, about going out and beating the other lot...'.
Nice post, magna. Some good numbers to ponder on.
If the rumoured NFL franchise comes on board as a co-occupant in the new stadium project, it may not put money directly into Spurs pockets, but it does allow for a very bold approach to stadium design. A capacity of around 70,000 would likely more than double Spurs match day revenue as upgraded corporate hospitality facilities would be a priority.
Naming rights and shirt sponsorship value would benefit tremendously. I would think Spurs receive most if not all the naming rights income because it's their property the stadium is being built on. There's some interesting times ahead. In Tim Leiweke, Spurs have an ambitious ally, a man looking to make his mark in a manner we should all relate to, by 'doing things in style, with a flourish, about going out and beating the other lot...'.
Superhudd
Simon Davies
Re: Northumberland Development Project
Don't make the mistake that the top teams are not the ones year on year making the most money.
If we were a northern team, we would be relegation fodder each year, or at best Everton with no chance of breaking the top 4 monopoly.
Incapable of what exactly.. working with a larger budget maybe.
Don't make the mistake that the top teams are not the ones year on year making the most money.
If we were a northern team, we would be relegation fodder each year, or at best Everton with no chance of breaking the top 4 monopoly.
Last edited:
Re: Northumberland Development Project
Incapable of living within their means, always spending more than they can afford. You can have as big a budget as you like, doesn't matter if your income doesn't come near what you've "budgeted".
Teams like Saudi Sportswashing Machine, Sunderland, Everton and Villa make enough to be top 10 teams, but it's imperative you get good value from transfers.
Incapable of living within their means, always spending more than they can afford. You can have as big a budget as you like, doesn't matter if your income doesn't come near what you've "budgeted".
Teams like Saudi Sportswashing Machine, Sunderland, Everton and Villa make enough to be top 10 teams, but it's imperative you get good value from transfers.
Superhudd
Simon Davies
Re: Northumberland Development Project
As I said its not rocket science and a lot of these teams are now run similar to each other. Over the next 2 or 3 seasons you will see the added TV money will pay off any debt, that includes Tottenham (80m). If we were a northern team we would become top 10 at best team. Whether Levy is there or not. The reason the past 6 or so seasons we are above the mentioned teams is because of four factors only.. location, disposable income is far greater in the South and London whilst the population is far denser whilst probably the most important, the club history and its support being there from yesteryear. Without these four factors we would not be the club we are today, and is a far greater reason as to why we are a sustained top 6 team now. And this is why the stadium is so important, creating room for the new fan is needed badly. Allowing the next generation a piece of the pie. As I believe the last generation was missed, and generally has gravitated to successful teams in London as it did to us in the 60s to 80s. Since the premiership era began its been somewhat a disaster IMO.
As I said its not rocket science and a lot of these teams are now run similar to each other. Over the next 2 or 3 seasons you will see the added TV money will pay off any debt, that includes Tottenham (80m). If we were a northern team we would become top 10 at best team. Whether Levy is there or not. The reason the past 6 or so seasons we are above the mentioned teams is because of four factors only.. location, disposable income is far greater in the South and London whilst the population is far denser whilst probably the most important, the club history and its support being there from yesteryear. Without these four factors we would not be the club we are today, and is a far greater reason as to why we are a sustained top 6 team now. And this is why the stadium is so important, creating room for the new fan is needed badly. Allowing the next generation a piece of the pie. As I believe the last generation was missed, and generally has gravitated to successful teams in London as it did to us in the 60s to 80s. Since the premiership era began its been somewhat a disaster IMO.
Re: Northumberland Development Project
We don't know yet how much debt will be required; at what rate we will pay interest; or over how long a period we will be borrowing.
What is quite certain is that having Joe Lewis as principle owner will give us access to a level of debt and a lower rate that would be denied many other clubs who don't have such a well connected, greatly respected businessman of high net worth on their side.
That's the point of Joe Lewis.
And if my aunt had balls...........seriously, on what basis do you make such a claim?
We don't know yet how much debt will be required; at what rate we will pay interest; or over how long a period we will be borrowing.
What is quite certain is that having Joe Lewis as principle owner will give us access to a level of debt and a lower rate that would be denied many other clubs who don't have such a well connected, greatly respected businessman of high net worth on their side.
That's the point of Joe Lewis.
And if my aunt had balls...........seriously, on what basis do you make such a claim?
Re: Northumberland Development Project
No doubt some of those factors come into play. But we are still performing above our financial level, year in year out.
It's perfectly apparent that we adopted a transfer policy some time ago that has given us an advantage over every other club below us. We have consistently bought well, sold well and reinvested well. And consequently improved the squad year on year. That is no accident. And it has nothing to do with location or pre-existing fan base or any other advantage that you claim that we have. It's simply the consequence of good management - a thorough implementation of a sound strategy. No other non CL club has managed it anything like as well as Spurs.
We have also punched way above our weight in terms of commercial deals. Again, no accident and nothing to do with any inherent advantage.
To dismiss the club's current status as merely the inevitable consequence of history and location is both to ignore how Spurs signally failed to attain anything like such a status under the previous regime and also fundamentally to misunderstand what it takes to be successful.
No doubt some of those factors come into play. But we are still performing above our financial level, year in year out.
It's perfectly apparent that we adopted a transfer policy some time ago that has given us an advantage over every other club below us. We have consistently bought well, sold well and reinvested well. And consequently improved the squad year on year. That is no accident. And it has nothing to do with location or pre-existing fan base or any other advantage that you claim that we have. It's simply the consequence of good management - a thorough implementation of a sound strategy. No other non CL club has managed it anything like as well as Spurs.
We have also punched way above our weight in terms of commercial deals. Again, no accident and nothing to do with any inherent advantage.
To dismiss the club's current status as merely the inevitable consequence of history and location is both to ignore how Spurs signally failed to attain anything like such a status under the previous regime and also fundamentally to misunderstand what it takes to be successful.
Superhudd
Simon Davies
Re: Northumberland Development Project
If we were in the North, Modric would not have signed, neither would have Berbatov, infact many of the players wouldn't have, our extra income over the likes of Northern teams is because despite our non success over the years we are still next in the food chain. You only have to see Liverpools pull in this respect.. loads of success in the 70s and 80s and there fanbase is built on this around the world. Evertons does not have the infrastructure of Liverpool so has to buy and sell well and I'd suggest they have done just as well as we have in that respect bar the ridiculous amount for Bale.
We earned our reputation from being the sugar daddy club in the 60s. That is how our club grew, from then to the 90s. It is since and because of bigger sugar daddies why we are not champions League. Our standing in the game has never changed.. despite Iving Scholar's running before walking demise and Alan Sugar best efforts to put as little money he could into the club but was still able to spend millions on players. As I said its not rocket science running a football club like Tottenham when a lot of the infrastructure is laid on a silver platter. More so in todays game.
If we were in the North, Modric would not have signed, neither would have Berbatov, infact many of the players wouldn't have, our extra income over the likes of Northern teams is because despite our non success over the years we are still next in the food chain. You only have to see Liverpools pull in this respect.. loads of success in the 70s and 80s and there fanbase is built on this around the world. Evertons does not have the infrastructure of Liverpool so has to buy and sell well and I'd suggest they have done just as well as we have in that respect bar the ridiculous amount for Bale.
We earned our reputation from being the sugar daddy club in the 60s. That is how our club grew, from then to the 90s. It is since and because of bigger sugar daddies why we are not champions League. Our standing in the game has never changed.. despite Iving Scholar's running before walking demise and Alan Sugar best efforts to put as little money he could into the club but was still able to spend millions on players. As I said its not rocket science running a football club like Tottenham when a lot of the infrastructure is laid on a silver platter. More so in todays game.
RomanzoCriminale
David Bentley
Re: Northumberland Development Project
If these are the only reasons then why weren't we finishing top 6 the previous 15 years ...... ? :-k
If these are the only reasons then why weren't we finishing top 6 the previous 15 years ...... ? :-k
Re: Northumberland Development Project
Really? I wasn't around at the time, but it's always been my firm belief that we had money because lots of people came to watch us. And lots of people came to watch us because we played good football.
Is that not the case?
Really? I wasn't around at the time, but it's always been my firm belief that we had money because lots of people came to watch us. And lots of people came to watch us because we played good football.
Is that not the case?
Craig_J
Mido
Superhudd
Simon Davies
Re: Northumberland Development Project
Not exactly, Charlton had the biggest crowds at the time too. In those days everyone had big crowds. Everyone pretty much had money too. Infact I believe Charlton had the highest ever attendance at one point. Moving into the 60's we started to separate because we got in the better players. In the 70's Liverpool took over blah blah blah.
Not exactly, Charlton had the biggest crowds at the time too. In those days everyone had big crowds. Everyone pretty much had money too. Infact I believe Charlton had the highest ever attendance at one point. Moving into the 60's we started to separate because we got in the better players. In the 70's Liverpool took over blah blah blah.
Last edited:
Re: Northumberland Development Project
We earned our reputation from being a sugar daddy club in the 60's? Nonsense.
Nothing to do, I suppose, with Bill Nicholson being a damn fine manager and judge of player, building upon the principles that had been embedded in the club since Arthur Rowe's Push and Run team?
And of course we could have signed the likes of Modric and Berbatov if we had identified them and taken a risk on them when others hadn't.
Besides, it is the principle of Spurs' transfer strategy that is important more than the specifics. If we hadn't bought those particular players, we would still have progressed and grown year on year by using the same strategy when buying different players. No other PL club has played the transfer market in the way that we have over the past ten years or so.
We earned our reputation from being a sugar daddy club in the 60's? Nonsense.
Nothing to do, I suppose, with Bill Nicholson being a damn fine manager and judge of player, building upon the principles that had been embedded in the club since Arthur Rowe's Push and Run team?
And of course we could have signed the likes of Modric and Berbatov if we had identified them and taken a risk on them when others hadn't.
Besides, it is the principle of Spurs' transfer strategy that is important more than the specifics. If we hadn't bought those particular players, we would still have progressed and grown year on year by using the same strategy when buying different players. No other PL club has played the transfer market in the way that we have over the past ten years or so.
Re: Northumberland Development Project
Nonsense. Charlton didn't have the biggest crowds. Tottenham, on the other hand, often did.
Charlton had one huge terrace along the side of the pitch (where the stand to the right of the away fans now is). And they occasionally got big crowds. But they never had the biggest crowds on average.
And Liverpool didn't often have the biggest crowds, even in the 70's and 80's. They didn't have a big enough stadium. Man Utd, more often than not, had the biggest attendances from the 70's on.
Nonsense. Charlton didn't have the biggest crowds. Tottenham, on the other hand, often did.
Charlton had one huge terrace along the side of the pitch (where the stand to the right of the away fans now is). And they occasionally got big crowds. But they never had the biggest crowds on average.
And Liverpool didn't often have the biggest crowds, even in the 70's and 80's. They didn't have a big enough stadium. Man Utd, more often than not, had the biggest attendances from the 70's on.