Tottenham Thread

[carmine]

WOW, theres alot of emotion on the gooner affiliated websites! It seems there a bit upset right now.

Still, it can only get worse.....

Edited February 19, 2012 by carmine

[carmine]

I wonder how much Levy will squeeze out of the FA for Harry. Someone from the FA said they were prepared to pay whatever it takes. I doubt that is a great negotiating stance with Levy.

Rumours are Levy wants 15m compensation

[Abrak]

Ok and my guess is Moyes.

Levy's greatest challenge over the next 5 years is to finance and build a new stadium for the club.

So 'sensible' 'young enough' 'wont get you relegated' ' reliable' 'boring' 'steady' and 'stable' will appeal to the financiers. Basically I see him as the 'lowest risk' option as a manager. And with a 400m project that is what people are looking for. Levy can also argue with the supporters that his lack of success is down to a lack of resources while he can tell the bankers he can achieve a degree of success without resources.

But Levy is not very predictable, so who knows.

[carmine]

Ok and my guess is Moyes.

Levy's greatest challenge over the next 5 years is to finance and build a new stadium for the club.

So 'sensible' 'young enough' 'wont get you relegated' ' reliable' 'boring' 'steady' and 'stable' will appeal to the financiers. Basically I see him as the 'lowest risk' option as a manager. And with a 400m project that is what people are looking for. Levy can also argue with the supporters that his lack of success is down to a lack of resources while he can tell the bankers he can achieve a degree of success without resources.

But Levy is not very predictable, so who knows.

Yes, Moyes is always a good shout, not that i'd want him btw. My point is Deschamps also has the qualities required under future circumstances, stadium build coming up etc, but he is also a proponant of stylish football which Moyes is not. The frenchman would i feel be a popular choice amonst the WHL faithful.

Its always best to remember when discussing Levy that he's Spurs through and through. He knows what the fans want because he's one of us. I see Deschamps embracing all the qualities required.

[Abrak]

Ok and my guess is Moyes.

Levy's greatest challenge over the next 5 years is to finance and build a new stadium for the club.

So 'sensible' 'young enough' 'wont get you relegated' ' reliable' 'boring' 'steady' and 'stable' will appeal to the financiers. Basically I see him as the 'lowest risk' option as a manager. And with a 400m project that is what people are looking for. Levy can also argue with the supporters that his lack of success is down to a lack of resources while he can tell the bankers he can achieve a degree of success without resources.

But Levy is not very predictable, so who knows.

My only problem with Levy is perhaps illustrated by Alan Sugar - which is why if he is smart did he invest in the business in the first place.

Yes, Moyes is always a good shout, not that i'd want him btw. My point is Deschamps also has the qualities required under future circumstances, stadium build coming up etc, but he is also a proponant of stylish football which Moyes is not. The frenchman would i feel be a popular choice amonst the WHL faithful.

Its always best to remember when discussing Levy that he's Spurs through and through. He knows what the fans want because he's one of us. I see Deschamps embracing all the qualities required.

Yes of course. I know that Moyes would not be a popular choice. But does his football style reflect his resources?

Deschamps is foreign so simply adds risk. Levy must be focused on financing the stadium which is very difficult. If I was a Spurs supporter I would prefer Deschamps.

But Levy's position is that he must be seen to be acting in the bankers best interests not the supporters at this stage. (If you dont think that this is obvious, then consider that if he acts in the supporters best interests the extra revenue from the stadium will go into the team.) This is exactly why you cannot long term finance a stadium (well there are other reasons too).

What Spurs supporters need to realize is that what they think is in the best interests of the club might not be so. And that Levy may have to make decisions that are best for the club but might be 'unpopular' with the supporters. But Levy is certainly smart enough to realize that his decisions may well be far smarter than what the supporters think. In fact that is what makes him so smart.

You know to be a 'club' supporter and make decisions that the majority of other supporters totally disagree is not easy. But it doesnt make them wrong. And personally if I was a spurs supporter I would put my trust in Levy to do the best thing for the club than to believe in the opinion of the supporters. Simply put, Levy is a Spurs supporter through and through but he may make decisions that Spurs supporters do not agree with. I would certainly back his judgment than the opinions of Spurs supporters.

Edited February 19, 2012 by Abrak

[carmine]

Ok and my guess is Moyes.

Levy's greatest challenge over the next 5 years is to finance and build a new stadium for the club.

So 'sensible' 'young enough' 'wont get you relegated' ' reliable' 'boring' 'steady' and 'stable' will appeal to the financiers. Basically I see him as the 'lowest risk' option as a manager. And with a 400m project that is what people are looking for. Levy can also argue with the supporters that his lack of success is down to a lack of resources while he can tell the bankers he can achieve a degree of success without resources.

But Levy is not very predictable, so who knows.

My only problem with Levy is perhaps illustrated by Alan Sugar - which is why if he is smart did he invest in the business in the first place.

Yes, Moyes is always a good shout, not that i'd want him btw. My point is Deschamps also has the qualities required under future circumstances, stadium build coming up etc, but he is also a proponant of stylish football which Moyes is not. The frenchman would i feel be a popular choice amonst the WHL faithful.

Its always best to remember when discussing Levy that he's Spurs through and through. He knows what the fans want because he's one of us. I see Deschamps embracing all the qualities required.

Yes of course. I know that Moyes would not be a popular choice. But does his football style reflect his resources?

Deschamps is foreign so simply adds risk. Levy must be focused on financing the stadium which is very difficult. If I was a Spurs supporter I would prefer Deschamps.

But Levy's position is that he must be seen to be acting in the bankers best interests not the supporters at this stage. (If you dont think that this is obvious, then consider that if he acts in the supporters best interests the extra revenue from the stadium will go into the team.) This is exactly why you cannot long term finance a stadium (well there are other reasons too).

What Spurs supporters need to realize is that what they think is in the best interests of the club might not be so. And that Levy may have to make decisions that are best for the club but might be 'unpopular' with the supporters. But Levy is certainly smart enough to realize that his decisions may well be far smarter than what the supporters think. In fact that is what makes him so smart.

You know to be a 'club' supporter and make decisions that the majority of other supporters totally disagree is not easy. But it doesnt make them wrong. And personally if I was a spurs supporter I would put my trust in Levy to do the best thing for the club than to believe in the opinion of the supporters. Simply put, Levy is a Spurs supporter through and through but he may make decisions that Spurs supporters do not agree with. I would certainly back his judgment than the opinions of Spurs supporters.

You do make alot of sense here, but i'd still like levy to take an initial risk and see how it goes. Lets face it, Moyes would almost certainly still be at Everton.

The whole new reality that we are to get a new stadium and in our borugh is very exciting. I also here Levy wants to up the capacity to 60000 which has been agreed. i couldn't understand why the original plan was for only 55000

[Abrak]

You the very essence and value of Levy is that he doesnt take 'risks' - that is how he might finance the new stadium. That is why 'Moyes' adds so much value. Essentially you add value by 'not taking risk on the manager' and 'not taking risk' that Moyes will still be there in a couple of years. A bank, of course, will tell you that they are taking an enormous risk that Moyes is a safe pair of hands.

Secondly and I have mentioned this before I think (unless Lewis steps up) that you seriously underestimate how difficult it is to finance your stadium and how long it will take for the cash flow to feed through. I think supporters think 400m, 30 year debt, 5% interest, 25m a year. Then 10m naming rights and 30m incremental matchday revenues. It is nothing like that.

In order to get cash flow benefits to move forward you need to refinance your debt after 5 years. To do that you need captain sensible in charge as well as Levy.

Anyway I dont believe you can take a 'risk' on a manager and get someone to take on the 'risk' of financing your stadium.

And the main argument against Moyes is that supporters do not think he will tell you 'forward' while to finance a stadium you need a manager that you think wont take you 'backwards'.

Edited February 19, 2012 by Abrak

[smokie36]

Public funding for the new stadium is I suspect behind our lack of investment in the playing staff recently.

I hope this is sorted out by the summer as we need to spend a few quid then if we're to continue upwards...

[smokie36]

Meanwhile I hope we see Parker, Bale, Modric and Adebayor on the bench today.

[carmine]

Meanwhile I hope we see Parker, Bale, Modric and Adebayor on the bench today.

My bet would be starting with Cudicini, Rose, Dawson, Neilson Walker at the back. i'd expect livermore holding with maybe Sandro getting a run out if he's fit. Modric Bale lennon Krancjar and defoe should also take part.

[Abrak]

Public funding for the new stadium is I suspect behind our lack of investment in the playing staff recently.

I hope this is sorted out by the summer as we need to spend a few quid then if we're to continue upwards...

It was always going to be difficult for you to get public funding when you are owned by one of the top ten richest people in Britain who lives offshore.

If you look at your balance sheet you will see that all your assets are tied up in the value of your squad which is considerable. While your debt levels restrict additional financing.

Levy could have sold off excess players to finance new recruits. Or he could have sold some of his best players at very high prices to finance new recruits. He also has approximately 30m funds to play with (although that might depend on annual cash flow requirements.) What I mean by that is that Levy might currently choose to keep excess players rather than excess cash.

The problem with selling a lot of players even if they are excess to requirements is that it places pressure to reinvest the proceeds. My best guess is that he has kept a lot of flexibility for a new manager to re-arrange the squad not by having a large amount of cash around but by having the current players.

Essentially there is a lot of money to spend in Spurs not directly in the balance sheet but through the squad. And Levy would not have the squad structured as is unless it was efficient.

[Abrak]

Public funding for the new stadium is I suspect behind our lack of investment in the playing staff recently.

I hope this is sorted out by the summer as we need to spend a few quid then if we're to continue upwards...

It was always going to be difficult for you to get public funding when you are owned by one of the top ten richest people in Britain who lives offshore.

If you look at your balance sheet you will see that all your assets are tied up in the value of your squad which is considerable. While your debt levels restrict additional financing.

Levy could have sold off excess players to finance new recruits. Or he could have sold some of his best players at very high prices to finance new recruits. He also has approximately 30m funds to play with (although that might depend on annual cash flow requirements.) What I mean by that is that Levy might currently choose to keep excess players rather than excess cash.

The problem with selling a lot of players even if they are excess to requirements is that it places pressure to reinvest the proceeds. My best guess is that he has kept a lot of flexibility for a new manager to re-arrange the squad not by having a large amount of cash around but by having the current players.

Essentially there is a lot of money to spend in Spurs not directly in the balance sheet but through the squad. And Levy would not have the squad structured as is unless it was efficient.

P.S. I am implying that there is deadwood in your squad which it is totally ridiculous considering how efficient you are.

[Takeo]

Anyone know where can watch the game tonight, i seen channel 7 only showing Liverpool surprise surprise. Im sure i can stream it though

[Abrak]

I hope this is sorted out by the summer as we need to spend a few quid then if we're to continue upwards...

Honestly Smokie the idea that you can beat City by spending more is such a ridiculous concept. That is their business strategy. They know they have tons more money than you and they know the best successful end game is to get you to spend too much. (It is almost as though they have employed Readies with his must match Adebayor's salary, Modric has to be paid 150k a week etc...

Your strategy can only be to see how long they are prepared to lose huge amounts of money to win before they realize that everyone else has noticed.

But City's business plan is based on the fact that you lose by trying to spend more to compete with them. You are supposed to notice they are losing and not winning.

[MrRed]

I hope this is sorted out by the summer as we need to spend a few quid then if we're to continue upwards...

Honestly Smokie the idea that you can beat City by spending more is such a ridiculous concept. That is their business strategy. They know they have tons more money than you and they know the best successful end game is to get you to spend too much. (It is almost as though they have employed Readies with his must match Adebayor's salary, Modric has to be paid 150k a week etc...

Your strategy can only be to see how long they are prepared to lose huge amounts of money to win before they realize that everyone else has noticed.

But City's business plan is based on the fact that you lose by trying to spend more to compete with them. You are supposed to notice they are losing and not winning.

I think he is more concerned at challenging United than those noisy neghbours after all they are still the upstarts and have won nothing over the last 20 years of substance.Spurs want to be like United like everyone else does including your lot ....successful year in year out over a very long sustained period of years.

Actually i would put Spurs ahead of City on that front statistically of course,pound for pound and history wise!!

[mrbojangles]

You'll have to try much harder than that for a bite, MrRed

[Abrak]

Theoretically there must be a finite amount of money you can lose to win the PL until you realize that you have in fact won nothing at all.

If Spurs had the same salary budget as City they could theoretically add 10 players on 180k a week to their existing squad. But of course they dont. And what a totally ridiculous sport it would be if clubs only had wages they could afford.

But you do realize the whole concept is so Paris Hilton.

Edited February 19, 2012 by Abrak

[Abrak]

I hope this is sorted out by the summer as we need to spend a few quid then if we're to continue upwards...

Honestly Smokie the idea that you can beat City by spending more is such a ridiculous concept. That is their business strategy. They know they have tons more money than you and they know the best successful end game is to get you to spend too much. (It is almost as though they have employed Readies with his must match Adebayor's salary, Modric has to be paid 150k a week etc...

Your strategy can only be to see how long they are prepared to lose huge amounts of money to win before they realize that everyone else has noticed.

But City's business plan is based on the fact that you lose by trying to spend more to compete with them. You are supposed to notice they are losing and not winning.

I think he is more concerned at challenging United than those noisy neghbours after all they are still the upstarts and have won nothing over the last 20 years of substance.Spurs want to be like United like everyone else does including your lot ....successful year in year out over a very long sustained period of years.

Actually i would put Spurs ahead of City on that front statistically of course,pound for pound and history wise!!

Dont worry Red, your success was well earned by taking your supporters money and investing in your business - a very virtuous circle. Unfortunately Liverpool, as we all know is a case study in how to destroy the value you had created.

Your advantage over both Chelsea and City is that as you created success you created the value in your fan base. Chelsea and City's success was based on created losses that were justified by the 'value' they created in terms of the 'reputation of the owner'. The problem they face is the diminishing marginal utility relative to revenue of that equation. By that I mean that once City wins the PL and Mansour gains his reputation for being incredibly productive rather than just spending lots of money, he will gain little by achieving the same again while he will continue to lose a lot.

So for instance noone is that impressed with Roman losing 68m last year and not winning much. Nor will they be this year. So given that he cant impress anyone anymore, or outspend the Arabs, what exactly is the point of him losing money every year without achieving anything. Worst of all, it is possible that despite his huge cheque, people might think he is the problem rather than the answer.

[smokie36]

I hope this is sorted out by the summer as we need to spend a few quid then if we're to continue upwards...

Honestly Smokie the idea that you can beat City by spending more is such a ridiculous concept. That is their business strategy. They know they have tons more money than you and they know the best successful end game is to get you to spend too much. (It is almost as though they have employed Readies with his must match Adebayor's salary, Modric has to be paid 150k a week etc...

Your strategy can only be to see how long they are prepared to lose huge amounts of money to win before they realize that everyone else has noticed.

But City's business plan is based on the fact that you lose by trying to spend more to compete with them. You are supposed to notice they are losing and not winning.

Nah mate. I want to see us buy a couple of young strikers and a left back...maybe a right winger in Hazard which would be our biggest outlay.

Hungry young players is what we want and cheap should be the byword.

[Abrak]

I hope this is sorted out by the summer as we need to spend a few quid then if we're to continue upwards...

Honestly Smokie the idea that you can beat City by spending more is such a ridiculous concept. That is their business strategy. They know they have tons more money than you and they know the best successful end game is to get you to spend too much. (It is almost as though they have employed Readies with his must match Adebayor's salary, Modric has to be paid 150k a week etc...

Your strategy can only be to see how long they are prepared to lose huge amounts of money to win before they realize that everyone else has noticed.

But City's business plan is based on the fact that you lose by trying to spend more to compete with them. You are supposed to notice they are losing and not winning.

Nah mate. I want to see us buy a couple of young strikers and a left back...maybe a right winger in Hazard which would be our biggest outlay.

Hungry young players is what we want and cheap should be the byword.

Yeah you want Hazard. Carmine wants you to take a punt on the manager. Alfie wants to render your financial business to a spare file while I would like Redknapp to run your business to at least show him in 2 short years why things would not be the same. You all want a new stadium within 5 years. Redknapp's a genius. You are backed by a multibillionaire who provides you with the square root of fuc_k all.

You have performed better than any team in the last 8 years the way I calculate things.

It does slightly bug me that Levy gets no credit. But in my view your biggest problem is your owner Lewis who appears to be your multibillionaire backer that actually wont give you a penny. If you were going to throw money at this business you should throw it at Levy. And all the big players are putting money into the business. Spurs have paid dividends but Arsenal are accused of being financial wanke_rs. So he should put up or sell out. Look you without a doubt have the most efficient operation in the business so therefore it should be backed by capital.

All you actually need is 30m a year to make the whole competition extremely interesting.

[carmine]

what a crap game. Another fixture for march that we don't need. Real hoof the ball upfield rubbish (or as Dev would say 'free flowing football ) and a constant worry that they might nick a winner from a corner or a free kick.

anyways well done to stevenage, no mugs and deserved the replay.

[MrRed]

I hope this is sorted out by the summer as we need to spend a few quid then if we're to continue upwards...

Honestly Smokie the idea that you can beat City by spending more is such a ridiculous concept. That is their business strategy. They know they have tons more money than you and they know the best successful end game is to get you to spend too much. (It is almost as though they have employed Readies with his must match Adebayor's salary, Modric has to be paid 150k a week etc...

Your strategy can only be to see how long they are prepared to lose huge amounts of money to win before they realize that everyone else has noticed.

But City's business plan is based on the fact that you lose by trying to spend more to compete with them. You are supposed to notice they are losing and not winning.

I think he is more concerned at challenging United than those noisy neghbours after all they are still the upstarts and have won nothing over the last 20 years of substance.Spurs want to be like United like everyone else does including your lot ....successful year in year out over a very long sustained period of years.

Actually i would put Spurs ahead of City on that front statistically of course,pound for pound and history wise!!

Dont worry Red, your success was well earned by taking your supporters money and investing in your business - a very virtuous circle. Unfortunately Liverpool, as we all know is a case study in how to destroy the value you had created.

Your advantage over both Chelsea and City is that as you created success you created the value in your fan base. Chelsea and City's success was based on created losses that were justified by the 'value' they created in terms of the 'reputation of the owner'. The problem they face is the diminishing marginal utility relative to revenue of that equation. By that I mean that once City wins the PL and Mansour gains his reputation for being incredibly productive rather than just spending lots of money, he will gain little by achieving the same again while he will continue to lose a lot.

So for instance noone is that impressed with Roman losing 68m last year and not winning much. Nor will they be this year. So given that he cant impress anyone anymore, or outspend the Arabs, what exactly is the point of him losing money every year without achieving anything. Worst of all, it is possible that despite his huge cheque, people might think he is the problem rather than the answer.

Good post Abby,even washing money through so called football clubs becomes boring if you are not getting it clean in the end.

Still i am looking forward to the next two or three years with anticipation of the new mega wonder club from Eastlands maybe they will be as big as Barcelona and Manchester United one day?....some how i doubt it even if they win a title or two??

[MrRed]

Apoligise Carmine.....not a bad performance yesterday what with all them injuries!

That Stevenage full back played well....had Bale in his pocket!

[carmine]

Apoligise Carmine.....not a bad performance yesterday what with all them injuries!

That Stevenage full back played well....had Bale in his pocket!

Actually we started as a 3-5-2 and Bale was playing centrally and didn't come into much contact with their right back but nice try.

However what i would say that is more noteworthy is that this was a prime example of wobbly chops having no idea of tactics. he literally had no idea how to break them dowm. they were well worthy of the draw and if we played an extra 30 mins fergie time it would still have been 0-0

Anyways, i'm sure you prefer thursday nights channel 5 Red.

Edited February 20, 2012 by carmine

[Abrak]

Well you are right in one sense. Mansour has so much money that he wont go away or lose interest until he has won the PL. After he has done that I wonder what he will get from losing money every year.

But Man U's reality is this. In 2000/01 you were the largest club in the world earning 45m euro of revenues more than the second largest. Now Real Madrid is the largest with 90m more revenue every year while Barcelona have 50m more additional revenues than you.

So ManU are in fact as big as Bayern Munich and Barcelona and Real Madrid are considerably bigger.

And the likes of Mansour are not trying to create a club bigger than yours only to show that he alone is bigger than your club.

[carmine]

Well you are right in one sense. Mansour has so much money that he wont go away or lose interest until he has won the PL. After he has done that I wonder what he will get from losing money every year.

But Man U's reality is this. In 2000/01 you were the largest club in the world earning 45m euro of revenues more than the second largest. Now Real Madrid is the largest with 90m more revenue every year while Barcelona have 50m more additional revenues than you.

So ManU are in fact as big as Bayern Munich and Barcelona and Real Madrid are considerably bigger.

And the likes of Mansour are not trying to create a club bigger than yours only to show that he alone is bigger than your club.

Are you aware this is the Tottenham thread?

[mrbojangles]

Mansour has so much money that he wont go away or lose interest until he has won the PL. After he has done that I wonder what he will get from losing money every year.

Abs, you keep on going on about this. Mansour has already stated that his initial strategy was fast tracked, rather than buying the odd player here and there and creeping up the table year on year. In effect he was just investing into City what all the other teams had been doing for many years and we hadn't. He was simply allowing us to play catch up and quickly. He will not and cannot be spending big again like he has done previously.

One of his main strategies was to buy a club that had potential and realise that potential. He's not an idiot and sees this as a business. One thing for sure is that he has enhanced City's status in the middle-east. When I first got here, there weren't many City fans but City is a big name here now because we are owned by one of their own.

Edit:- Sorry Spurs fans for talking about this on your thread.

[carmine]

Mansour has so much money that he wont go away or lose interest until he has won the PL. After he has done that I wonder what he will get from losing money every year.

Abs, you keep on going on about this. Mansour has already stated that his initial strategy was fast tracked, rather than buying the odd player here and there and creeping up the table year on year. In effect he was just investing into City what all the other teams had been doing for many years and we hadn't. He was simply allowing us to play catch up and quickly. He will not and cannot be spending big again like he has done previously.

One of his main strategies was to buy a club that had potential and realise that potential. He's not an idiot and sees this as a business. One thing for sure is that he has enhanced City's status in the middle-east. When I first got here, there weren't many City fans but City is a big name here now because we are owned by one of their own.

Edit:- Sorry Spurs fans for talking about this on your thread.

To be honest after last nights game theres precious little to talk about!

[Abrak]

Mansour has so much money that he wont go away or lose interest until he has won the PL. After he has done that I wonder what he will get from losing money every year.

Abs, you keep on going on about this. Mansour has already stated that his initial strategy was fast tracked, rather than buying the odd player here and there and creeping up the table year on year. In effect he was just investing into City what all the other teams had been doing for many years and we hadn't. He was simply allowing us to play catch up and quickly. He will not and cannot be spending big again like he has done previously.

One of his main strategies was to buy a club that had potential and realise that potential. He's not an idiot and sees this as a business. One thing for sure is that he has enhanced City's status in the middle-east. When I first got here, there weren't many City fans but City is a big name here now because we are owned by one of their own.

Edit:- Sorry Spurs fans for talking about this on your thread.

To be fair I havent gone on about this for a couple of months but I do understand his business plan.

It is based on.....

1) Losses created are made up by the value enhancement to reputation

2) His cost of capital is actually zero. If you think the risk free rate is say 30 year UST yields you dont understand that 'risk free' is actually an oxymoron.

3) His strategy is to spend more than others. Theoretically the 'leader' is ManU who have an actual cost of capital and a known amount of revenues. It makes no sense for ManU to outspend him because his cost of capital is lower.

4) So he has a simple a pretty predictable strategy to become 'leader'. And he also knows that like a Chagall the actual value of being a leader in sport is unknown.

5) Your statement 'He will not and cannot be spending big again like he has done previously.' is simply wrong. He can spend as big again because he has a lot of money. I accept that it is a business as long as you accept the business is enhancing his reputation rather than making money.

[rijit]

Thought that we were no better than stevenage yesterday, they did everything that they needed to do barring score. IMO They deserved the draw and the extra money from the replay will im sure will help them push on, They were a v good advert for 1st division football. On a lighter note Forget all the millions we've spent on players we could just get a dodgy pitch it's a great leveler. Oh and ABRAK , SOME GREAT POSTS'