- Nov 8, 2004
- 12,647
- 15,180
I'm no fan of exploitation, but I can't agree that £10-£20m pa is small beer or a sign of penny-pinching. In any financing model that type of revenue is likely to be valued at up to 10X face value, so between £100 & £200m. Possibly more. That's enough to cover 25% of the stadium costs on its own and will probably have been a key condition to securing the level of finance required.
I know lots of people don't believe that Spurs will increase player expenditure in line with revenues, and we'll have to wait and see, but if we want to have any chance of competing at the next level up we have to expect this sort of thing. The realistic alternatives were either a lower-spec stadium which, by the way, would have been no easier to finance because of the reduced revenues it would have generated, or pay for a higher space stadium by reducing the footballing budget, which we should hope the club never took seriously.
I wish it we're possible to follow the German model but it simply isn't, in the UK.
Why is it not possible to keep ST for loyal supporters at a very reasonable price in the UK??
You are talking nonsense of course it is possible but the fact is no owners etc are willing to do so.
Also the football authorities in this country are so spineless and the Premier League are so uber money driven
I imagine this is the same type of argument as to why we cant pay the bankers much much less in bonuses because they will all leave and go elsewhere
Well let them fuck off somewhere else . It would also be lovely to keep football for normal working people and not just Oligarchs and the super rich as a play thing and something they can dip in and out of when they choose
Last edited: