What's new

New Stadium Details And Discussions

Lee82

Member
Oct 3, 2015
96
136
We’d have gotten more funding from the bank as well as kicked in more ourselves. It doesn’t do the banks any good to let a construction project (especially one as specific as this) fall incomplete. It’s not like they can call this project in default and sell it to someone else. Who else is going to buy this thing? Not like there’s a huge market out there for a 3/4 finished stadium!

If we’ve borrowed more money from the banks then I would have expected to hear about it as any large scale city borrowing if often reported on straight away in the financial press. A few extra hundred million for a large scale construction project in London wouldn’t go unreported surely. When we originally borrowed for the project it was reported on and when we refinanced last year, it was also reported on. The media claiming that costs have rocketed to £1bn don’t seem to add up to me. There’s no way the club could just cover the costs and we don’t appear to have borrowed anymore money from what I can tell. Whether this can be arranged confidentially I’m not sure.

The only over solution is that Lewis has chucked in money but I am highly doubtful that he would have done so.
 

Lee82

Member
Oct 3, 2015
96
136
Papers keep giving this Billion figure , not a financial genius but this was the last statement on finances I can find https://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news-archive-1/club-announcement-new-stadium-scheme-financing/

Mr Levy must be confident of our financial position giving lucrative contracts to Poch , Harry & Co. but recent stadium setback could have financial implications.

Indeed Harry. This is what I don’t understand. This was the last time it was reported that we had borrowed money and in total we must have borrowed around £500m. There have been no reports of borrowing since and I would be surprised it the club had managed to find £500m of their own to put into the build to make it up to the reported £1bn. I can only assume that either a) the papers are massively wrong, b) Lewis had put in money or c) further borrowing has been kept quiet which is very unusual for large scale financing.
 

Lilbaz

Just call me Baz
Apr 1, 2005
41,363
74,893
Indeed Harry. This is what I don’t understand. This was the last time it was reported that we had borrowed money and in total we must have borrowed around £500m. There have been no reports of borrowing since and I would be surprised it the club had managed to find £500m of their own to put into the build to make it up to the reported £1bn. I can only assume that either a) the papers are massively wrong, b) Lewis had put in money or c) further borrowing has been kept quiet which is very unusual for large scale financing.

You forget we have already paid hundreds of millions for the stadium. We have basically an overdraft with the banks where we can draw hundreds more if needed.
 

WorcesterTHFC

Well-Known Member
May 4, 2016
1,783
2,553
No more informative than all the twitter rumours tbh. I might be really stupid but if they project has cost £1bn to date where has the other money come from considering our loan is only £350m ? Tbh we should have stayed at Wembley for 2 seasons, nobody would have said a thing. If there’s any truth in these rumours we should just announce Wembley for the season ASAP. It kills all these over dramatic stories dead and we can just concentrate on football.
Maybe my memory's playing tricks, but I'm sure that a few years ago the club was saying that its expectation or intention was that we would spend 2 complete seasons away from Tottenham. I'm sure someone will put me right if I'm mistaken.
 

parj

NDombelly ate all the pies
Jul 27, 2003
3,624
5,954
Maybe my memory's playing tricks, but I'm sure that a few years ago the club was saying that its expectation or intention was that we would spend 2 complete seasons away from Tottenham. I'm sure someone will put me right if I'm mistaken.

You are indeed very correct
 

punky

Gone
Sep 23, 2008
7,485
5,403
Papers keep giving this Billion figure , not a financial genius but this was the last statement on finances I can find https://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news-archive-1/club-announcement-new-stadium-scheme-financing/

Mr Levy must be confident of our financial position giving lucrative contracts to Poch , Harry & Co. but recent stadium setback could have financial implications.

The £1bn figure - which the club has always disputed - includes the hotel, extreme sports complex, medical centre, etc. All of which will generate significant revenues of themselves.

The initial cost of the stadium itself was £400m but I think everyone knows it will come over that, what with Brexit fears, overtime, and the usual problems with major construction. £400m to £750m seems the best guesss, but I think, when Donna Cullen said the other day abotu 20% cost on materials from the EU and overtime, it will be closer to the £400m and not £750m.

Looking at the link you posted, as of 31st May 2017 (so end of the WHL season), they spent £340m which includes the land, planning and legal costs (not reflected in the £400m figure). So back out some of that (I know the land was £40m, even before Archway), so guess maybe £60m, brings us to £280m. It's hard to say how complete the stadium was at May 2017. Although heavy construction is the biggest cost of your project. So if you so the budget was 50% spent at that point, that gives us £560m projected total (which sounds right to me). If you are more pessimistic and say it was a 1/3rd spent, that gives us £840m, still way under £1bn.
 

worcestersauce

"I'm no optimist I'm just a prisoner of hope
Jan 23, 2006
26,946
45,205
You are indeed very correct
Correct possibly but not very correct, two years at Wembley was one of the possible options considered as apparently was Milton Keynes as was one year at wembley which is eventually what we went for, I'm not sure we were going for two years and then changed our mind though.
 

mickdale

Well-Known Member
Apr 5, 2016
1,069
1,409
fair play to Levy and co for nearly getting us in for the Liverpool game - sparks maybe was a bridge too far
 

yiddopaul

Well-Known Member
Dec 28, 2005
3,444
6,723
Just finished watching Chris Cowlin's latest vid. The dissapointment in his voice is really noticeable. But – and this will controversial – I wouldn't be disappointed if the club said we're going to play at Wembley for the rest of the season. We're pretty settled there, we play well there. It feels like we're trying to do waaaay too much, and rushing into a 80-90% finished stadium which will disrupt us even more. I say, lets bite the bullet, finish the stadium off properly so it's all ready and shiny to go next season. Crack on with this season, get CL again.

I'm dissapointed, but look at the bigger picture. We should be proud of what we've accomplished in the 15 months since WHL stood there. But, as it turned out, just too big of an ask to have it finished on time.
 

Giovanni

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2012
2,587
3,614
Just finished watching Chris Cowlin's latest vid. The dissapointment in his voice is really noticeable. But – and this will controversial – I wouldn't be disappointed if the club said we're going to play at Wembley for the rest of the season. We're pretty settled there, we play well there. It feels like we're trying to do waaaay too much, and rushing into a 80-90% finished stadium which will disrupt us even more. I say, lets bite the bullet, finish the stadium off properly so it's all ready and shiny to go next season. Crack on with this season, get CL again.

I'm dissapointed, but look at the bigger picture. We should be proud of what we've accomplished in the 15 months since WHL stood there. But, as it turned out, just too big of an ask to have it finished on time.


I agree to a point but i dont see how anybody can make such statement without knowing the extent of the problems and how much there is to be done to complete it.
Is there really enough work left to justify saying "we will wait until next season?" If the answer is yes then dare i say the stadium will be over budget by a ridiculous amount. (To the point where i would be worried about us financially)

Secondly as a season ticket holder i would be feel abit dissapointed. Now i dont mind it running late and even if they said our first game will 100% be start of 2019 but to suddenly go from sept 15th to next season is too much! Id rather get in a use this season to bed in and then go hard next season.
 

marion52

Well-Known Member
Dec 10, 2006
1,616
2,290
If they suddenly announced that I wouldn’t be happy.
They would have to refund all ST and reissue for Wembley, an absolute nightmare.
Much better, as has been said, have half/three quarters of a season to become familiar with the stadium. In much the same way as playing CL at Wembley the seasonal before we moved there.
 

whitesocks

The past means nothing. This is a message for life
Jan 16, 2014
4,652
5,738
A comment on Chris Cowlin's latest video was interesting...

He and the FA made a binding legal agreement to play more home games at Wembley until the New Stadium is match-ready. The ball is now firmly in the FA's court to honour the agreement and solve any problems arising from fixture congestion caused by construction delays.
It is hard to believe this option we took out wouldn't have specified the dates Wembley might not be available. And when the dates hardened, that they weren't passed on to the club/premier-league fixture compilers. It is very basic stuff.

But I'm not sure how much flexibility there is in the schedule anyway. Maybe we requested an away that weekend and the computer say no. If it had been clear from the start that we were playing at Wembley for another season, we could have had exactly the same problem with this fixture.

If we have an nfl franchise at NWHL, clashes like this could be a reoccurring feature. With the money the TV companies are paying, they want the fixtures to fit their schedule. The same goes for both sports. Should be fun.
 

nailsy

SC Supporter
Jul 24, 2005
30,536
46,630
The £1bn figure - which the club has always disputed - includes the hotel, extreme sports complex, medical centre, etc. All of which will generate significant revenues of themselves.

The initial cost of the stadium itself was £400m but I think everyone knows it will come over that, what with Brexit fears, overtime, and the usual problems with major construction. £400m to £750m seems the best guesss, but I think, when Donna Cullen said the other day abotu 20% cost on materials from the EU and overtime, it will be closer to the £400m and not £750m.

Looking at the link you posted, as of 31st May 2017 (so end of the WHL season), they spent £340m which includes the land, planning and legal costs (not reflected in the £400m figure). So back out some of that (I know the land was £40m, even before Archway), so guess maybe £60m, brings us to £280m. It's hard to say how complete the stadium was at May 2017. Although heavy construction is the biggest cost of your project. So if you so the budget was 50% spent at that point, that gives us £560m projected total (which sounds right to me). If you are more pessimistic and say it was a 1/3rd spent, that gives us £840m, still way under £1bn.

Poch mentioned that it was costing £1bn recently so the press are just going to keep using that figure now.
 

sosua

Active Member
Sep 6, 2014
46
165
I'm sure Levy wouldn't mind it being called the £1bn stadium (even thou it's no where near that figure). The association at that figure is marketing/promotional bonanza.

Certainly better than a measly £450m stadium ?
 

FibreOpticJesus

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2005
2,812
5,040
I’m sure someone else who deals with theses sort of building contracts has said that, penalty clauses are infact illegal now days and instead we put in incentive clauses. One would have obviously been for the stadium to be finished on time which Mace clearly won’t be receiving.

No Liquidateted And Ascertained Damages are not to be penalties but are meant to be an ascesment of the likely cost for failure to hand over the building on the completion date. It is usually stated as a week or part of figure or it could be based on games missed or a ground unavailablity charge.
 

DanielCHillier

Well-Known Member
Feb 26, 2014
2,036
4,029
Just finished watching Chris Cowlin's latest vid. The dissapointment in his voice is really noticeable. But – and this will controversial – I wouldn't be disappointed if the club said we're going to play at Wembley for the rest of the season. We're pretty settled there, we play well there. It feels like we're trying to do waaaay too much, and rushing into a 80-90% finished stadium which will disrupt us even more. I say, lets bite the bullet, finish the stadium off properly so it's all ready and shiny to go next season. Crack on with this season, get CL again.

I'm dissapointed, but look at the bigger picture. We should be proud of what we've accomplished in the 15 months since WHL stood there. But, as it turned out, just too big of an ask to have it finished on time.
If we hadn't had this fire alarm issue, we would've been moving into the stadium at around 90%, but now with this additional delay every other trade has extra time to complete and snag everything, so it's no longer a rushed job. I'm sure some of the other sub-contractors have seen this as a blessing is disguise.
 

ceebee

New Member
Apr 3, 2004
11
15
No Liquidateted And Ascertained Damages are not to be penalties but are meant to be an ascesment of the likely cost for failure to hand over the building on the completion date. It is usually stated as a week or part of figure or it could be based on games missed or a ground unavailablity charge.
Spelling 0/10
 
Top