Daily Express - Kelmsley plots takeover bid

[rez9000]

I think a lot of the distaste (is that the right word?) toward Kelmsley is not just based around the Ramos affair but also other stuff about PK. His close relationship with Harry Redknapp for one. Even really tenuous stuff like his general demeanour on The Apprentice has been cited as reasons to hate him (myself included).

I just feel that his general manner and approach is slightly suspect. The big aspect of it for me though is the Ramos meeting. Deliberate or accidental there is nothing in the meeting that mitigates Kemlsey in any way.

 

[worcestersauce]

I think a lot of the distaste (is that the right word?) toward Kelmsley is not just based around the Ramos affair but also other stuff about PK. His close relationship with Harry Redknapp for one. Even really tenuous stuff like his general demeanour on The Apprentice has been cited as reasons to hate him (myself included).

I just feel that his general manner and approach is slightly suspect. The big aspect of it for me though is the Ramos meeting. Deliberate or accidental there is nothing in the meeting that mitigates Kemlsey in any way.

Unless the Ramos meeting came about because Ramos is coming to the end of his contract and therefore negotiating so if the board feel that he is a better coach more able to take us to the top where PK wants us to be then I think he is duty bound to to meet him.
Unfortunately the meeting got out into the public domain and only that made Martin Jols position difficult, although if Kemsley didn't go public he can't really be blamed.
Not sure why Harry Redknapp is a bogey man but I do understand your feeling about him PK personally which I share up to a point, he gives the impression of being a wide boy, other than that I just think he's getting a bit of a bad press.



I still don't know why it's a plot and not a plan!

 

[rez9000]

Unless the Ramos meeting came about because Ramos is coming to the end of his contract and therefore negotiating so if the board feel that he is a better coach more able to take us to the top where PK wants us to be then I think he is duty bound to to meet him.
Unfortunately the meeting got out into the public domain and only that made Martin Jols position difficult, although if Kemsley didn't go public he can't really be blamed.
Not sure why Harry Redknapp is a bogey man but I do understand your feeling about him PK personally which I share up to a point, he gives the impression of being a wide boy, other than that I just think he's getting a bit of a bad press.

I agree with the wideboy analysis and I think it's quite accurate and actually had a bearin gon the Ramos meeting in that he wasn't discreet enough. Even if every other aspect of the meeting was set up by Ramos or his reps (not that I necessarily believe that, of course), PK should have had enough nous to ask for a more private setting.

I still don't know why it's a plot and not a plan!

Because he's EVIIIIIIL!!! :wink:

 

[yanno]

My concern may be dismissed by many as old-fashioned, but here it is. And mods, I'm writing this very carefully!

----------------------------

It's a matter of public record that Kemsley is in charge of property developments for Spurs, and that he is both paid and incentivized for this work. Here's a link to Daniel Levy discussing it:
http://www.spursodyssey.com/0405/dl081104.html

Summary of Levy's comments: "Paul Kemsley receives remuneration from the club for his work in relation to the Academy and Stadium issues. The deal whereby Mr Kemsley's company stands to benefit if achieving certain results in the property transactions was approved by the club's independent directors, and is separate from his salaried work."

--------------------------------------

Investigative journalist, Tom Bower, in his book "Broken Dreams" alleged that Harry Redknapp was incentivized by West Ham to get the best possible transfer prices for their "golden generation" of young talent. Redknapp has not sued Bower. Here's a quote from David Mellor's Times' review:
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/article882286.ece

"Harry Redknapp, whose iffy tenure at West Ham was marked by an astonishing 134 inbound transfers in seven years, provides the reason why the temptation to accept inducements proves overwhelming to some managers (although the most that Bower can prove against him is that he took £300,000 from his chairman as a reward for the transfer of Rio Ferdinand to Leeds, an example of football’s easy-come-easy-go attitude to money, also typified by Redknapp’s alleged comments that he was underpaid on £1m a year): “No one gives a monkey’s about you once your career is over, so in my view you should make all the bucks while you can.”"

---------------------

Now this amounts to financial "incentivization" of people who are already salaried to do their job. Call me old-fashioned, but when you're already employed and paid to do something, I don't think you should then get a percentage on top. And I certainly wouldn't be happy for this mentality to become dominant at Spurs. Eg for our coach or DoF to get a percentage of the transfer fee if they get above a certain price for selling Berbatov.

It may be legal and approved by the non-execs, but for me decisions should be based on what is best for the club. Full stop.

 

[Rocksuperstar]

Yanno, you seem to be on the bug for this kind of investigating - how about the Dein/Wenger investment's in that Belgian club, buying players cheap from outside of the EU, then Woolwich "paying" that Belgian club more to buy them same players once they had... whats the word, naturalised? It was all based around work permits being easy to obtain in Belgium, and after a certain amount of time employed in Europe then they wouldn't require a further permit to play in England...

Can't remember exactly, but simplifying - to invest in one company that buys a product for X amount, then a company owned by the same people buy that same product from them for XX amount - does that not basically amount to money laundering? :shrug:

sorry to go OT, but it's something that was never really cleared up, in my humble opinion...

 

[yanno]

Rocksuperstar - I'm not saying that any of this is illegal. In fact, if it's approved by non-executive directors, then it's prima facie all above board and legal.

But then there's a fine line between tax avoidance and tax dodging - you have to be able to afford a certain class of tax lawyer to be advised how to channel your funds through Switzerland and various offshore tax havens. And what I don't like is the culture it creates, that already rich people should get paid a percentage on top for simply doing their job.

I don't know enough about the details of the Arse's Belgian linkup to comment. But being a club full of bankers (I said bbbbbankers), they know a thing or two about wads of money...

 

[sloth]

Kemsley is the flabbermouth that ITKs frequently quote when it comes to rumours destabilising staff and players. He can't keep his mouth shut it seems. He possibly wants Redknapp, which is another reason to be concerned.

He came out with a tissue of lies when caught in Spain. It's worth also noting that while Commolli and Levy were smart enough to slip out the back way, it was Kemsley and Alexander who blundered straight into the sting. It's Kemsley who by all accounts has been whispering against Jol and it makes you wonder whether he was complicit in those photos. Did Ramos' agent use Kelmsey's stupidity to engineer his sting?

Finally, the manner of the lie he told makes me think he thinks the rest of the world is stupid. He's undoubtedly successful, but while success often requires brains it also sometimes involves animal cunning and willingness to shaft the other guy. Property development is a funny old game and there are plenty of idiots who've made a success of it over the years. For every one that makes it perhaps ten fall by the wayside, but those ten took the same chance that the one did, not always but often making it in property development is a question of balls and blind luck. Kelmsey comes across as an old school Fat Freddy Shepherd type character. He's a Spurs fan, but stories of him winding up the Arsenal board and all the rest of it make me think he's not too bright, he thinks too much of himself and owning us would be as much a vanity project as anything else.

It's for these reasons I hope he gets no closer to the chairmanship than he already is.

 

[yanno]

sloth - why are you convinced that Ramosgate was an agent's sting? A genuine question.

Also, if it was, then was the agent's motivation solely to get Ramos a raise?

And, if Jol goes (for whatever reason), do you think we have any chance of getting Ramos, if we still wanted him? Or does his agent have other plans for Juande?

 

[sloth]

sloth - why are you convinced that Ramosgate was an agent's sting? A genuine question.

Also, if it was, then was the agent's motivation solely to get Ramos a raise?

And, if Jol goes (for whatever reason), do you think we have any chance of getting Ramos, if we still wanted him? Or does his agent have other plans for Juande?

How would local Spanish journalists know who the f*** Alexander and Kemsley are without being tipped off? They're not well known figures, they're not famous. Why would they have just happened to be hanging around that hotel at that time? Who told them who to take the pictures of?

I presume that it was set up by the Spanish side because despite Ramos being offered everything he could have wanted and more he didn't sign. It sounded as if our side was totally confident he would and this is why I wonder if Levy and Comolli were there genuinely to sound him out but were undecided and Kelmsey agreed to leave through the front exit and be snapped (otherwise why would DL and DC leave through the rear exit?) in order to force the issue.

Lots of speculation in the latter part of my reasoning but the first part is the explanation that makes most sense. I'd be interested to hear any other reasoning however.

 

[yanno]

I presume that it was set up by the Spanish side because despite Ramos being offered everything he could have wanted and more he didn't sign. It sounded as if our side was totally confident he would and this is why I wonder if Levy and Comolli were there genuinely to sound him out but were undecided and Kelmsey agreed to leave through the front exit and be snapped (otherwise why would DL and DC leave through the rear exit?) in order to force the issue.

Were Levy and Comolli in the Alfonso XIII as well? Sorry, I must have missed this as I thought only Kemsley and Alexander were definitely reported as being in Seville?

If Levy and Comolli were there, AND managed to avoid the paparazzi, then that throws an entirely different light on matters...

 

[sloth]

Were Levy and Comolli in the Alfonso XIII as well? Sorry, I must have missed this as I thought only Kemsley and Alexander were definitely reported as being in Seville?

If Levy and Comolli were there, AND managed to avoid the paparazzi, then that throws an entirely different light on matters...

There were a couple of reports saying as much, but no way of knowing of course.

The main reason for believing it was a sting however was the first bit of reasoning I offered. How do you think the journalists got there and knew who they were looking for? Kemsley and Alexander are not well known figures even in this country so how would a couple of local journalists first just happen to be wandering past and second know who to photograph?

 

[yanno]

How do you think the journalists got there and knew who they were looking for? Kemsley and Alexander are not well known figures even in this country so how would a couple of local journalists first just happen to be wandering past and second know who to photograph?

As I've said before, all swanky hotels have staff who supplement their wages by tipping off local journos & paparazzi about newsworthy guests.

Now, I agree that Kemsley & Alexander were definitely not recognizable, and probably not of any interest to the hotel staff. Until, that is, Ramos turned up. Then the hotel staff were always going to get very interested. If they then see Ramos (and his agent) with these two English guys, a member of hotel staff can easily check the guest register, and give the name of these cockneys to a hack who can quickly get those names checked out. The identities of the cockneys can even be confirmed after the paparazzi have their pictures.

So, I still think there are three main options as to what actually happened. You're entirely correct it could well have been a sting - with Ramos' agent alerting the press to the fact his client was going to be at the hotel meeting some "interesting" people.

But I also think it's possible that Kemsley deliberately allowed himself to be seen with Ramos - with the aim of pissing Jol off and helping him out of the door.

The third option is that Kemsley was simply reckless - having made it to Seville, he could have arranged to have been picked up in a private car by Ramos' agent for a completely clandestine meeting. As a journalist, I've often met sources who are very cagey about being seen with a journo. There are plenty of easy ways of minimizing your risks of getting spotted.

I also think this matters. Firstly, in my judgement, even if it was an agent sting, Kemsley was reckless in agreeing to meet Ramos at the Alfonso XIII hotel. And secondly, we really do need to know why Ramos turned us down - especially since I think he still only has a contract with Sevilla till the end of the season.

Btw - I don't remember reading any reports claiming Levy and Comolli were there. But if they were, obviously as above, that's hugely important in trying to understand what happened that night.

 

[sloth]

As I've said before, all swanky hotels have staff who supplement their wages by tipping off local journos & paparazzi about newsworthy guests.

Now, I agree that Kemsley & Alexander were definitely not recognizable, and probably not of any interest to the hotel staff. Until, that is, Ramos turned up. Then the hotel staff were always going to get very interested. If they then see Ramos (and his agent) with these two English guys, a member of hotel staff can easily check the guest register, and give the name of these cockneys to a hack who can quickly get those names checked out. The identities of the cockneys can even be confirmed after the paparazzi have their pictures.

True, I hadn't considered that.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

I've got to say that I would be absoloutely amazed if Kemsley was there without the full knowledge (and instruction) of Levy. I also think personally it may well have been engineered by our side to back Ramos into an untenable position.

The fact that Alexander (who is the clubs legal bod I believe) was out there as well suggests this was not the initiative of Kemsley, and I thnk it highly likely that he was just the bag man who took a bullet for Levy on this. Which if true shows the bloke's loyalty to Levy/THFC and willingness to sacrifice his own rep for the cause.

As I said at the time, personally I would be fucking disapointed if the club weren't trying to hire the best manager available and Ramos is one of the few out there (potentially) available that IMO would have offered a definate step up from Jol.

I think if most are honest they are basing their opinion of kemsley on a 5 minute slot in The Apprentice". He does carry himself in that ballsy forthright toe rag made good way which isn't often endearing to the masses (who are mostly toe rags wishing they could make good).

My only reservations about Kensley are:

1. I really like the way levy runs the club from top to bottom (with the exception of the fucking shit catering in the South Upper)

2. If he is to go I would kind of want some shit for brains multi billionaire who is going to buy Pirlo, Gattuso, Kaka, Ronaldhino etc and give us the kind of jismic transfer fest that Chelsea (the undeserving wankstains who can't even fill their ground for a CL game) have enjoyed.

 

[Rocksuperstar]

So many people so sure that Ramos would be able to take us to the next step, despite him having no more an impressive track record than our current manager, and no experience in the English game at all. :shrug: I just don't get how everyone is so convinced Ramos is this managerial god when he's actually not done anything of any real significance. Has Ramos had any experience in England at all? Ever come to watch a match? Ever even watched a Premier League match on the tellybox you think? :shrug: Where Martin has played here before (granted, the old 1st div.) and, for me, has proven he has what it takes to advance the club.

Sadly though it seems that whoever is the main brain behind the move for Ramos is a labels over performance man. Maybe it was the fact we went out of the waffa to Sevilla, maybe that stuck in someone upstairs' craw, so they wanted to take the manager of the team that, basically, cheated their way to a victory over us? Hmm, no ta.

If the whole thing was Kemsleys idea then it's just a sign that he hasn't got the clubs success at the top of his wish list, but he has the clubs profile up there. Can you raise the profile of your club without achieving success? I don't think so. I think it makes you the major also ran who every pity's. Trying so hard to be like the grown ups but aww, bless, never quite making it.

Maybe Levy and Lewis do want to sell up and Kemsley's been given a hush hush mission to raise the clubs profile as high as he can, upset the staff that could be a problem in any takeover bid and basically give them a slightly easier exit strategy. Having a feisty manager on board would put off some potential buyers so, upset him until he quits, or at least is seen to leave of his own accord, then it leaves the board without shit all over their hands. I dunno, i'm not privy to that kind of information, but it seems Kemsley is good at doing the jobs he's given, i just wonder if them jobs aren't all a bit too close to being ruthless business oriented with no apparent thought for the club further than the bank balance.

 

[Bill_Oddie]

My concern may be dismissed by many as old-fashioned, but here it is. And mods, I'm writing this very carefully!

----------------------------

It's a matter of public record that Kemsley is in charge of property developments for Spurs, and that he is both paid and incentivized for this work. Here's a link to Daniel Levy discussing it:
http://www.spursodyssey.com/0405/dl081104.html

Summary of Levy's comments: "Paul Kemsley receives remuneration from the club for his work in relation to the Academy and Stadium issues. The deal whereby Mr Kemsley's company stands to benefit if achieving certain results in the property transactions was approved by the club's independent directors, and is separate from his salaried work."

--------------------------------------

Investigative journalist, Tom Bower, in his book "Broken Dreams" alleged that Harry Redknapp was incentivized by West Ham to get the best possible transfer prices for their "golden generation" of young talent. Redknapp has not sued Bower. Here's a quote from David Mellor's Times' review:
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/article882286.ece

"Harry Redknapp, whose iffy tenure at West Ham was marked by an astonishing 134 inbound transfers in seven years, provides the reason why the temptation to accept inducements proves overwhelming to some managers (although the most that Bower can prove against him is that he took £300,000 from his chairman as a reward for the transfer of Rio Ferdinand to Leeds, an example of football’s easy-come-easy-go attitude to money, also typified by Redknapp’s alleged comments that he was underpaid on £1m a year): “No one gives a monkey’s about you once your career is over, so in my view you should make all the bucks while you can.”"

---------------------

Now this amounts to financial "incentivization" of people who are already salaried to do their job. Call me old-fashioned, but when you're already employed and paid to do something, I don't think you should then get a percentage on top. And I certainly wouldn't be happy for this mentality to become dominant at Spurs. Eg for our coach or DoF to get a percentage of the transfer fee if they get above a certain price for selling Berbatov.

It may be legal and approved by the non-execs, but for me decisions should be based on what is best for the club. Full stop.

Interesting stuff there, yanno.

I'm not sure I agree, though. I get a reasonable wage (bloody huge for KL, but poor for London), but at the end of the year I get 10% of the profit of the company. I'm already employed to do my job, and this is certainly 'on top', but the amount of effort I put in and the role I play, I think I'm pretty good value for my nice little (well, huge) bonus.

If Kemsley is generating Spurs money (and it says he only gets the cash if he hits targets) then he gets a payment. That seems pretty fair to me.

The Reknapp thing is a bit dodgy, but I suppose the alternative is that the Chairman at West Ham pockets the cash. Twitch was responsible for getting the best out of Jajr-Jar Senior, so a one-off payment again doesn't seem too outrageous.


The problem with a lot of this, is that your regular bloke will hear "Football manager/player/board member gets X hundred-thousand quid" and think its unfair. In reality, it's not that big a slice of an enormous multi-billion pound cake. Thats also why I think players wages really aren't that stupid. It's them we pay to watch. Simple economics, innit?

 

[FITZ]

Anyone see the photo of Kelmsey, Green and Ashley in the Londonpaper last night. Looked like they were all out on the lash!

 

[Stoof]

Rocksuperstar - I'm not saying that any of this is illegal. In fact, if it's approved by non-executive directors, then it's prima facie all above board and legal.

Very very prima facie. :lol:

Just because the directors say it's OK isn't a great sign of legality, especially if they're in on it - with no intention to get caught.

If we're looking at Redknapp, for instance, him and Terry Brown (and assorted cronies) were as thick as thieves with the whole Rio transfer.

"Where's our Rio money gone?" was the banner at the time I believe.

EDIT: Bill's said a similar thing. (sorry MB)

 

[SpurSince57]

I do hope the betting on Jol being sacked isn't traced back to him. That sort of thing gets you a two-stretch now.

 

[yanno]

Interesting stuff there, yanno.

I'm not sure I agree, though. I get a reasonable wage (bloody huge for KL, but poor for London), but at the end of the year I get 10% of the profit of the company. I'm already employed to do my job, and this is certainly 'on top', but the amount of effort I put in and the role I play, I think I'm pretty good value for my nice little (well, huge) bonus.

If Kemsley is generating Spurs money (and it says he only gets the cash if he hits targets) then he gets a payment. That seems pretty fair to me.

The Reknapp thing is a bit dodgy, but I suppose the alternative is that the Chairman at West Ham pockets the cash. Twitch was responsible for getting the best out of Jajr-Jar Senior, so a one-off payment again doesn't seem too outrageous.

Bill Oddie - it's your absolute right to disagree! Part of it does come down to whether we think our football club should be run like any other business. Board members would probably answer "Yes", supporters would answer "No".

My specific concern is as follows - with a hypothetical scenario to draw out the issues.

Let's say the club decide we should sell Berbatov (the reason being irrelevant - it doesn't matter whether he wants to go or we've decided to cash in). The DoF is told to get the best price possible, but if he gets over £30 million, he gets 5%. So, if Berba goes for £33 million, the DoF gets 5% of £3 milllion.

Now, I would say that part of the job description of our salaried DoF is to strike the best possible deals for the club in all transfer activity. So, if he gets £33 million rather than £30 million, all that means is that he's doing his job rather well. But the full value of the transfer should go to the club and be used for the club for core activities - such as buying players. Imo, in this hypothetical situation, the DoF should not get a cut.

Looking at the Rio situation at West Ham - yes, Redknapp did help develop him. But so did numerous coaches at the Spammers who didn't get a penny. The transfer price was surely determined by market forces (and whatever was going on with various agents), plus Leeds' ridiculous profligacy with money. Since Redknapp was an already well remunerated employee, my position is that it's outrageous that he should allegedly have received a cut of the transfer fee.

The problem with football morality is that scumbag agents get large percentages of ridiculous salaries and transfer fees for doing very little. Managers and coaches look at this and think, "I should be getting some of that". That's why so many of them set up their otherwise useless sons as football agents.