New Stadium Details And Discussions
- Thread starter fozzi44
- Start date
Hardly a on-going construction site. They'll be a building site to the immediate south of the completed stadium.
The west, north and east sides of the stadium will be finished and in all likelihood there'll even be access to the south stand too.
At worst, access to the south stand will have to be carefully managed and maybe temporarily rerouted through the east and west access.
Deeyal
Active Member
- Jun 2, 2004
- 270
- 144
Fixed to 61k with no option for expansion? Seems odd. I mean, I'm pretty sure that 61k will be more than adequate for a few years, but you would have thought that we would want the option. Does the guy explain why? is it a limitation of building on the existing site, for example?
longtimespur
Well-Known Member
- Sep 10, 2014
- 5,834
- 9,950
I would imagine cost would be a factor. Designing expansion possibilities into it would add to the cost as it would require more complex engineering and perhaps different materials to be used in places. Instead my feeling is they just tried to max it out within the envelope of what the site and local transport can handle.
One addition to this, may be increased capacity if safe standing is ever permitted (i did read something on this thread that alluded that the new design could allow that).
Having said that, the sentence quoted above, does not necessarily mean it can't be expanded many years in the future, it just means there is no provision for it in the design. That may of course mean the same thing, but who knows, 20 or so years in the future with the advent of new technologies and [wishful] years of sustained success on the pitch [/wishful] a way to expand it could probably be found.
Phischy
The Spursy One
- Feb 29, 2004
- 1,000
- 1,152
I'm almost certain I read that they have the limitation due to the size of the site and lack of further possibilities. We're boxed in by the enabling developments and high road, meaning we'd only have the option of buying the land behind the East Stand (not likely) to expand that side. In reality of you know there's possibility to expand, you keep the door open on that, but when you are building the second largest stadium in England and your prospects of becoming the next Real Madrid are pretty slim, you're not going to spend time and money trying to keep the door open for an unlikely future expansion. I also think that, for example, the roof design requires it to be all the way around and removing a stand would compromise the whole roof. Therefore, they'd have to have a totally different (likely more expensive) roof solution to allow for expansion... If it's not likely to happen, why bother?!
HotspurSam
Active Member
- Jul 15, 2003
- 148
- 218
There is a public consultation this Wednesday or Thursday followed on 23rd IIRC with a pre-application briefing with Haringey Planning Committee and I don't envisage it being too long after that for the full application
Last edited:
sloth
Well-Known Member
- Mar 7, 2005
- 9,018
- 6,900
I'm now going to embark on one of those pointless exercises which speaks of a person with too much time on his hands, but hey-ho, what the hell.
Looking at what we know about the clubs finances the stadium costs, the money spent so far, and the new TV deal, plus bench-marking naming rights deals at other clubs I want to estimate the affordability of our new stadium. I'll post this in the Stadium thread too (even though I suspect it's already been done there, but I'm too stupid to look).
Anyway the conclusion is we'll have £130m to put up front towards the £450m stadium costs. Therefore we'll have to borrow £320m from either our owner or the banks. But if we continue to finish an average of sixth, we continue to player trade as we have been, and our operating costs only increase by 15% over the next five years, then thanks to the naming rights and the new TV rights deals, plus the additional match-day income our turnover will have increased to about £300m, and our surplus will be at around £150m. In other words we're good for the loan.
I've spoilered the assumptions and workings out, so go through them if you dare!!
Annual over next three years
£m
Additional Income (inc money in bank) and Expenditure
+3
+82
-20
-7
£58m p/a
If we multiply that figure by 3 we get £174m (but we have to subtract £44m for next year when we don't have the new TV deal but the current one so:
Three Year Total
£130m
That means we have to find £320m towards stadium costs from somewhere. That's what we have to somehow borrow. That's how much debt we'll find ourselves in. Seems a big number, but no bigger than Arsenal managed. Anyway the real question is how sustainable is it.
So let's add up the extra income once the stadium is opened:
Annual
£m
Additional Income and Expenditure
+82 (TV Rights)
+30 (Naming Rights)
+65 (Match-day)
-20 (Contingency)
£157m
Looking at the above we'd have paid it off in two years.
If that's the case then will our owner be willing to make us the loan?
Looking at what we know about the clubs finances the stadium costs, the money spent so far, and the new TV deal, plus bench-marking naming rights deals at other clubs I want to estimate the affordability of our new stadium. I'll post this in the Stadium thread too (even though I suspect it's already been done there, but I'm too stupid to look).
Anyway the conclusion is we'll have £130m to put up front towards the £450m stadium costs. Therefore we'll have to borrow £320m from either our owner or the banks. But if we continue to finish an average of sixth, we continue to player trade as we have been, and our operating costs only increase by 15% over the next five years, then thanks to the naming rights and the new TV rights deals, plus the additional match-day income our turnover will have increased to about £300m, and our surplus will be at around £150m. In other words we're good for the loan.
I've spoilered the assumptions and workings out, so go through them if you dare!!
- Latest accounts had us with no debt and £3m in the bank (http://www.theguardian.com/football/2015/apr/29/premier-league-finances-club-by-club)
- Since then our transfers have balanced, and the above article says our wages only increased by £4m, although our turnover increased by £40m. We could assume a healthy profit last year too therefore, except that we apparently haven't accounted for the purchases the summer we sold Bale, which is why we appeared to be so profitable that year and were able to have 0 debt. I'm going to say no profit in the period since we sold Bale, so no additional money to go towards the stadium.
- I'm going to assume the total cost of the stadium is £450m, including the work done to date.
- Under the new TV deal, 6th place would bag us £134m (http://www.totalsportek.com/money/premier-league-tv-rights-money-distribution/), a £44m a season increase on the current one. If our operating costs remain as they are and we continue with £0 net spend per season, then that would mean, that since 30th June 2013, our income will have gone up from £147m (http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/may/01/premier-league-accounts-club-by-club-david-conn) when we made a £4m profit, to about £225m in three years. But looking at the profile of our signings, who we've let go and who will have come in, our wage bill will have remained static (remember we're getting shot of Soldado, Paulinho, Adebayor), and replacing them with young guns. In theory that's (£225m less £147m plus £4m) £82m additional each year. I can't currently see where that's being spent (other than the stadium), but am happy to listen to theories on where it might be.
- Stadium Naming Rights - arsenal signed a £30m a season deal in 2012. Obviously they've a greater brand profile at the moment, but that was four years ago, and we've seen TV Rights inflation since then. We also have the potential extra draw of NFL. I'll be conservative though and plump for the same deal, £30m a year.
- Match-day income - Again the simplest thing is to benchmark against Arsenal's. So £100m a year to our current £35m, perhaps they'll be closer to full capacity more often, on the other hand we have a genuine multi-purpose stadium with NFL matches to be included too. I also haven't considered inflation in any of these figures. So a further £65m increase to our income.
- Debt: It seems to be close to zero now, and any additional borrowing we can assume is towards the stadium. If we don't reduce the total £450m then we don't have to consider that now. £0 debt means we can borrow, we've got head-room.
- Additional non-stadium related expenditure. So far I haven't estimated any, but I should. I don't know what they are so I'm going to put a 15% contingency in there - based on 2013 figures that's £20m of additional expenditure.
- Timeline - We'll open in three years.
- One more cost - the season away from WHL will see us lose some of our matchday income and have to pay out towards hiring another stadium, let's assume a £20m drop for that season, which, for the purpose of the calculations we'll round up to an annualised £7m a season over the three years.
Annual over next three years
£m
Additional Income (inc money in bank) and Expenditure
+3
+82
-20
-7
£58m p/a
If we multiply that figure by 3 we get £174m (but we have to subtract £44m for next year when we don't have the new TV deal but the current one so:
Three Year Total
£130m
That means we have to find £320m towards stadium costs from somewhere. That's what we have to somehow borrow. That's how much debt we'll find ourselves in. Seems a big number, but no bigger than Arsenal managed. Anyway the real question is how sustainable is it.
So let's add up the extra income once the stadium is opened:
Annual
£m
Additional Income and Expenditure
+82 (TV Rights)
+30 (Naming Rights)
+65 (Match-day)
-20 (Contingency)
£157m
Looking at the above we'd have paid it off in two years.
If that's the case then will our owner be willing to make us the loan?
Last edited:
Spursidol
Well-Known Member
- Sep 15, 2007
- 12,636
- 15,834
Time to start again I'm afraid.
The original estimate for the stadium, Sainsbury and new flats was £400m - so that's presumably your £450m total, allowing for some cost and inflation increases.
It should not have escaped you that Sainsbury has already been built - ;lets guess at £100m. You will also find that this is self financing with Sainsbury as the tenant.
Lets also guess that the flats/hotel complex will cost a further £100m - and this will almost certainly built in partnership with a developer with experience of building flats - Spurs have no experience of a residential build on this scale, and the way these things work Spurs will not be putting up the finance as the developer will. Spurs contribution of getting outline planning permission and buying the land on which the flats sit will give us a slice of the profits (in some form or other) without needing to invest further.
So taking your £450m and deducting the costs of building Sainsbury and the flats, that's already down to £250m.
Then take off the considerable costs of acquiring the land (eg Archway plot and building), professional fees to get planning permission and design the stadium etc ........and you may be down to £200m left to finance, or maybe less.
So if you think the numbers work at £450m, good news it could be even easier at much lower sums !!
Dokta-D
Dr. Tottenham will see you now
- Jul 16, 2011
- 81
- 173
Wow that's great news if true. Knowing Levy, it could be even less, who knows what deal he will get for naming rights as well as the extra for the NFL games, concerts, et all.
Just imagine if the year we move in (2018) we have less debt then say Liverpool! Glory glory! (Wishful thinking I know).
All this could happen, and all without an endless pot of money.
Go on Levy . . . Show 'em how it's done!
I dare ya!
Just imagine if the year we move in (2018) we have less debt then say Liverpool! Glory glory! (Wishful thinking I know).
All this could happen, and all without an endless pot of money.
Go on Levy . . . Show 'em how it's done!
I dare ya!
Kalim
Pakispur
- Dec 10, 2006
- 1,285
- 996
Apparantly sold Brook House for £11m, to Legal & General so funds coming in.
http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/foo...-kitty-boost-after-unusual-sale-10390017.html
http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/foo...-kitty-boost-after-unusual-sale-10390017.html
Kalim
Pakispur
- Dec 10, 2006
- 1,285
- 996
And a little bit on tonight's pubilc meeting:
http://www.haringeyindependent.co.u...eneration_to_be_discussed_at_public_meeting/?
http://www.haringeyindependent.co.u...eneration_to_be_discussed_at_public_meeting/?
sloth
Well-Known Member
- Mar 7, 2005
- 9,018
- 6,900
I agree with what you highlight, but all projections tend to be over optimistic, I've tried to counter that by being as harsh as I can with my assumptions.
If you ask me what I really think though, then I suspect, without meaning to be, that I'm being over-optimistic
- May 21, 2004
- 25,468
- 2,408
- Admin
- #16,274
Found this about the Club raking in some income...
http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/foo...-kitty-boost-after-unusual-sale-10390017.html
http://www.standard.co.uk/sport/foo...-kitty-boost-after-unusual-sale-10390017.html
whitesocks
The past means nothing. This is a message for life
- Jan 16, 2014
- 4,652
- 5,738
So the new stadium might cost £200m?
I reckon, finger in the air, the retractable pitch and floating stand could cost that alone.
If it goes to plan.
If the scumerates cost 390m 10 years ago, and ours will have a bigger capacity plus all this cutting edge technology, I can't see us getting much change out of £500m.
As for paying the debt, if we can clear the worst of it in under 10 years like that lot did, then we'd be doing very well, but remember they were in the CL for the whole period.
If we get a 10 year £300m sponsor, cash up front,
£100m from the flat developments,
and a nfl franchise paying £25m pa for use of the stadium,
then with the extra income from the corporates it then starts to add up.
I reckon, finger in the air, the retractable pitch and floating stand could cost that alone.
If it goes to plan.
If the scumerates cost 390m 10 years ago, and ours will have a bigger capacity plus all this cutting edge technology, I can't see us getting much change out of £500m.
As for paying the debt, if we can clear the worst of it in under 10 years like that lot did, then we'd be doing very well, but remember they were in the CL for the whole period.
If we get a 10 year £300m sponsor, cash up front,
£100m from the flat developments,
and a nfl franchise paying £25m pa for use of the stadium,
then with the extra income from the corporates it then starts to add up.
longtimespur
Well-Known Member
- Sep 10, 2014
- 5,834
- 9,950
I think the repayment time span will be more dependent on what JL and ENIC want to do than the sum involved!
Will they sell once the stadium is built and pass the debt to the new owners?
Will they continue to progress the club by paying off the debt and investing in the playing staff?.
Thus increasing our chances of regular CL and consequently the value of the club!
A fly on the boardroom wall would be a great place to dwell or JL's home!
Will they sell once the stadium is built and pass the debt to the new owners?
Will they continue to progress the club by paying off the debt and investing in the playing staff?.
Thus increasing our chances of regular CL and consequently the value of the club!
A fly on the boardroom wall would be a great place to dwell or JL's home!
Hoops
Well-Known Member
- Mar 15, 2015
- 3,650
- 6,363
Fellas stop worrying. It really isn't a great deal of debt for the club anymore. Our revenues will push 250-300m soon.
If the stadium is 450m. 100m is spent. Naming rights will get us 150m at least.
The remainder will be from bank loan. Say 200m over 25 years. Its pittance.
If the stadium is 450m. 100m is spent. Naming rights will get us 150m at least.
The remainder will be from bank loan. Say 200m over 25 years. Its pittance.
Lilbaz
Just call me Baz
- Apr 1, 2005
- 41,363
- 74,893
All we know is that we have already spent over £100m on the development as levy has said so in the financials.
The new stadium may or may not be the same cost as the old one, which was around £250m mark (as this was the cost of building in stratford).
The southern development is much larger scale than previous plans so will be more as will the retractable pitch add to costs.
At the end of the day tottenham have some experience of developments. But enic and tavistoc are masters and have done far larger developments in america.
The costs and timescale will be sure.
The new stadium may or may not be the same cost as the old one, which was around £250m mark (as this was the cost of building in stratford).
The southern development is much larger scale than previous plans so will be more as will the retractable pitch add to costs.
At the end of the day tottenham have some experience of developments. But enic and tavistoc are masters and have done far larger developments in america.
The costs and timescale will be sure.
razor1981
Well-Known Member
- Jun 27, 2012
- 1,269
- 8,984
Found this in the sales literature for Brook House. A clue as to the new name for WHL station? Or just a place filler until the new name is chosen?
http://www.lshinvestmentsales.co.uk/server_resources/dynamic-content/uploads/LSH%20Investment%20-%20Property%20brochures%20(192)%20-%20Brook%20House.PDF
http://www.lshinvestmentsales.co.uk/server_resources/dynamic-content/uploads/LSH%20Investment%20-%20Property%20brochures%20(192)%20-%20Brook%20House.PDF
