The Daily ITK Discussion Thread 9th June 2016

Status
Not open for further replies.

tdk101

Active Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2014
Messages
717
Off topic, but why not look at Spurs accounts (on their website) over the last say 10 years period.

Over that time period, except for the year we sold Bale, the cumulative profits are 'diddly squat' and no dividend paid. So no 'investment return being pocketed'

Fact of the matter is that so far all the revenues coming in from match tickets, TV and sponsorship are largely paid to players, and the negative transferee balance over the last few years has been invested in the training ground etc.
The investment return include not only dividend. The accumulated massive capital acquisition and gains thru land purchase, subsequent stadium build, and the facility upgrade which won't be realized in the book until the team is sold. I am not least bit surprised that there are no dividends. You pay tax on dividends, but not on capital gains until it's sold. Of course all the money will be put into stadium. Let's wait and see what happens once the stadium is finished.
 
Last edited:

Lighty64

Glory Glory
Joined
Aug 24, 2010
Messages
3,949
This is not any business but football, where you have to rely on fanbase support to generate profit. What they charge for tickets (especially Spurs) and TV rights is outrageous. It is almost verging on corporate donations. Naturally fans reserve right to demand more investments when the club has the ability to make higher expenditure instead of pocketing majority of it as investment return.
trouble is with football spending money doesn't guarantee returns, and i would rather the club making a profit and keeping us a float (supported Spurs during the period we might go into admin), i hate that term doing a Leeds, but think that really woke up a lot of teams apart from Blackpool, but they were never going to be as big as Leeds where.

under Levy we have become a regular top 6 team again, to go that step to become a regular top 4 we would need an ultra rich takeover that can work within the FFP ruling.

on the supporter side of things if someone stops going because of cost, and ambition someone else will take their place in the stands
 

Lighty64

Glory Glory
Joined
Aug 24, 2010
Messages
3,949
Then we can compare to other PL clubs. We are probably the 6th biggest club in PL, so naturally it's fair that we can/may expect the 6th biggest transfer investment in PL. Looking at our transfer expenditure (net amount), that's not what's happening. So where goes the profit? (besides the privately-owned stadium which is supposed to have a separate budget anyway)
but until the stadium is paid for, we can't compete with teams that don't have a debt hanging over them in transfer windows, teams like Stoke can use there expected new TV deal, and like 13 to 14 other clubs will spend that just to stay in the Premier, they don't do it to try and break in the top4 because they know with the size of their stadiums they can't afford them wages for the majority of their squad.

as someone has posted in this thread, to pay Bats £150k a week we would have to increase 5 other players wages up to that amount, nope won't happen, especially for a player that might not even settle

seperate budget is one thing, the possibility of paying it off early makes us stronger quicker
 

Spursidol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Messages
12,636
The investment return include not only dividend. The accumulated massive capital acquisition and gains thru land purchase, subsequent stadium build, and the facility upgrade which won't be realized in the book until the team is sold. I am not least bit surprised that there are no dividends. You pay tax on dividends, but not on capital gains until it's sold. Of course all the money will be put into stadium. Let's wait and see what happens once the stadium is finished.
Only when the club is sold can we see if there is 'an investment return' or not and whether it's reasonable

Your posts were about the owners taking out monies instead of investing.

My points stand. The owners have not taken money out
 

Lighty64

Glory Glory
Joined
Aug 24, 2010
Messages
3,949
Are you kidding? They each cost 7-10m more than Alli and Dier. They didnt cost a ton but certainly werent "bargains" like Alli and Dier. Also, our scouting is decent in identifying great talent for low cost. But they have failed quite a bit as well.

Oh and one more thing. Lamela is a fantastic player and is only getting better. Do not say other wise. Countless times he was the only on the pitch last season actually fucking giving a shit and trying. One of our 2 most important players. Poch taking him off so early cost us 3 points multiple times last season, including both games against woolwich.
on both occasions he was 1 tackle away from having an early bath and playing with 10men
 

tdk101

Active Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2014
Messages
717
Only when the club is sold can we see if there is 'an investment return' or not and whether it's reasonable

Your posts were about the owners taking out monies instead of investing.

My points stand. The owners have not taken money out
You are missing the point. The fans want first and foremost player investment that will make the club challenge for higher league finishes. We have been waiting for a back up striker over a year. I still cant believe that it hasn't been resolved after the catastrophe that was Berahino dealings a year ago.
 
Last edited:

Everlasting Seconds

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2014
Messages
9,755
Gotta love THFC spin doctor department though.
(In the voice of Boris Johnson)
"Yeah, Pochettino has identified key needs, namely being two-legged men who can kick a ball, and, ehm, ... he is equally happy with any one of the 1.256 two-legged men who in fact, who can kick a ball, and Spurs pulled, rather interestingly, out of the race for ONE of those 1.256 two-legged men already weeks ago, and we are now working very hard, in fact harder than EVER, with signing one, in fact anyone, of the remaining list over 1.255 candidates"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.