The Deadline Day ITK Discussion Thread - 1st September

[Cambridge Spur]

ENIC has no interests other than the club. It gets no dividends or interest from the club. Levy takes out a large salary (arguably a couple of million more than he would get if he were not a part owner) but that’s it.

ENIC is an investment company, they don’t spend their own money, everything is generated by the club. The stadium is being paid for by the club. All members of staff are paid for by the club. They paid an initial £22 million for the club for Sugars stake and then bought out the remaining shareholders. The club is now worth £4.5 billion. Everything has been done to further improve their investment. They are not interested in winning or turning us into serious contenders. They will continue to maximise their investment until such time to cash in.

 

[ssamme]

When the usual suspects are off the wage bill because they aren’t suited to the system, too old, lazy, crap, contract finally expired, etc, who are gonna be the next crop of players we need off the wage bill?

Fair to say

Sanchez
Dier
Ndombele
Lloris
Davies
Hojbjerg
Reguillon

Are the main ones.

Who are we going to want shifted after that?? Interested.

It would be interesting to see what that would be in wages per week, I am guessing £600k or £31.2m per year

 

[only1waddle]

Here's the short version for the defenders of the faith..

We spent the last two hours of the window panicking and scraping barrels for a 3rd chioce centre back having known all window we needed 2 decent centre backs from day one, tapping Chelsea up late on in desperation is fucking embarrassing.

It's mismanagement, nothing else, no conspiracy, no purple and gold, mis-fucking-management.

 

[Whazam]

We acceptred Fulham's (high) offer but he had no interest in going there. If we'd have accepted lower offers, someone else would have taken him., he'd be gone and we'd have signed the one player the manager wanted. That's the whole point.

Fine, that's a fair point. But it's also hypothetical and would mainly have invited more clubs of Fulham's level into the question, which Højbjerg didn't want. But I hear you.

However, even if this didn't happen, we obviously compromised (and tried to compromise) on quite a lot of players we wanted out.

 

[Rob]

Fine, that's a fair point. But it's also hypothetical and would mainly have invited more clubs of Fulham's level into the question, which Højbjerg didn't want. But I hear you.

I disagree. It'd have invited more european clubs who don't have the spending power we do but who would have been more attractive than Fulham.

 

[djhotspur]

If Arsenal had sold Henry it'd be comparable...

I know you're not trolling us but it really feels like it. We've just lost our arguably best ever player and main goalscorer and you think we've had a comparable window to Arsenal?

Literally. It’s the same as them selling Saka and replacing him with a young striker coming off an average season.

 

[DFF]

And yet the clubs audited accounts (publically available) show a loss of circa £50m a season since the stadium opened.

Where is the cash everyone seems to think we have? Cos it sure as hell isn't in the clubs bank account.

£226m. It’s right there in the accounts you claim to know so much about, but show very little understanding of.

 

[Whazam]

I disagree. It'd have invited more european clubs who don't have the spending power we do but who would have been more attractive than Fulham.

You could very well be right about that.

My main point however (which I tried to make with the other examples), was that Levy seems to at least try to compromise in a way that was unthinkable from him just a few years ago.

 

[jimmyh]

I think it's not about who we brought in or who we let go it's after all these years Levy and co have not learned a single thing about giving the manager what he needs to succeed. They have brought in countless managers and when they don't give them what they need they sack them and wonder why it hasn't worked. We have a manager at the minute who really wants to succeed at Tottenham Hotspur but a board who could not give a shit as long as the money keeps rolling in.
Levy was right the stadium has changed the game but what he never mentioned was he wanted the game changed from football altogether. Maybe from day one the whole reason for buying the club in the first place was for the real estate.
I think we are still along way away from having our Tottenham back as this transfer window has proved once again no matter how good a start or feel good factor a manager can bring to the club Levy and co could not give a toss.

 

[Dougal]

Doris the tea lady. She's often mistaken for a 6ft centre back.

Still would.

 

[Pochie]

Agree. That’s why I’m a bit disappointed that Ange appointed Son captain. He really needs to be maneuvered towards the out door.

Not going to happen. In a business sense he’s far too valuable. I think he might retire with us.

 

[Neon_Knight_]

We acceptred Fulham's (high) offer but he had no interest in going there. If we'd have accepted lower offers, someone else would have taken him., he'd be gone and we'd have signed the one player the manager wanted. That's the whole point.

I really don't think £30m was a high offer. Based on the current market, a player of his ability and experience is worth £40m+. Factoring in that he's no longer in our starting XI, £30m is perhaps fair, but by no means high.

Despite popular belief (seemingly), he's far from deadwood. I think it's very much him, not Ange, who was pushing for a move. He made meaningful contributions in both of our PL wins and in the process showed that he can have a useful role to play for us this season. Take him out of the squad and we're weaker - Ange clearly agrees, as otherwise Skipp or White would have been given all of Hojbjerg's minutes in the PL so far this season (either of them coming on for the last 20 minutes against Man United would have made me nervous).

 

[cjsimba]

It delays another purchase by a year is my guess, taking the hit and selling Sanchez for say £7m or buy another player with say a £12m lump sum and then yearly payments, or delay it another year and pray AP scrapes Europe with Sanchez as back up and we get lucky with injuries.

But what’s the advantage of delaying it another year. We’re going to have to pay for the replacement at some point. It’s not like Levy is saying ‘well I’m leaving in 3 years so the more I can delay spending the less of a hit for my pocket’.

Scenario A- sell Sanchez for £5m now and buy replacement for £12m in 2023. Outlay = £7m

Scenario B- sell Sanchez for £0m in 2024 and buy replacement for £12m in 2024. Outlay = £12m

(numbers are just examples)

 

[thelak]

And yet the clubs audited accounts (publically available) show a loss of circa £50m a season since the stadium opened.

Where is the cash everyone seems to think we have? Cos it sure as hell isn't in the clubs bank account.

We had at June 22 in rough numbers

£230m cash on the BS partly reflecting £100m of the £150m potential capital increase Enic talked about

£850m in very LT loans with about £20m a year interest

The Cash flow statement to be fair showed from £85m of operating cash the club spent a net 70m on players although not sure why they continue to spend £30m a year on fixed assets post the stadium build - local property?

But v much living within our means

imagine 23 accounts will be similar

 

[elfy]

We had at June 22 in rough numbers

£230m cash on the BS partly reflecting £100m of the £150m potential capital increase Enic talked about

£850m in very LT loans with about £20m a year interest

The Cash flow statement to be fair showed from £85m of operating cash the club spent a net 70m on players although not sure why they continue to spend £30m a year on fixed assets post the stadium build - local property?

But v much living within our means

imagine 23 accounts will be similar

All very true, it looks to me like that 100m was not used for transfers but to shore up the balance sheet.

Liabilities and loans are much higher than cash on hand, but a lot of that can be excused by the stadium build and training ground.

But, that's my point: the accounts don't show large sums of money being made and hoarded year on year (excusing the £100m equity loan)

 

[Stamford]

For starters, how much of the Kane money do we have right now? Did Bayern pay in full or are they paying in instalments? And if we spend the money in January, next Summer or some other time, how is Levy a liar? The idea that money coming in must be spent immediately is idiotic in the extreme.

You know what you've said makes no sense. The point isn't about it spent immediately it's about supporting the team on the pitch which is the whole point. We've just sold our best player and haven't given the manager what he requested. He said he wanted two backs and he doesn't have them both

 

[SpursForever71]

So its been obvious for while Ange doesnt rate Dier, and isnt on the bench AGAIN today. Yet we were buggering about last night trying for last minute deals for a CB.
We had the Kane money, is a disgrace we didnt get another CB in, along with VDV, if Dier was obv not a part of Ange's plans

 

[thelak]

All very true, it looks to me like that 100m was not used for transfers but to shore up the balance sheet.

Liabilities and loans are much higher than cash on hand, but a lot of that can be excused by the stadium build and training ground.

But, that's my point: the accounts don't show large sums of money being made and hoarded year on year (excusing the £100m equity loan)

No but we are run very conservatively run and could certainly be more ambitious without putting the club at risk given the visibility around various revenue streams

but ultimately we probably need an oil state to buy us to really compete in the absence of becoming much better operators in the transfer market and player development

 

[Derryank]

Great servants my absolute hole.

LOVE IT!!

Bang on

 

[nicdic]

You could very well be right about that.

My main point however (which I tried to make with the other examples), was that Levy seems to at least try to compromise in a way that was unthinkable from him just a few years ago.

Yeah, people broadly seem unable to understand this. There has been huge change in the way Levy deals, but people fall back on the tropes of years gone by.

I think it's not about who we brought in or who we let go it's after all these years Levy and co have not learned a single thing about giving the manager what he needs to succeed. They have brought in countless managers and when they don't give them what they need they sack them and wonder why it hasn't worked. We have a manager at the minute who really wants to succeed at Tottenham Hotspur but a board who could not give a shit as long as the money keeps rolling in.
Levy was right the stadium has changed the game but what he never mentioned was he wanted the game changed from football altogether. Maybe from day one the whole reason for buying the club in the first place was for the real estate.
I think we are still along way away from having our Tottenham back as this transfer window has proved once again no matter how good a start or feel good factor a manager can bring to the club Levy and co could not give a toss.

Ditto with this.

Countless managers and not given them what they need?

Ange, Conte, Jose, Poch (in his last summer) were all backed. Did we get them everything they wanted? No, but to be implying that we haven't backed managers is just not true.