The ousting of Daniel (COYS)

[vegassd]

It was £400m last year and we sold Kane.

Sure... but then where does that £400m come from? It seems a bit of a coincidence that it's still exactly the same as the often reported number from before the stadium. We've had Covid and a bunch of player spending since then.

There are different numbers published by different online sources (as expected) but the most prominent mention of £400m I have stumbled upon is from the Daily Mail (eurgh) back in 2021 which talks about us having a £400m pre-tax profit over the period 2010-2020. My understanding of FFP is that it's calculated over a 3 year period, so I don't see how that historical profit comes into play.

I have a feeling that the Mail article was published and then did the rounds being quoted by online footy sites without anybody taking the time to understand or critique it. It seems to me that it has mistaken long-term profitability for FFP allowance.

Swiss Ramble have an article here which includes a table of profit/loss for PL clubs in the 3 years up to 21/22. It shows us as having a £5m profit over that period, which would suggest to me a "headroom" figure of more like £110m:

Financial Fair Play 2021/22

Dance This Mess Around

swissramble.substack.com

And of course, that allowance figure is for permitted losses, so it doesn't seem like a wise thing to strive towards anyway. I don't think we should be aiming to make a financial loss.

I suppose it's all a bit like net spend... a nice simple number for sports journos to create content about. It doesn't really mean anything on its own, and it's probably only of any real use when judging how bad things are for a club if they are breaking it.

EDIT: after a bit more digging it seems like that original Mail article is all based on net spend figures anyway. Ho hum.

 

[Stuart Leathercock]

Sure... but then where does that £400m come from? It seems a bit of a coincidence that it's still exactly the same as the often reported number from before the stadium. We've had Covid and a bunch of player spending since then.

There are different numbers published by different online sources (as expected) but the most prominent mention of £400m I have stumbled upon is from the Daily Mail (eurgh) back in 2021 which talks about us having a £400m pre-tax profit over the period 2010-2020. My understanding of FFP is that it's calculated over a 3 year period, so I don't see how that historical profit comes into play.

I have a feeling that the Mail article was published and then did the rounds being quoted by online footy sites without anybody taking the time to understand or critique it. It seems to me that it has mistaken long-term profitability for FFP allowance.

Swiss Ramble have an article here which includes a table of profit/loss for PL clubs in the 3 years up to 21/22. It shows us as having a £5m profit over that period, which would suggest to me a "headroom" figure of more like £110m:

Financial Fair Play 2021/22

Dance This Mess Around

swissramble.substack.com

And of course, that allowance figure is for permitted losses, so it doesn't seem like a wise thing to strive towards anyway. I don't think we should be aiming to make a financial loss.

I suppose it's all a bit like net spend... a nice simple number for sports journos to create content about. It doesn't really mean anything on its own, and it's probably only of any real use when judging how bad things are for a club if they are breaking it.

EDIT: after a bit more digging it seems like that original Mail article is all based on net spend figures anyway. Ho hum.

Indeed, the £400m number came from a period where our revenues jumped massively, while our transfer spending was minimal. The FFP surpluses from back then have now expired. The cash surpluses back then were directed to our stadium project that had clearly gone massively over its intended budget (consistently achieving CL football ahead of schedule yet still having very little to spend on transfers showed us that the stadium cost way more than thought).

IMO the big miss from the owners back then was not injecting equity for transfer spending during that period. The value of ENIC’s holding was rocketing and we had loads of FFP wiggle room but not the cashflow due to the stadium overspend. Injecting £150m of equity for transfers back then would probably have resulted in us winning a few pots and perhaps have improved commercial revenues even further.

Since the stadium opened our spending has been quite significant. The FFP rules have also changed so that it is no longer about overall losses but instead about only being allowed to spend a certain portion of your turnover on the playing squad - combined wages, transfer fees (amortised in equal portions over the original contract length) and agent fees, minus transfer fees received must be under a certain portion of turnover. I believe the allowance was 90% of turnover last year, 80% this year and 70% next year and from then onwards.

We would’ve had a reasonable amount of wriggle room on the 90% allowance last year with us having CL football but will be closer to the 80% this year I think (even booking the Kane transfer money). I suspect Levy’s aim is for us to hit the 70% requirement next year without European qualification, if we qualify for Europe Levy could then adjust the transfer budget up by a portion of the likely additional turnover from playing European football.

 

[Wheeler Dealer]

My 46 odd years supporting Spurs have been roughly 50/50 without Levy/with Levy.

My favourite eras in order are Burkenshaw, Poch, Redknap, and Jol.
My least favourite eras were 1977 relegation, most of the 90's, Nuno/Mourinho/Conte.

So, for me, the majority of the good times have been under Levy and the majority of bad times not under Levy.

Spot on. I'm 56 and supported Spurs since 1977 and agree with everything you are saying, albeit I did enjoy 1986-7 season under Pleat. Great footballers in this team, Hoddle, Waddle, Gough, Ardiles and Allen. I still can't believe we lost to Coventry in FA cup final.

The Sugar era was depressing from start to finish

 

[DogsOfWar]

Spot on. I'm 56 and supported Spurs since 1977 and agree with everything you are saying, albeit I did enjoy 1986-7 season under Pleat. Great footballers in this team, Hoddle, Waddle, Gough, Ardiles and Allen. I still can't believe we lost to Coventry in FA cup final.

The Sugar era was depressing from start to finish

86-87 would have been next on my list. It should be higher because, as you say, of the quality of the team and the football we played but just falling short in all the competitions just took the edge off for me as I believed we could win all three at the time (which highlights how much expectation plays a part in our interpretation of success).

 

[bomberH]

Haha he’s played a blinder with the Kane news that we have a buyback clause. He didn’t tell anyone at the time of the sale and blatantly waited for this evening to tell everyone knowing it’s his one chance that the fans won’t hound him tonight.

Ps Rob, seeing as you hate Levy and Cullen with a passion nowadays, can I bring back Manwhore’s Mansion?

 

[Stavrogin]

FFS Daniel...

 

[yido_number1]

View attachment 132337

FFS Daniel...

Wtf is that lol

 

[vegassd]

View attachment 132337

FFS Daniel...

1) Spending time with Friends

 

[chas vs dave]

1) Spending time with Friends

View attachment 132338

I suppose the theme tune works:

"The club's broke, a joke, you're cup forms DOA,
It's like you're always stuck in second gear,
When it hasn't been your day, your week, your month, or even you're year...."

 

[Cream]

Just because Big Ange(c) is doing what Big Ange(c) does doesn't forgive Levy and his quarter of a century incompetence.

 

[easley91]

Just because Big Ange(c) is doing what Big Ange(c) does doesn't forgive Levy and his quarter of a century incompetence.

We know.

 

[haslemereyid]

Am i allowed to say I was quite heartened by our Daniels chat at the fans forum? It s the first time i have ever heard he say he genuinely got things wrong - recognising this is in public i think is a big thing for him and i hope this will make him more flexible in his thinking going forward - sure he doesn’t admit to his other many errors particularly regarding recruitment but its a real start - he isn’t going anywhere until the club is sold so if its an improved version of him then we are better off for it

 

[fishhhandaricecake]

Am i allowed to say I was quite heartened by our Daniels chat at the fans forum? It s the first time i have ever heard he say he genuinely got things wrong - recognising this is in public i think is a big thing for him and i hope this will make him more flexible in his thinking going forward - sure he doesn’t admit to his other many errors particularly regarding recruitment but its a real start - he isn’t going anywhere until the club is sold so if its an improved version of him then we are better off for it

Same he actually came across pretty well in that video to be fair. He’s not perfect but perhaps he learnt some lessons finally.

 

[Hoopspur]

We know.

Just because Big Ange(c) is doing what Big Ange(c) does doesn't forgive Levy and his quarter of a century incompetence.

If that represents incompetence then I suggest you look at the previous X number of years!

 

[only1waddle]

Same he actually came across pretty well in that video to be fair. He’s not perfect but perhaps he learnt some lessons finally.

I think he had to, where else could he go with all this?, more of the same would have increased the toxicity levels and that might spill out in affecting the brand.
*I welcome his sea change for the record.

 

[HodisGawd]

Levy came across very well, as did Son and Ange.

Ange's crack about being a big name was a good joke after Levy said he'd avoided big names.

The club seems a happy ship right now with everything stable.

Anyway, about that ousting... when is it and are you going for the two or three-pronged pitchfork?

 

[Cream]

If that represents incompetence then I suggest you look at the previous X number of years!

When we won stuff?

 

[Cream]

Same he actually came across pretty well in that video to be fair. He’s not perfect but perhaps he learnt some lessons finally.

He's an old man now. He's failed. He's been proved as useless.

A bald useless ****.

That is Daniel. A useless bald ****. It's such a shame we've had to put up with a quarter of a century of his ineptitude.

Teflon Dan. He's always managed to deflect. Not for me. I got his number very quickly.

Biggest **** ever to infect whl

 

[DarwinSpur]

Levy came across very well, as did Son and Ange.

Ange's crack about being a big name was a good joke after Levy said he'd avoided big names.

The club seems a happy ship right now with everything stable.

Anyway, about that ousting... when is it and are you going for the two or three-pronged pitchfork?

He's an old man now. He's failed. He's been proved as useless.

A bald useless ****.

That is Daniel. A useless bald ****. It's such a shame we've had to put up with a quarter of a century of his ineptitude.

Teflon Dan. He's always managed to deflect. Not for me. I got his number very quickly.

Biggest **** ever to infect whl

Is there a 6 pronged fork for our friend Cream here?

 

[easley91]

He's an old man now. He's failed. He's been proved as useless.

A bald useless ****.

That is Daniel. A useless bald ****. It's such a shame we've had to put up with a quarter of a century of his ineptitude.

Teflon Dan. He's always managed to deflect. Not for me. I got his number very quickly.

Biggest **** ever to infect whl

Really? No need to bring appearance into it and he is far from useless. Under his stewardship we have actually risen up the league and challenged for trophies, if not winning them. We have built state of the art facilities majority are jealous of.

Whatever you think of the past few years and some of his mistakes (which he accepted at the forum by the way) he is far from useless. Anybody will have made mistakes in a 20 year period. Just look at other clubs to see he isn't really that bad in comparison. Could he have done better with some things? Yep absolutely. But useless? Nah.

And before you or anyone else labels me a Levy defender or lover I want him gone. I can just accept the good he has done and acknowledge it without turning into a child having a temper tantrum.