Uefa Financial Fair Play rules and the stadium issue


Advises to have a beer & sleep with prostitutes
May 14, 2007
Thread starter #21
Firstly my apologies for starting a thread and then having to walk away from it due to work commitments.

I'll try to answer a few of the posts.

You then later go on to glibly suggest ENIC donate £15m-£20m p/a to the company. For what possible reason would they do that? On what basis do you suggest they might? That private investment would be almost as much again as the £28m p/a we currently make from match day revenue. It's the equivalent of asking them to stump up what to fans would be a 70% ticket price hike.

Truth is Champions League qualification will remain in budget projections a low probability, variable income.

The best and most sustainable way of increasing turnover is through a bigger stadium.

Given UEFA's financial fair-play directive it offers the best most likely prospect of getting up to the level of the big boys. Simple as.
I included the "standing still " option as some people have used that as a pro Stratford argument.

With the benefit of hindsight, I should have just stuck to the NDP v OS angle.

But, I deliberately used the 2010 accounts, which excludes most of the benefits of Champions League as the base of the figures.

But at the end of the day, I am arguing for a new stadium, I'm 100% behind that. It just happens to be in N17.

u dont get it do ya?
I get it. I get it very well thanks.

Look, Matt. We dont have 450m. Get over it. We going to Stratford.
But you told me that we can easily generate the cash/handle the debt to get the stadium built at WHL and be profitable in the stadium thread. You went into a long detailed descriptions from everything from naming rights down to transport.

You scoffed at me saying it probably isn't a financially viable option.

Since Lev stated today that keeping the stadium at it's current location is risky if we want to remain competitive:

Why should ole Gibbsy trust your opinion on this subject?
I'll tackle these, as well as a more detailed response to Mr Ben in one go if that's okay.

I've broken it out before, I'll probably have to do it again. The entire NDP will cost £450m apparently.

Financed as follows:

£100m-£150m on naming rights

£100m is what the goons got, widely acknowledged as being too low, which is why they have tried to renegotiate it.

£50m profit on disposal of the hotel, supermarket and housing.

£250m loan to build the stadium. It's lower than the £260m the gooners got for their stadium. I have in previous posts illustratrated that increased normal attendance could fund interest and repayments. Increasing ticket prices, which will happen with both options, and increased corporate will fund improvements in the squad.

Based on the above, up to £50m equity contribution from ENIC.

When the NDP was first announced, ENIC stated the funding would be done as above, including an equity contribution.

It is the amount of the equity contribution that I believe is the biggest issue.

It pays to trust ole Gibbsy, but it is a long term commitment.

Some outlets are saying it's gone up 50 million. Perhaps that is what took Lev over the edge.
The biggest issue is CABE saying the 400 flats in the first planning application was too many, resulting in it being cut by 50%.

But you are correct that the implications of the additional £50m has probably spooked Levy, the the sense that ENIC could have to contribute some of this via an increase equity contribution.

But if it was viable at £400m, it should still be viable at £450m.

If it wasn't, would we really have gone to a second planning application, agreed s106 with Haringey and agreed contributions with TfL?

There was a divide in the discourse related to how much Spurs have to pay towards revamping the transit system and the cost we had to cover.

I think it was around 7 million.

Where we wanted to put around 7 million towards it and they wanted 14 million out of us.
Don't know where you get your figures from. TfL wanted £5.6m for refurbishing Tottenham Hale, we wanted to pay £2m.