Swiss Ramble Article on our finances

Shea · Apr 15, 2015

THFCSPURS19 said:
I'm sorry buy how do you know we're not attracting new fans?

Life experience and common sense

Edit: don't take it to mean literally NO new fans - I am talking in comparison to the likes of Man U, Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea and City in the past 20-30 years and I said so in response to the previous poster who questioned why we would only have a 56k stadium and what has changed from the days where we were the biggest/richest team in the land and had the most fans (in context I am sure you understand)

Gaz_Gammon · Apr 15, 2015

225 said:
Walking out on the team is different to walking out on a contract

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/walk out

Definition of WALK OUT
intransitive verb

: to leave suddenly often as an expression of disapproval
2
: to go on strike
— walk out on
: to leave in the lurch : abandon, desert

A contract is legal and binding........oh and i don't need Wiki to understand that.

So don't walk on, jog on.

225 · Apr 15, 2015

Gaz_Gammon said:
A contract is legal and binding........oh and i don't need Wiki to understand that.

So don't walk on, jog on.

It was the dictionary, not Wiki. I sometimes wonder whether people are being WUMs or a bit slow....

They walked out on their team, i.e. left their team mates in the lurch. Didn't turn up for training. Fuck all to do with contracts.

Some of the players had signed for the club no doubt specifically thinking they were going to be playing with these players, Modric and especially Bale. They let those guys down.

So many different examples of 'walking out', and footballers can effectively strike easier than Joe Public as they are worth so much that clubs can't afford to terminate their contracts.

Everlasting Seconds · Apr 15, 2015

Bus-Conductor said:
Exactly this.

Transfers will always be a gamble. Even when you pay top dollar for established players with WC reputations. Veron, Shevchenko, Torres, etc etc. DeMaria, Falcao and Shaw can't get in the ManU team now. ManC have spent vast sums on players who can't get a regular game.

It's piss easy looking at transfers in hindsight and saying they were terrible business but that is bogus. You can only judge the deals at the time they were made. Did they make sense in terms of the what the player had achieved and his potential to achieve, did they represent value in those circumstances, did they represent value in relation to the clubs fiscal model etc.

There will be various of us that are vehemently opposed to given transfers, sometimes we can see they are poor fits or poor value or both. But to be fair, that doesn't happen very often, and what the figures prove, and the consistent performance we've had suggest we aren't getting it too wrong.

Most of the time in the last few years we can see the logic (or at least some) in most of the deals we are making - in terms of the overall package.

Soldado was a proven goalscorer over a long duration, in a top league for a good team. Lamela had just scored 15 goals for the second team in SerieA aged 21 and seemed like an almost perfect replacement for the outgoing 85m auxiliary wide forward. Paulinho had just won the equivalent of the South American CL, been voted 3rd best player as Brazil won the Confed Cup. Eriksen was great business at 8m. Chadli had just scored 19 goals playing as a wide forward in the dutch league. You can see Chiriches has talent as a footballer, how the fuck anyone thought he'd be a good CB fit for the EPL is a bit baffling though.

So, we may have had the odd reservation, but by and large most could see some logic in all those deals. That's all we can ask of those that make the decisions to buy players. That there is some understandable logic.

The signings that are most questionable for me are decent but average players with limited scope for improvement who will block the integration of a development player who at the very least will equal that averageness, but may have the potential to exceed it.

Agreed. If we all transport ourselves to the time of signing of various players, we most likely approved of 85%, at least. As you point out too, I've seen the logic in most transfers over the latest years. I was vocally disapproving very few, including Davies. I was puzzled over Capoue, who was immediately a really good player, and I was under whelmed over Holtby. I was however, excited for loads of them, and I believe we all were.

lis spur · Apr 15, 2015

Looking at that table we sit neatly between Dortmund and Atletico Madrid; both fairly successful in both domestic and European football recently.
So is lack of money a reason for not achieving ?

Everlasting Seconds · Apr 15, 2015

Mullers said:
Soldado had pedigree but we shouldn't have broken from our strategy to buy a striker with no resale value

Yes we should. And we did. We should have done everything we could to secure a striker that summer, and I believe everything possible was done. It didn't work out, correct. But we should have given it our all, and abandon reason if needed, and in that regard, I can't fault Levy the decision.

SteveH · Apr 15, 2015

lis spur said:
Looking at that table we sit neatly between Dortmund and Atletico Madrid; both fairly successful in both domestic and European football recently.
So is lack of money a reason for not achieving ?

Our current problem is recovering from the subsequent poor signings, it has set back and scuppered any chance of top four for this and privoise season. It really cannot be underestimated the damage it has done to the club. I do not think people in the last two seasons at the recrutemene side quite understood what makes a player suitable to the premiership.

mckenz · Apr 15, 2015

Everlasting Seconds said:
Agreed. If we all transport ourselves to the time of signing of various players, we most likely approved of 85%, at least. As you point out too, I've seen the logic in most transfers over the latest years. I was vocally disapproving very few, including Davies. I was puzzled over Capoue, who was immediately a really good player, and I was under whelmed over Holtby. I was however, excited for loads of the, and I believe we all were.

100% this

Christ, Signing someone called Vlad from the east who scored amazing long shots?

all the rest sounded good on paper (from that 2013), even Capoue had many, many here very excited. In fact I remember the only objection was "why, we have Sandro"

hindsight is 20/20

newbie · Apr 15, 2015

SteveH said:
Our current problem is recovering from the subsequent poor signings, it has set back and scuppered any chance of top four for this and privoise season. It really cannot be underestimated the damage it has done to the club. I do not think people in the last two seasons at the recrutemene side quite understood what makes a player suitable to the premiership.

I agree we signed way to many players that never helps and sold to many.

I think it was failure to push on under Rednapp if we had made 3rd that season and signed some good players maybe. Since then to much change, and a bar set way to high for the next manager after we had sold vdv, and modric if we had a top striker under Rednapp and one or two players ( and a shit load of belief we could have sustained a challenge for the title). Since then to many average players bought to many good players sold.

Gaz_Gammon · Apr 15, 2015

225 said:
Walking out on the team is different to walking out on a contract

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/walk out

Definition of WALK OUT
intransitive verb

: to leave suddenly often as an expression of disapproval
2
: to go on strike
— walk out on
: to leave in the lurch : abandon, desert

A contract is legal and binding........oh and i don't need Wiki to understand that.

So don't walk on,

225 said:
It was the dictionary, not Wiki. I sometimes wonder whether people are being WUMs or a bit slow....

They walked out on their team, i.e. left their team mates in the lurch. Didn't turn up for training. Fuck all to do with contracts.

Some of the players had signed for the club no doubt specifically thinking they were going to be playing with these players, Modric and especially Bale. They let those guys down.

So many different examples of 'walking out', and footballers can effectively strike easier than Joe Public as they are worth so much that clubs can't afford to terminate their contracts.

If the club wanted to hold the players to their contracts they could. Saints did it and so did Liverpool.

That's the end of this discussion for me.

guiltyparty · Apr 15, 2015

lis spur said:
Looking at that table we sit neatly between Dortmund and Atletico Madrid; both fairly successful in both domestic and European football recently.
So is lack of money a reason for not achieving ?

Neither of those teams has as many clubs more financially powerful than them in their domestic leagues as us though. The financial powerhouses are concentrated in the UK

lis spur · Apr 15, 2015

guiltyparty said:
Neither of those teams has as many clubs more financially powerful than them in their domestic leagues as us though. The financial powerhouses are concentrated in the UK

But you could argue the quality coached and better teams lie in their respectice leagues .A.Madrid are battling with the two powerhouses of European football ,while we wallow in 5/6/7 of a poor quality league in the eyes of most.I feel we flitter away our money too easily.

SteveH · Apr 15, 2015

newbie said:
I agree we signed way to many players that never helps and sold to many.

I think it was failure to push on under Rednapp if we had made 3rd that season and signed some good players maybe. Since then to much change, and a bar set way to high for the next manager after we had sold vdv, and modric if we had a top striker under Rednapp and one or two players ( and a shit load of belief we could have sustained a challenge for the title). Since then to many average players bought to many good players sold.

Bale and Modric going where inevitable in the player market in Europe and was not the problem it was the total ineptitude of "whoever" when choosing so many 'wrongens' as replacements. Very Spursie sadly.

225 · Apr 15, 2015

Gaz_Gammon said:
If the club wanted to hold the players to their contracts they could. Saints did it and so did Liverpool.

That's the end of this discussion for me.

Naturally. Liverpool held on to Suarez for one season, Southampton sold half their team and convinced just one to stay. He won't be there after the summer I doubt.

And what do you know, that's what happened with us. Both Modric and Bale stayed an extra season before skipping training.

I don't know what your point is. I can only assume you think we should make a Josef Fritzl style dungeon under Hotspur Way, where we can imprison unhappy players.

Contracts do not override human rights, and we only hold the registration to a player, not their human rights, nor do we own them as people. Modric and Bale forced the club into a corner whereby the only option were to either:

a) Cancel the contract due to breach (not turning up for training/refusing to play/whatever Modric did under Harry at the start of 2011/12)

b) Refuse to sell the player, at which point they become a stale asset no difference to Assou-Ekotto or Kaboul, probably never turn up for training and then the agents refuse to deal with us as a club, meaning we can't sign anyone worth bidding for.

c) Sell the player on our terms.

We chose C. Anyone who blames the club for refusing to sell until breaking point, and at which they brought in decent fees, needs to take a look at what happens to other clubs in those situations. Nearly every decent player Arsenal have had have gone easier and cheaper (Nasri, Fabregas, Henry, Toure, Hleb, Clichy, van Persie, Adebayor......), Liverpool with Suarez, United with Cristiano Ronaldo....

Lilbaz · Apr 16, 2015

lis spur said:
Looking at that table we sit neatly between Dortmund and Atletico Madrid; both fairly successful in both domestic and European football recently.
So is lack of money a reason for not achieving ?

3rd party ownership plays a big part in Atleticos success. Also the fact they didn't pay any of their debts and ran up a £500m overdraft.

yankspurs · Apr 16, 2015

Shea said:
Life experience and common sense

Edit: don't take it to mean literally NO new fans - I am talking in comparison to the likes of Man U, Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea and City in the past 20-30 years and I said so in response to the previous poster who questioned why we would only have a 56k stadium and what has changed from the days where we were the biggest/richest team in the land and had the most fans (in context I am sure you understand)

You dont know that for sure. Maybe people like the heartbreak and alcoholism life. Maybe the fancy torturing themselves :whistle:

Lilbaz · Apr 16, 2015

Our commercial/merchandising income hasn't gone up. So even if we are getting new fans, it doesn't matter. Because they are not spending money on us.

arunspurs · Apr 16, 2015

Our revenue is dominated by player sales. Problem with that is we could have one good season in sales & next year end up with duds who are worth nothing. Its a volatile portion in the revenue. On other hand, Commercial revenue like kit deal etc are guaranteed revenue. Our commercial revenue % is same as Aston Villa which is saying somthing;

Simple fact is - to make money we have to spend money.

yankspurs · Apr 16, 2015

Lilbaz said:
Our commercial/merchandising income hasn't gone up. So even if we are getting new fans, it doesn't matter. Because they are not spending money on us.

I'd love to see the merchandising numbers for each club. I'd imagine the bigger clubs would be lower than you'd expect as there shirts are also the most popular ones that people buy from chinese wholesalers.

arunspurs · Apr 16, 2015

yankspurs said:
I'd love to see the merchandising numbers for each club. I'd imagine the bigger clubs would be lower than you'd expect as there shirts are also the most popular ones that people buy from chinese wholesalers.

Nike pay United for the association with their brand & not for the number of shirts sold by Nike showrooms. For a sponsor, shirts sold is just a add-on benefit - their main purpose of giving money is to get exposure.

Forums

What's new

Matches

Sportsbook

Members

Swiss Ramble Article on our finances

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Living in hope, existing in disappointment

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

BSoDL candidate for SW London

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

BSoDL candidate for SW London

Living in hope, existing in disappointment

Just call me Baz

Enic Out

Just call me Baz

Well-Known Member

Enic Out

Well-Known Member

Similar threads