What's new

Tottenham Takeover Talk

Would you welcome a 25% ownership stake for Qatar Sports Investments (QSI)?

  • Yes

    Votes: 655 65.2%
  • No

    Votes: 350 34.8%

  • Total voters
    1,005
  • Poll closed .

fecka

Well-Known Member
Jun 24, 2013
2,346
6,520
Wasn’t most of Chelsea’s fee, IIRC nearly half of the fee, the money Chelsea owed to Roman Abramovich?

I can understand why we’d be expensive, with all of the infrastructure and assets that we own, but £4.5b for Tottenham when that’s the ball park figure for Manchester United is an extortionate fee. It’s ridiculous and stinks of greediness.
Chelsea, on the other hand, have almost no assets in the form of real estate, etc while THFC holds something close to 2 bn in real estate and infrastructure alone and a brand new state-of-the-art stadium while Chelsea is stuck at Stamford Bridge with 40k seats for the foreseeable future.
Also, remember that a first bid will always be lower so there are bound to be negotiations and meeting somewhere closer to the middle.
 

JonnySpurs

SC Veteran
Jun 4, 2004
5,346
12,398
No, the new owner bought the controlling stake of 57% from majority shareholder. Najafi is still the 2nd biggest shareholder. The previous Suns owner is controversial and Najafi called for his resignation last year after some bad comments he made. Essentially, brokered the sale of Suns.

As a Suns fan for the last 30 odd years, this is spot on. Robert Sarver was the previous owner and was an absolute tool. Hated by the fan base. I wasn't actually aware that Najafi was still part owner. I thought Matt Ishbia had bought us outright. Either way, this all feels more legit than any other similar story we've seen in recent years.
 

wiggo24

Well-Known Member
Jan 5, 2013
5,094
36,825
Wasn’t most of Chelsea’s fee, IIRC nearly half of the fee, the money Chelsea owed to Roman Abramovich?

I can understand why we’d be expensive, with all of the assets that we own, but £4.5b for Tottenham, when that’s the ball park figure for Manchester United, is an extortionate fee. It’s ridiculous and stinks of greediness.

I agree it's high but TBF people need to stop looking at this form a footballing perspective. Chelsea own fuck all except a stadium which needs upgrading and quite a shabby training base in Cobham. We've got state of the art stadium and training facilities, plus a bunch of hotels/apartments etc. Our portfolio of assets is incomparable, and that's what the investors will be focusing on - not how many trophies we've won (or failed to win).

9th highest revenues in the world without a stadium sponsor (which a new owner could pick and choose). I'm not surprised that the club are valuing us at 4bn or so.
 

shelfsidespur

Active Member
Feb 28, 2006
78
191
This thread has the most chest out, completely unaware opinion throwing I've ever seen on this forum... And I frequent the match threads!

The face of the takeover consortiums net worth is largely nil and moot, it is investment from the partners that is often filtered through a club through "complicated" means and I really can't stress enough it would be healthy for individuals to do a bit of research before putting fingers to screen on this one...

This would on paper see a more investment focused owner within the club which is what everyone wanted since day one...now it may finally be happening the amount of absurd opinions is genuinely mind numbing and you know the opinions I'm referring to, ignoring the plenty of healthy discourse in between...
Not sure it is necessary for the emotive language but the underlying message I get from this is wait and see, then read the details before commenting and I would strongly agree. The devil will be in the detail. Despite the views of many on here DL is no fool, not by any means.There is a lot more detail required before one can make an informed decision. My gut reaction is that if the deal encompasses the the development activities adjacent to the stadium the price is too low, using Chelsea as a yardstick. Their stadium is limited in its expansion capabilities. Ours -say no more! COYS!
 

Timberwolf

Well-Known Member
Jan 17, 2008
10,328
50,217
Cue ENIC valuing us at 20 billion quid and Levy mooning the MSP representatives through the window of his palatial office at the training ground when they show up to negotiate.
 

THFCSPURS19

The Speaker of the Transfer Rumours Forum
Jan 6, 2013
37,898
130,561

Spurs chairman Daniel Levy values over £3.5bn amid takeover talk​

Reports claim Iranian-American billionaire Jahm Najafi is lining up bid for the club

Tottenham Hotspur insist they have not received an approach from Iranian-American billionaire Jahm Najafi, who is reported to be lining up a £3.1 billion bid for the club.

The Financial Times have reported that Najafi, who is the chair of MSP Sports Capital and has held talks over investing in Everton, will bid for Spurs with a consortium of backers.

Telegraph Sport understands that a bid in the region of £3.1 billion would likely fall short of chairman Daniel Levy’s valuation of the club, with sources claiming he rejected a £2.9 billion offer from a different American businessman last year.

It is believed that Levy values Spurs at upwards of £3.5 billion and, while not commenting publicly, insiders are adamant that Najafi and his partners have so far not approached the club about the prospect of a sale.

It is claimed, however, that Najafi and members of his consortium are already known to Levy, with sources convinced that Levy would want to retain his position, at least in the short-term, as part of any takeover.

Telegraph Sport has been told that talks between Everton and MSP have slowed down over the past fortnight, but it is unclear whether or not that is related to reported interest in Tottenham.

Intriguingly, Najafi’s partner at MSP, Jeff Moorad, held talks with Levy in 2015 about investing in Tottenham. Moorad made his name during the 1980s and is said to have been partially responsible for inspiring the character Jerry Maguire, famously played by Tom Cruise in the Hollywood movie.

According to the Financial Times, The Najafi and MSP-led offer would value the club’s equity at approximately £2.5 billion before adding about £620 million of debt on the club’s books.

It is reported that the bid would be structured so that MSP and its partners would put forward 70 per cent of the purchase price, while backers from the Gulf, mainly from Abu Dhabi, would contribute the remaining 30 per cent.

Tottenham is owned by ENIC, who bought their first 26 per cent share into the club in 2000 for £21.9 million, and run by Levy.
 

fecka

Well-Known Member
Jun 24, 2013
2,346
6,520
If they spend 3bn and cover the debts on top it's not far off the 4bn though is it?
The £3.1bn is with the stadium debts covered, the original article stating 3.75bn was in USD so if accurate they're essentially 1 bn or something off atm.
If Najafi and the consortium get to around £4bn or slightly over I'd be surprised if Enic wouldn't sell.
 

Darth Vega

Well-Known Member
Jul 28, 2013
1,710
10,496

Spurs chairman Daniel Levy values over £3.5bn amid takeover talk​

Reports claim Iranian-American billionaire Jahm Najafi is lining up bid for the club

Tottenham Hotspur insist they have not received an approach from Iranian-American billionaire Jahm Najafi, who is reported to be lining up a £3.1 billion bid for the club.

The Financial Times have reported that Najafi, who is the chair of MSP Sports Capital and has held talks over investing in Everton, will bid for Spurs with a consortium of backers.

Telegraph Sport understands that a bid in the region of £3.1 billion would likely fall short of chairman Daniel Levy’s valuation of the club, with sources claiming he rejected a £2.9 billion offer from a different American businessman last year.

It is believed that Levy values Spurs at upwards of £3.5 billion and, while not commenting publicly, insiders are adamant that Najafi and his partners have so far not approached the club about the prospect of a sale.

It is claimed, however, that Najafi and members of his consortium are already known to Levy, with sources convinced that Levy would want to retain his position, at least in the short-term, as part of any takeover.

Telegraph Sport has been told that talks between Everton and MSP have slowed down over the past fortnight, but it is unclear whether or not that is related to reported interest in Tottenham.

Intriguingly, Najafi’s partner at MSP, Jeff Moorad, held talks with Levy in 2015 about investing in Tottenham. Moorad made his name during the 1980s and is said to have been partially responsible for inspiring the character Jerry Maguire, famously played by Tom Cruise in the Hollywood movie.

According to the Financial Times, The Najafi and MSP-led offer would value the club’s equity at approximately £2.5 billion before adding about £620 million of debt on the club’s books.

It is reported that the bid would be structured so that MSP and its partners would put forward 70 per cent of the purchase price, while backers from the Gulf, mainly from Abu Dhabi, would contribute the remaining 30 per cent.

Tottenham is owned by ENIC, who bought their first 26 per cent share into the club in 2000 for £21.9 million, and run by Levy.
About the most horrifying words you could hear: "with sources convinced that Levy would want to retain his position, at least in the short-term, as part of any takeover"
 

felmani26

SC Supporter
Jan 1, 2008
24,679
43,839
I guess at least parameters are/have been set here and it's down to negotiating a settlement figure somewhere in the middle.
 

JonnySpurs

SC Veteran
Jun 4, 2004
5,346
12,398
It's fascinating to see how state ownership of football clubs have warped fans' view of what ownership should be about.

Firstly, every single owner bar the sports washers are in it for a profit. That goes for 90% of PL clubs. Levy is in it for profit. That's not a mark against any potential owner.

I was reading through our financials last night because I'm a sad, boring accountant but we had revenue of 443m in a year that we were in the Conference League.

Assuming that we'd be in the Europa League at a minimum most times and our commercial income should keep growing (especially if we sort out the naming rights) our revenue should regularly crack 500m.

Our operating income is 114m. We have 226m cash in the bank. We've spent 500m in the last four years.

We don't need an owner to come in and pump money in the club. Levy has done an outstanding job of building us up into being a profitable business. We need an owner to come in and give us direction and to do what FSG/Kroenkes have done and have a data analytics-heavy football operation with the Sporting Director/Manager in full control.

We need an owner who is not as risk averse as Levy who will raise our wages to turnover ratio from 47% to something more competitive without being financially destructive (something like 65%) while also pushing the boat out when we're in a position of strength.

I don't know much about this guy but I do follow the NBA as a sorry Knicks fan and the Suns are a decently ran operation. They've built a competitive small market team while making a blockbuster trade for one of the league's best players. The ambition is there at least but of course that doesn't transfer to football.

What we need to hope is that this guy has a heavy focus on data analytics who will support Paratici (or a DoF of his choosing) to revamp our recruitment department and allowing the football people time to implement a philosophy that suits us as a club.

We need that more than we'll ever need a sugar daddy.
Agree with this, one thing I would say is that I believe Matt Ishbia, new majority owner, was the driving force behind the Kevin Durant trade and I'm not sure that Najafi had anything to do with it. Sarver was essentially blocking a lot of big trades previously because he was a tight fisted, cretin of a man that didn't care enough about the success of the team. Ishbia swooped in and on his first day as owner, rubber stamped a trade that cost 400m to pull off, or something like that. What Spurs need is an owner like Ishbia, who understands what it is to back a team and actually want to see them be successful in a sporting sense, as well as profitable in a business sense.

As much as Abramovich is/was a dodgy fucker, it cant be denied that he wanted Chelsea to be successful on the pitch and did everything necessary to make that happen. Let's not forget that he nearly purchased Spurs before Chelsea and I've no doubts that, had he done so, we'd have seen similar on-field success as they have.
 
Top