That's good of them £40m into the imaginary stadium we'll probably never play in
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
Did you actually read what the press release says?
The moment those naming rights are secured - brace yourself for the inevitable
A little more than dodgy, since it essentially means you bankrupted yourself and just took the creditor (Roman), and gave him the club by wiping out the previous holdings and reworking the debt as the new equity on paper (but no money actually went into this new equity). Given Roman was the owner at the time, it's taking the money from one pocket and moving it to the other. Nothing actually changed.
The numbers you posted were incomplete. It shows only the TV revenue, rather than including the other sources (matchday and commercial) where we struggle in comparison. It also doesn't include expenses. All you see is the profit and loss at the end of the year, which paints a deceiving picture. It shows that Chelsea and City are still spending unsustainably. It also shows Liverpool are massively in the red while still paying off the debts of the previous ownership. We make a small profit, but don't have piles of money to spend. Woolwich do, but their American owner pockets the cash rather than uses it (a literal refusal to compete).
Still doesn't make a case that ENIC must go into debt to buy players. They own the club, and can do with it what they wish. Claims that they owe it to the fans to lose money show a tremendous sense of entitlement. It would appear that many Spurs fans are in fact Veruca Salt.
But the owners of Porstmouth, Leeds and AS Monaco did do that. Roman hasn't yet, but what happens if Vladimir Putin decides take away ahis company, as he has done to other "business friends"?
Did you read Swiss Ramble's article?
If not - I'd strongly recommend you do (as with most of his finance-related pieces - goon or not)
You've missed the point completely, I'm afraid. Who said ENIC must go into debt (that makes 0 sense by the way - they're simply an investment company)
Most fans are merely asking for positive investment in the transfer market instead of pathetic excuses and shareholders' pleasing, while spouting bullshit about a new stadium which was meant to open this season btw while spunking millions in agent's fees and wages on managers and staff. One little company (Archway) holding back a 500 million project that would regenerate one of London's shittest parts? Like fuck they would. Where the fuck is the community here? CLOs? Sounds more like a cheesy movie script to me, mate. Just pay them what they want and fucking get on with it. Sound familiar? Moutinho, Schneiderlin, etc.
As for Chelsea - the debt was turned few years ago, not back in 2004
Last edited:
The wording of that implies a debt to equity transaction. The loan would be converted to a number of shares, giving the creditor a % in THFC.
Yes - they'll sell the shares and recoup the 40m - not donate 40m from their own pocket to the club as the OP implied
/pedant
Leeds foreign billionaire Peter Risdale?
Mandaric and Gaydemark are/were both worth less than £200m.
AS Monaco's owner just paid out his ex-wife 1/2 his fortune so has taken a massive hit in his personal wealth. The other problem with Monaco is they are in a city which doesn't follow football and don't get the crowds or sponsorship to be a viable long term "toy thing"
Who made that loan? The quote you just provided said that the loan would be converted to shares. That doesn't mean selling shares to someone else like the public. It means taking the loan, and converting that £40 million into a numbers of shares in THFC. No sales of shares to the public implied in that sentence I'm afraid.
Oh for the old days when a self made millionaire fan could buy a club and secure it's fortunes.i reckon Sugar was just that(not a fan though) he just turned up 20 years too late and took on a club that was too big.
He would have made a great Championship chairman
He would have made a great Championship chairman
Non-voting share capital
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-voting_stock
What do you think those are intended for other than to sell?
League One maybe. Have you seen the debts of the average Championship club nowadays?
Still waiting to hear about the foreign billionaires who have ruined clubs....
The same ones whose personal fortune rivals their countries' annual balance sheet / GDP and serve as advisers to Parliament - the ones bound to go bankrupt any time now?
This thread reminds me of when the whole Straford debate was on going. The 'old school' chaps decided to hold an anti-Stratford protest before a match with Man U (i think). Around 150 turned up, protested at the Bill Nick gates & then shut the High Road for 10-15 mins so the away team coach had to be diverted. Message sent.
A fortnight later, a Facebook protest was organised (Bolton). 300/350 hard core Spurs declared they would 'be attending', On the day, 5 showed up.
I suppose my point is that unless it was a 'virtual' protest, no-one would show.
A fortnight later, a Facebook protest was organised (Bolton). 300/350 hard core Spurs declared they would 'be attending', On the day, 5 showed up.
I suppose my point is that unless it was a 'virtual' protest, no-one would show.
Vincent Tan.
He may have got Cardiff to the premier league, but he ripped the soul out of the club by changing their colour to red.
I think they're intended as a way to account for every investment in the club, so that when it comes time to sell the club to the next owner, you get all your money back. Who will buy those shares. No one who wants a say in the club, because you have none. Would you, as a fan buy one? If so, why not just mail Joe Lewis 40 pounds directly, as that's what you'd be doing. It's got no value to anyone who wants to buy the club, as it offers no power. It has no value to any fan wanting a place at the table, as it explicitly denies that. If it is a share that offers none of the benefits of a share, what is it for?
Ok, this is my personal verion of the NDP below
I genuinely believe ENIC want to build a new stadium primarily because it would triple our value as a club overnight and very little to do with turning us into a regular Top 4 contender - i.e. football related. They can then sell and take a massive return on their investment - job done. Thanks for coming.
However - Joe/ENIC is not willing to pay the 400m tab himself so they went looking for investors. That obviously takes time and often requires serious canvassing - hence the endless bullshit about heritage approval, land acquisition, etc.
Naturally, one of the main investors would be the future naming rights (anyone who genuinely believes we wold be called WHL anymore should stop reading now and have their head checked). That in a way is a bit like selling a pyramid scheme - trying to convince a large multinational S&P Top100 to give us 200m cash based on some pretty Photoshop renderings (remember - Goons also had flats to sell which helped). So that for me remains the main stumbling block - not some random family-owned warehouse standing in the way of massive community regeneration. If anything - local government should have been far more vocal while involving the community throughout.
I believe one of 3 scenarios are likely to happen in the near future
- we finally sell the naming rights and ENIC sells the club shortly after = fantastic return on investment
- we finally sell the naming rights, secure the loan, build a new stadium - ENIC sells the club immediately = enormous return on investment
- we're unable to secure investors, they refuse to chip in and the circus continues
I genuinely believe ENIC want to build a new stadium primarily because it would triple our value as a club overnight and very little to do with turning us into a regular Top 4 contender - i.e. football related. They can then sell and take a massive return on their investment - job done. Thanks for coming.
However - Joe/ENIC is not willing to pay the 400m tab himself so they went looking for investors. That obviously takes time and often requires serious canvassing - hence the endless bullshit about heritage approval, land acquisition, etc.
Naturally, one of the main investors would be the future naming rights (anyone who genuinely believes we wold be called WHL anymore should stop reading now and have their head checked). That in a way is a bit like selling a pyramid scheme - trying to convince a large multinational S&P Top100 to give us 200m cash based on some pretty Photoshop renderings (remember - Goons also had flats to sell which helped). So that for me remains the main stumbling block - not some random family-owned warehouse standing in the way of massive community regeneration. If anything - local government should have been far more vocal while involving the community throughout.
I believe one of 3 scenarios are likely to happen in the near future
- we finally sell the naming rights and ENIC sells the club shortly after = fantastic return on investment
- we finally sell the naming rights, secure the loan, build a new stadium - ENIC sells the club immediately = enormous return on investment
- we're unable to secure investors, they refuse to chip in and the circus continues
Last edited:
Sorry, mate - did you just ask why would a company sell (non-voting) shares to the public?