Financial Results - Year Ended 30 June 2022

  • 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...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Sort by date Sort by reaction score
Spursidol said:
Certainly in summer 2018 (I think) Eriksen was turned down for a move. I'd hate to sell domestically and hope that we could repeat the Modric transfer (who was being pursued by Chelsea) but we allowed Madrid to take him.

Its always up to buying club to persuade player to leave Spurs, usually for higher wages or more sun in Spain !

Never easy and never going to be popular but results of NOT agreeing Eriksen's sale in 2018 was a lack of funds to buy his successor which is coming home to roost now. Its a classic case of a small amount of jam today for a couple of seasons if you keep an older player or (hopefully) lots of jam tomorrow or actually maybe 10 seasons if you sell and buy right.
Click to expand...

Yes, the summer before he left is the absolute latest we should've sold him, didn't he want Madrid who didn't seem fussed about wanting him? Might've been paper talk.

I'm also against selling a top player to a domestic rival, wasn't so fussed about Walker (don't regard him as a top player) going for crazy money, just a shocker that we recruited so badly for so long at RB (and generally).

I remember the Modric affair well, he tried to publicly engineer a move to Chelsea for £40m and Levy quite rightly told him and his agent to fuck off. He sulked for a few weeks and then had an excellent season. We sold him at the end of it for £30m(ish) to Madrid which did him a massive favour to be honest, what a career he's had.

As an aside, Harry was manager then and complained that he was struggling with Modric after the Chelsea affair, that the lad wasn't training properly and maybe it'd be better to sell him and invest the money on new players.

Cut to a year or two later when Harry was now managing QPR and he said that Spurs were a good club but their problem was they sold their best players like Modric!!
Selective memory from Harry as per!
 
Spursidol said:
Click to expand...


Worth noting that most transfers are paid for over a period of time (generally the length of player contract), so no surprise there are creditors arrising which are the outstanding instalments of player transfers

Not surprisingly when players are sold there are equally debtors arising from outstanding instalments.

However generally speaking clubs are net investors in playing staff - replacing players with more expensive models so creditors £'s are higher than debtors (which Kieran Maguire has not reported on)
 
Spursidol said:
Click to expand...


Spurs get into 4th position in total income, bolstered by 2nd highest matchday revenues - but still a gap to make up on the 'big 3' of ManCity (under attack for possibly phony commercial contracts), Liverpool and ManU.

In the current year to 30 June 2023 I'd expect Spurs revenues to rise substantially driven by CL revenues (versus Conference League last year) but importantly a healthy increase in commercial income - the 16 non football events a year, more sponsorship deals a return of exhibitions and conferences, increases in skywalk and similar stadium experiences, followed in year to June 24 of the F1 'go kart' income. All of these necessary to try to get in a par with big 3 income ..... and in turn improve the playing squad, remembering that top players these days are routinely £50m - £100m in transfer fees.
 
To summarise, if I'm reading it right ;

4th highest income
5th highest wage bill, a negligible amount behind Woolwich
5th highest loss
5th highest gross spend
2nd highest net spend.
2nd highest on monies owed for transfer fees.
 
I suspect from the above that Chelsea accounts for 2022 have not yet been published and Maguire has not included them in his analysis.

I'd expect Chelsea revenues to be less than Spurs but clearly their spend on players over the last 18 months to radically change slides on squad cost, player spend, wages etc
 
Spursidol said:
I suspect from the above that Chelsea accounts for 2022 have not yet been published and Maguire has not included them in his analysis.

I'd expect Chelsea revenues to be less than Spurs but clearly their spend on players over the last 18 months to radically change slides on squad cost, player spend, wages etc.
Click to expand...
No, not released yet.

Obviously their mega spending in the summer would not be included in the figures for 2022 accounts.
 
stevee said:
To summarise, if I'm reading it right ;

4th highest income
5th highest wage bill, a negligible amount behind Woolwich
5th highest loss
5th highest gross spend
2nd highest net spend.
2nd highest on monies owed for transfer fees.
Click to expand...
Looks about right.

Worth adding that with a year end of June, much of our summer 2022 transfer business is not included in the figures nor those players wages etc.

I'd suggest our squad rebuild really started with Paraciti's arrival and summer 2021 transfer window so it might take a year or even two before our more systematic squad rebuild show up in the above figures.

So I'd expect our wages to grow faster as a % than our competitors, our spend to typically be 3rd/4th highest and our total squad cost to grow faster as a % than our main rivals etc.

And our ability to improve the playing squad will be significantly affected by our attracting CL revenues, however I suspect our non football revenues will grow fast such that CL revenues (whilst remaining important) become less significant to the club's ability to invest in new players in the next few years
 
Spursidol said:
Worth noting that most transfers are paid for over a period of time (generally the length of player contract), so no surprise there are creditors arrising which are the outstanding instalments of player transfers

Not surprisingly when players are sold there are equally debtors arising from outstanding instalments.

However generally speaking clubs are net investors in playing staff - replacing players with more expensive models so creditors £'s are higher than debtors (which Kieran Maguire has not reported on)
Click to expand...
Our loan to buy is probably pushing up our outstandings up
Spursidol said:
Wham's 'council house' stadium idea where they do not pay for the full cost of putting their matches on showing up in them being the only club able to make 'day to day' profits. A clear case of unfair competition - a case for MMC ? !
Click to expand...
Probably tongue in cheek but no as any club are allowed to do the same if opportunity ever arose.
 
Spursidol said:
I suspect from the above that Chelsea accounts for 2022 have not yet been published and Maguire has not included them in his analysis.

I'd expect Chelsea revenues to be less than Spurs but clearly their spend on players over the last 18 months to radically change slides on squad cost, player spend, wages etc
Click to expand...
These results represent 2021 ours are up to June 2022 so even when included any spend this season won't be in them
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom