Levy out?

[Incomplete_usernam]

Price of arrivals = £150m
Price of sales = £30m

BuT wE oNlY sPeNt MoNeY wE gAiNeD fRoM sAlEs!

You should have gone with your instinct and not replied you silly idiot.

So let's do the math on this then shall we?

Our "net spend" was £74m this window after sales all told but during that "net spend" we also weakened the team in a key area and didn't buy a replacement, the reasoning for which is obvious, our revenue wouldn't cover the cost and still keep us profitable to the degree our owners would deem acceptable (see "greed" in the dictionary.)

When you also factor in the extra revenue from the unexpected CL run which is £73m or £103m with TV rights it means we have actually profited once again this window, so whilst this was "net spend" in theory our purchases were still made with austerity and frugality in mind rather than purchases which would try to push us on to the next level.

I know you have a hard time seeing through our owners and their bullshit because you have this weird cult like undying loyalty to them but shouldn't it be pretty obvious at this point that their goal is to remain in profit at all points? Even at the expense of success? Nothing they have ever done has indicated that their goal is for us to win trophies at the expense of profit, ever, their number one focus is running this club to benefit them, not to benefit supporters.

Why do you think we stopped short of spending more without more sales? Levy even said during the most recent meeting that the reason we didn't buy more was because we couldn't move players on.

I know you seem to have a hard time understanding this but maybe you should think about what you want AS A SUPPORTER, rather than celebrating and championing billionaires saving a few quid to make themselves richer at the expense of success on the pitch.

 

[Incomplete_usernam]

Price of arrivals 102.6 million
Price of departures 31.5
Net spend 19/20- 71.5 million
net spend 18/19 minus 4. 82 million

combined net spend 18/19 +19/20 66.7 million

averaging a net spend of 33.35 million per year based on the last 2 years.

Figures according to transfermarkt

That's not even accounting for the extra CL revenue either.

 

[SchmoodSpur]

So let's do the math on this then shall we?

Our "net spend" was £74m this window after sales all told but during that "net spend" we also weakened the team in a key area and didn't buy a replacement, the reasoning for which is obvious, our revenue wouldn't cover the cost and still keep us profitable.

When you also factor in the extra revenue from the unexpected CL run which is £73m or £103m with TV rights it means we have actually profited once again this window, so whilst this was "net spend" in theory our purchases were still made with austerity and frugality in mind rather than purchases which would try to push us on to the next level.

I know you have a hard time seeing through our owners and their bullshit because you have this weird cult like undying loyalty to them but shouldn't it be pretty obvious at this point that their goal is to remain in profit at all points? Even at the expense of success? Nothing they have ever done has indicated that their goal is for us to win trophies at the expense of profit, ever, their number one focus is running this club to benefit them, not to benefit supporters.

Why do you think we stopped short of spending more without more sales? Levy even said during the most recent meeting that the reason we didn't buy more was because we couldn't move players on.

I know you seem to have a hard time understanding this but maybe you should think about what you want AS A SUPPORTER, rather than celebrating and championing billionaires saving a few quid to make themselves richer...

HAHAHA

Literally your post before you said our spending was funded by sales...

our spending and how it was funded by sales

Now you've written a whole essay that this isn't actually true.

Stop talking, lad.

FYI lad - When a certain crew come in to back you up against me, you know it's a wrap.

 

[superstaryid]

Total Net spend of 79.5 million for the last 10 years.

If you did the total for the 10 years prior to the last window we had a net spend of under + 16 million just 1.6 million a season.

The last 11 seasons has a combined positive net spend of 87.2 million making an average net spend of 7.9 million s year.


The sell to buy theory has legs.

 

[SchmoodSpur]

 

[Incomplete_usernam]

HAHAHA

Literally your post before you said our spending was funded by sales...


Now you've written a whole essay that this isn't actually true.

Stop talking, lad.

FYI lad - When a certain crew come in to back you up against me, you know it's a wrap.

Our spending was funded by sales, how can that even be denied? I don't know why you're struggling to understand this.

My overall point, which is the point I made from the very start which you have ignored entirely, is that our owners couldn't give a shit about success on the pitch as long as they are making a profit, which they are, a very healthy one and they will continue to make that profit now the stadium is built, despite the debt, anybody who thinks because the stadium has been built that we will suddenly start spending money and winning things (like you seem to believe given your "first window since building the stadium we have spent money so that's proof" rhetoric) is delusional, it goes against ENIC and their entire model.

Our club has become a brand that's been swallowed up by an investment group who have no ambitions on the football side of things and have the club held hostage, the only people who lose here are the supporters, some of which are defending the owners as if they love the club, newsflash, they don't, they are here to make money, which they are doing, very successfully.


"Written a whole essay that isn't actually true" ok, you care to disprove what I have said then? Go on, I will wait.

 

[SchmoodSpur]

Our spending was funded by sales, how can that even be denied? I don't know why you're struggling to understand this.

My overall point, which is the point I made from the very start which you have ignored entirely, is that our owners couldn't give a shit about success on the pitch as long as they are making a profit, which they are, a very healthy one and they will continue to make that profit now the stadium is built, despite the debt, anybody who thinks because the stadium has been built that we will suddenly start spending money and winning things (like you seem to believe given your "first window since building the stadium we have spent money so that's proof" rhetoric) is delusional, it goes against ENIC and their entire model.

Our club has become a brand that's been swallowed up by an investment group who have no ambitions on the football side of things and have the club held hostage, the only people who lose here are the supporters, some of which are defending the owners as if they love the club, newsflash, they don't, they are here to make money, which they are doing, very successfully.


"Written a whole essay that isn't actually true" ok, you care to disprove what I have said then? Go on, I will wait.

Actually, my argument was that now the stadium is built, we will see an upturn in spending.

The only evidence we have is this past window, in which we spent a huge amount.

There's no need for your essays. What I'm saying is factual.

No ambitions for the club is a hoot. I'm sure you prefered it when we were perpetually 10th under Sugar and didn't have a sniff of the Champions League.

Go take a shower mate. There's nothing more to be said. You're wrong.

 

[superstaryid]

If you do the last 13 windows we have an average net spend of 15.3 million per season and some evidence from the 07/08 and the 08/09 season that levy is prepared to spend big.

 

[Incomplete_usernam]

Our net spend since 2015 is £98.97m, that puts us 15th in the league in net spend.

2019/20: £-74.70m
2018/19: £4.82m
2017/18: £-15.93m
2016/17: £-28.08m
2015/16: £14.92m

Besides that, we aren't accounting for the extra revenue from the CL like I have said, I don't know how anybody can claim our owners have shown ambition on the pitch to try and improve us.

We went two entire windows without strengthening, the argument is "Well, we were building a stadium! It will change now!"

Yet we were told by our chairman that the stadium wouldn't impact transfer spending, we are also now being told by his cult that the stadium will be a magic bullet for spending and we will suddenly change our entire transfer policy now it has been built.

Yet, our previous windows have shown that the same strategy has always been implemented, nothing has changed, we have always had a sell to buy policy.

But "So what?" I hear. "We have a brand new stadium, world class facilities, if that isn't ambition what is? Just be patient, we are doing things the right way!"

The stadium was built for ENIC, not for spurs, it was an absolute no brainer, an investment company aquiring land, breaking the American market for NFL, concerts etc and turning an area of London that is impoverished into a hotspot over time is a guaranteed gold mine, it has NOTHING to do with ambition for the club on the pitch, stop deluding yourselves, Levy nearly moved us into that shithole the spammers currently occupy, don't forget that.

Thinking that this stadium was built for the purpose of making us a more competitive club in the transfer market is not only naive but it's a sign of ignorance and stupidity at this point because it means you are ignoring the entire history of our ownership.

 

[SchmoodSpur]

Our net spend since 2015 is £98.97m, that puts us 15th in the league in net spend.

2019/20: £-74.70m
2018/19: £4.82m
2017/18: £-15.93m
2016/17: £-28.08m
2015/16: £14.92m

Besides that, we aren't accounting for the extra revenue from the CL like I have said, I don't know how anybody can claim our owners have shown ambition on the pitch to try and improve us.

We went two entire windows without strengthening, the argument is "Well, we were building a stadium! It will change now!"

Yet we were told by our chairman that the stadium wouldn't impact transfer spending, we are also now being told by his cult that the stadium will be a magic bullet for spending and we will suddenly change our entire transfer policy now it has been built.

Yet, our previous windows have shown that the same strategy has always been implemented, nothing has changed, we have always had a sell to buy policy.

But "So what?" I hear. "We have a brand new stadium, world class facilities, if that isn't ambition what is? Just be patient, we are doing things the right way!"

The stadium was built for ENIC, not for spurs, it was an absolute no brainer, an investment company aquiring land, breaking the American market for NFL, concerts etc and turning an area of London that is impoverished into a hotspot over time is a guaranteed gold mine, it has NOTHING to do with ambition for the club on the pitch, stop deluding yourselves, Levy nearly moved us into that shithole the spammers currently occupy, don't forget that.

Thinking that this stadium was built for the purpose of making us a more competitive club in the transfer market is not only naive but it's a sign of ignorance and stupidity at this point because it means you are ignoring the entire history of our ownership.

This was my entry into the discussion...

The first window following the building of the stadium we broke our transfer record twice.

You wanna change the debate because you've had your pants down go ahead. I made no mention of ''since 2015''.

I put you right on the fact that we have upped our spending since stadium completion against your prediction that we won't.

You're wrong. Deal with it.

 

[superstaryid]

According to transfermarkt Enic have spent 315 million in 19 years at the club averaging 16.5 million a season net spend.

 

[SchmoodSpur]

According to transfermarkt Enic have spent 315 million in 19 years at the club averaging 16.5 million a season net spend.

How much have they spent since the stadium has been built? How many times has the transfer record been broken?

 

[superstaryid]

There is some good evidence that Levy/Enic will spend money , they spent 257 million in their first 10 years when you could argue that the stadium wasn't the full focus.

 

[superstaryid]

How much have they spent since the stadium has been built? How many times has the transfer record been broken?

Once by my reckoning.

 

[Incomplete_usernam]

This was my entry into the discussion...



You wanna change the debate because you've had your pants down go ahead.

I put you right on the fact that we have upped our spending since stadium completion against your prediction that we won't.

You're wrong. Deal with it.

We haven't upped our spending though, that's MY POINT, if you look at the way we have been in the market over the tenure of our owners then it remains the same, it's the same model, nothing has changed, it's a sell to buy model that puts profit before ambition, so your "facts" are wrong.

I am not changing the debate, this was my entry into the discussion.

"Either way, when you look at ENIC and their model over the long term there is absolutely no indication that we will suddenly start spending huge sums of money to win trophies, anybody who thinks that's why the stadium was built are living in LA LA land.

The stadium, just like everything else ENIC have done, was built to widen their portfolio, gain more profit and have more ownership, the biggest lie people tell themselves is that ENIC care about spurs like they are supporters of the club, even Levy who has been watching spurs since he was a kid (allegedly) is always going to put ENIC and their interests above the club."

You are of the belief that because we spent big this window that it's an indication that now the stadium is built we are suddenly going to see the benefits from it on the pitch and in the transfer market.

I am of the belief that this has been ENICs model all along and nothing has changed because the evidence shows a pretty consistent model of doing business over the longer term and that model of business is profit before ambition, trickle down economics that only serve to hold back the club in terms of success and harm the paying supporters.

You seem to think ENIC and their entire business model is suddenly going to change now they are making more money? They will just suddenly spend loads to try and make us win trophies or be competitive even if it means them losing money?

Does that make any sense to you? Does that seem like something ENIC would do?

 

[SchmoodSpur]

We haven't upped our spending though

We spent nothing last summer.

How much did we spend this summer?

When you get those numbers, my lad, compare them.

 

[Chester/ Yukon]

How much have they spent since the stadium has been built? How many times has the transfer record been broken?

Brother many of us dont understand your steadfast unbridled love for our owners over any silverware.
The main man don't even watch us, l turn up more and l live in 7 months of five feet snow.
Your an intelligent dude far more educated than lonesome me but undying praise for a return of zilch is disturbing from someone so gifted like good self.
I agree with you we may be at a crossroads and the next 2 windows will show our true colors of our pesky overlords but many feel it will be underwhelming compared to others.

 

[Hrytn]

You seem to think net spend has an effect on the quality of a signing.

Is that the case?
We signed 4 players.

One on loan, one was injured but ready now, and two started on the bench at Liverpool and Poch played last years team.

Are you saying if we had a huge net spend, Ndombele and Lo Celso would have started?

You don't get it. Let me explain:

1. Not enough spent on recruiting players for a top PL club.

2. We had a whole 2018/19 season without a single signing. Same season Dembele was sold and not replaced.

3. We had a poor 2019/20 TW. An injured player Sess was purchased. LoCelso brought in on loan last minute not giving enough time to integrate into the squad.

4. We are short of quality players in the squad:
The full backs: Sess if suppose to be injured. Tripps first choice cashed but not replaced.

5. We only have one striker in the team, no Kane backup. Son and Maura are not strikers. Llorente was released but not replaced.

6. The centre backs in Toby and Vert ageing plus uncertain future re contract situation.

7. Eriksen. "We discussed this in his thread so no need to say more"

From the above, you can see the squad has been neglected. Poch asked for players in the summer. Poch asked for early business. Lack of investment in the team, not enough spent on players recruitment. That is why where we are now 12th in the table.

We supporters want the team the club to go forward, we want to win matches and do well on the field. We want trophies.

Enjoy the weekend.

 

[SchmoodSpur]

Brother many of us dont understand your steadfast unbridled love for our owners over any silverware.
The main man don't even watch us, l turn up more and l live in 7 months of five feet snow.
Your an intelligent dude far more educated than lonesome me but undying praise for a return of zilch is disturbing from someone so gifted like good self.
I agree with you we may be at a crossroads and the next 2 windows will show our true colors of our pesky overlords but many feel it will be underwhelming compared to others.

My love is for Spurs, top to bottom.

Under our current owners I have seen us compete at the elite level of football for the first time in my life.

This return of zilch is bollocks used by those that have a superficial understanding of the glories of football.

First and foremost, I want to see us win football matches. We do that now, and have done in this current era, at a higher level, than at any other time in my lifetime.

That is to be appreciated.

 

[Incomplete_usernam]

We spent nothing last summer.

How much did we spend this summer?

When you get those numbers, my lad, compare them.

Over the longer term our spending has been consistent, that's my point, our transfer policy has been consistent, we sell to buy.

Levy himself said in the most recent minutes..

"Daniel Levy said it’s not always possible to sell players," read the minutes. "In 90% of instances either a buyer could not be found for a player or the player did not wish to join the club that had expressed an interest in buying them so THFC was not able to make as many changes as desired this summer."

He said because of this our squad refresh was hampered.

Because we didn't offload more players, we didn't buy, it's that simple, so now we are stuck with players who don't want to be here because we couldn't sell them (a failure on the part of our chairman might I add) we made huge profits from our CL run, we could have improved further this window if our goal was to be competitive with City and Pool for the league.)

A club with goals to win silverware and put on field ambition ahead of profits only concern would be who they needed to purchase to be competitive.

My point is, even with our transfers this summer, we still as a club, made profit, this is the ENIC business model, it's foolish to think that will change because of the stadium.