Tottenham Hotspur - Financials

  • 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

Sounds about right. 40m a year total outlay. You get a stadium sponsor for 20m a year. Then that nets off to 20m a year outlay for the stadium. On increaed revenues of 450m a year. 20m is sod all.

And people say Levy is holding us back!!

Money isn't holding us back atm - aside from todays news which is good in itself, the last financial accounts are showing profits of £100m + pa so plenty of cash generation.

Question is about identifying the right players (both technical skills and attitude etc) and getting them in....and then the issue is integrating them in. Which in turn limits the numbers of players coming in to realistically 3 or 4 first team players per season plus a few prospects (just cannot integrate more).

Of course we cant guarantee the players will come - Frenkie de Jong who went to Ajax to Barcelona says he turned Spurs down in favour of Barcelona, whilst Jack Grealish to Spurs fell through due to a change of ownership at Aston Villa with the new owners taking the gamble that they would get to PL with Grealish - so two players who might have come in our 'no signings' summer.

But as an average, I suspect we'll get similar numbers and quality of players in next summer and the summer after (ie 4 - 6 players in) which will solve any problems in the current squad.

Probably 16 or 17 out of 20 PL clubs fans would love to swap their current squads, stsdium and financial situation for Spurs atm, so not time for Spurs fans to panic.
 
Money isn't holding us back atm - aside from todays news which is good in itself, the last financial accounts are showing profits of £100m + pa so plenty of cash generation.

Question is about identifying the right players (both technical skills and attitude etc) and getting them in....and then the issue is integrating them in. Which in turn limits the numbers of players coming in to realistically 3 or 4 first team players per season plus a few prospects (just cannot integrate more).

Of course we cant guarantee the players will come - Frenkie de Jong who went to Ajax to Barcelona says he turned Spurs down in favour of Barcelona, whilst Jack Grealish to Spurs fell through due to a change of ownership at Aston Villa with the new owners taking the gamble that they would get to PL with Grealish - so two players who might have come in our 'no signings' summer.

But as an average, I suspect we'll get similar numbers and quality of players in next summer and the summer after (ie 4 - 6 players in) which will solve any problems in the current squad.

Probably 16 or 17 out of 20 PL clubs fans would love to swap their current squads, stsdium and financial situation for Spurs atm, so not time for Spurs fans to panic.

The issue isnt levy. Its the fact half our 1st team wont sign contracts and we cant replace until they leave
 
The issue isnt levy. Its the fact half our 1st team wont sign contracts and we cant replace until they leave
Toby and Eriksen will not sign but rumours persist that Toby May sign eventually. Vertonghen in last year. We haven’t offered him another one. Sure he will sign if we do but at the moment he isn’t looking too good.
Looking slow against Woolwich and Olympiakos.
 
Toby and Eriksen will not sign but rumours persist that Toby May sign eventually. Vertonghen in last year. We haven’t offered him another one. Sure he will sign if we do but at the moment he isn’t looking too good.
Looking slow against Woolwich and Olympiakos.

Its still 6 and two 3s.

We need to bring players in but cant until the old timers are moved on. But the old timers want to run down their contracts.
 
Sounds about right. 40m a year total outlay. You get a stadium sponsor for 20m a year. Then that nets off to 20m a year outlay for the stadium. On increaed revenues of 450m a year. 20m is sod all.

And people say Levy is holding us back!!
Financially/commercially no he's not but what about the quality of players we intend to buy ? By his own admission don't expect anyone too expensive for the next few years.
 
Looking at the clubs accounts, the playing squad in terms of its value to the club, according to length of contract of individual players, was valued at £151.3 million.

Just over £150m? Seems a bit cheap doesn't it? Does anyone know how they calculate playing squad values? If so I'd be interested to know.
 
Looking at the clubs accounts, the playing squad in terms of its value to the club, according to length of contract of individual players, was valued at £151.3 million.

Just over £150m? Seems a bit cheap doesn't it? Does anyone know how they calculate playing squad values? If so I'd be interested to know.
All I could find was this :
 
Looking at the clubs accounts, the playing squad in terms of its value to the club, according to length of contract of individual players, was valued at £151.3 million.

Just over £150m? Seems a bit cheap doesn't it? Does anyone know how they calculate playing squad values? If so I'd be interested to know.

Probably cost of transfer fees or contracts put on the balance sheet and amortised.

Its just purely accounting treatment. Not market value.
 
Probably cost of transfer fees or contracts put on the balance sheet and amortised.

Its just purely accounting treatment. Not market value.

Yeah I think that's closest to the mark. It'll probably be fees paid minus amortisation. After looking at a few other teams in and around us, it can't be based on statistical valuing or a transfer value we may out on a players head, Woolwich have an intangible value of around £270m so now WAY could our squad have a smaller value than them seeing as we've been finishing above them in recent years.

Got to be transfer fee paid -amortisation, I'm pretty sure you're on the money there.
 
Yeah I think that's closest to the mark. It'll probably be fees paid minus amortisation. After looking at a few other teams in and around us, it can't be based on statistical valuing or a transfer value we may out on a players head, Woolwich have an intangible value of around £270m so now WAY could our squad have a smaller value than them seeing as we've been finishing above them in recent years.

Got to be transfer fee paid -amortisation, I'm pretty sure you're on the money there.

Correct if a player is signed for £50m on a 5 year contract, the £50m is put on the balance sheet on day 1.

In the first year £10m (£50m divided by 5 year contract) is charged to Profit and Loss account leaving £40m as the Net Book Value in the balance sheet.

If that player is sold for £40m at the end of year 2 (when that player has been amortized by a 2nd year so Net Book Value reduced to £30m) then a profit is shown in the accounts if £10m ( being £40m sale proceeds less £30m net book value). And at that point the balance sheet value is zero.

A few complications around renewing a players contract and players like Wanyama losing value through injury), but otherwise the above 3 paras explain the majority of accounting for player transfers both in and out.
 
Last edited:
The above analysis shows how important to Spurs the CL is - with the total prize money for distribution being 50% higher than last year when our run to CL final netted us over 100m euros - before match day revenues from tickets, food and drink, sponsorship and advertising monies !

So far this year we have banked 58m euros by getting to Group stages, with hopefully more to come through good results in matches to come. And that despite UEFA's introduction of the 10 year coefficient to distribute 30% (euros 585m) which will not be in Spurs favour as its only in the last few years have we been gaining good co-efficient points - Chelsea have the best 10 year coefficient points despite their recent lack of success.

Also underlines how important a top 4 place is - and if we can get to 2nd or 3rd the extra prize money over and above getting 4th place is worthwhile, being a multi million pound difference.
 
TDLR:
That ten-year coefficient is a bastard.

What I don't get is Liverpool's share of the coefficient, we've been in the CL once more than they have in the last ten years and they have failed to qualify for any European comp THREE times in the same period! Whilst we've qualified for Europe every single year.
 
Last edited:
TDLR:
That ten-year coefficient is a bastard.

What I don't get is Liverpool's share of the coefficient, we've been in the CL once more than they have in the last ten years and they have failed to qualify for any European comp THREE times in the same period! Whilst we've qualified for Europe every single year.

It's called a 10 year coefficient - but that description is a misnomer as it does not include the fact that within that coefficient calculation clubs get extra points for past titles and European cups, so for the likes of Liverpool and Real Madrid et Al they get an extra 40 points for their performances in 70s and 80s. Spurs get 3 extra points for our cup winners cup, 2 UEFA cups.

This shows how the points have been calculated.


Reason why this coefficient has been (rightly) criticised is that these points for old European competitions are in perpetuity, so gives the likes of Liverpool Chelsea Real Madrid Barcelona et Al a very big ongoing financial advantage, irrespective of recent form

Take out both our and Liverpool's bonus points for old wins and Spurs would have s higher 10 year coefficient than Liverpool !
 
Back
Top Bottom