or to join or start a new Discussion

114 Comments
Article Rating 3.67 Stars

For those who hate Daniel Levy!

For those you who hate Daniel Levy & want him out of the club this makes a very good read.

From The Tottenham Hotspur Blog News site:

Over the last nine years Tottenham have made £267 million from player sales which has aided the sound financial performance of the club. Has that weakened the playing side of the club, well yes and no, it's gone up and down.

You can find the first part of this article here: The future is bright, the future is Levy

Selling players is a fact of life in football, Berbatov and Bale for instance went on strike to force moves through, Modric went through the motions and then gave us an extra year. Players move, it's a fact of life, why play for Spurs when you can earn four times as much playing for Real Madrid?

It's only natural that a quality player will be interested in a move to a bigger club. Vlad Chiriches said when he joined us, or his agent did (can't remember which) that Tottenham was basically a stepping stone to Chelsea. That didn't work out but it shows players see us for what we are an in between club.

Until we increase our income that will remain the same, you can understand that or moan about it, whichever, it won't change. We have to wait for the stadium for the next growth spurt.

Our player sales profit of £104 million was the highest in the Premier League in 2013/14. Chelsea recorded £65 million and Everton £28 million.

The downside of the player trading coin is player depreciation. This transfer fee of purchased players is is written-off evenly over the length of the player’s contract and the annual cost of expensing this is depreciation. I used Roberto Soldado for an example in an earlier article so sticking with him, he was bought on a four-year contract for £26 million, thus the annual depreciation is £6.5 million.


This rose around £15 million to £40 million in 2013/14 as the playing squad was invested in, as we know now, badly. Add to this the £10 million cost for impairment and the figure climbs to £50 million.

*An Impairment cost must be included under expenses when the book value of a non-current asset exceeds the recoverable amount. Impairment of assets is the diminishing in quality, strength amount, or value of an asset. A player is an asset, a reduction in his value is impairment of an asset.

Forgetting player sales for a moment Tottenham are still profitable from our core business. This rose from £19 million in 2012/13 to £39 million in 2013/14. Compare this to our top four rivals though, Manchester United £130 million, Manchester City £75 million, Arsenal £62 million, Liverpool £53 million and Chelsea £51 million.

These clubs have much higher wage bills meaning they have to have greater income to sustain higher wage bills. The fact that they are all making more money from their business means Tottenham can only compete by raising money from player sales.

If we didn't then we wouldn't be able to afford the wages we are currently paying, thus we would fall back into the pack financially and the gap between ourselves and the top four would only grow. Thus we have to look to acquire players that we feel will increase in value, the more players we acquire who do not increase in value affects our ability to continue to pay wages better than all but the top five income generators in the Premier League, Manchester United, Chelsea, Manchester City, Arsenal and Liverpool.

And who wins all the trophies, yes, those with higher wage bills and greater income than us. Can the anti Levy brigade tell us how they propose paying the wahes we won't be able to afford without selling players and without building the club on a sound financial footing to be able to raise funds to build a new stadium. We have already established in a previous article that we can not rely on the guarantee of Champions League football because there is none, ask Leeds United.

Our revenue rose 22% from £147.4 million to £180.5 million, thanks almost entirely due to the Premier League TV deal income. Broadcasting revenue rose by 52% from £62.3 million to £94.8 million. Match day revenue also rose by 9% from £40.2 million to £43.9 million, however commercial income fell 7% from £44.9 million to £41.8 million.

To be where we are, above the pack but below the big boys we have to rely on TV money and player sales and that means producing better players than the rest of the Premier League below us, we have to be selling players for the best price we can get, not to just get rid of them. We need to develop Premier League players, keeping those that operate best within our system and selling the rest.

Fans complain about player sales but we are only able to sustain a position where we can at least challenge for the top four each season because we sell players. Selling players is not the problem, replacing them is, it's safe to say we haven't perfected that yet.

PART TWO BELOW!!!

posted on 20/7/15

Comment Deleted by Site Moderator

comment by GOODBYE (U1029)

posted on 20/7/15

Cal

I agree with you agreeing with me

posted on 20/7/15

I concur with the agreement of the agreement

posted on 21/7/15

RDBD,

20 yrs of PL seasons. At least 4 CL qualifiers per season.
Giving over 80 data items.
The pattern observed : the typical points tally all these 80 odd teams in the final third of the season.

========================================

I’m sure there are more than “80 data items” over the course of 20 seasons – it’s just you only want to focus on a small proportion.

We finished on enough points to finish 4th that season. That is the only “data item” you need to look at really, because that one “data item” covers every other “data item” within the “data item" representing the full league’s worth of “data item/s” combined into one single “data item”.

So to stop me cherry picking one “data item” to suit one debating point and you selecting your cherry pick / data item, why don’t we just use the most significant “data item” available which is the league table itself?

Sounds like the voice of reason to me….

posted on 21/7/15

"I’m sure there are more than “80 data items” over the course of 20 seasons – it’s just you only want to focus on a small proportion."

I've "focused" on ALL 80+ .

It is ALL the PL data items from day 1 to 2010-11 that allowed an accurate prediction of Spurs final fate in 2011-12 to be made without
knowing how the team was playing that season.

You have just emphatically proved you don't understand basic statistics.

posted on 21/7/15

Would the data say that our last 12 games form wouldn't get us top four?

Because we did, after all

posted on 21/7/15

RDBD,

I've "focused" on ALL 80+ .

==================

All 80+ of what, your cherry pick stats?

There is many more stats than just 80. There is 90 minutes in one game for starters, with many different stats in each minute.

Stats are endless my friend, which is why we generally use the end league table to decide who finished where and why. This is the full and "basic" statistics that no-one can dispute........until you came along of course .

The league table is final. This is what tells us we finished 4th that season - its one of the simplest forms of comparing data in any one season, yet you are out ofyour depth with it.

posted on 21/7/15

"Would the data say that our last 12 games form wouldn't get us top four?"

Would the data predict that the likelihood of finishing in the top 4 with that form (only 16 points out of 39) is low ??

It should do.
For starters the source data set will be larger.


"Because we did, after all"

Only an event that has a likelihood of zero cannot occur.

posted on 21/7/15

"Stats are endless my friend, which is why we generally use the end league table to decide who finished where and why."

Did the stats predict that Spurs would not be in the 2012-13 CL, if a points total of 16 was taken for the final third of the 2011-12 season ??
Yep.

Did Spurs play in the 2012-13 CL ?? Nope.

1-0 to the stats.

posted on 22/7/15

RDBD,

Did the stats predict that Spurs would not be in the 2012-13 CL, if a points total of 16 was taken for the final third of the 2011-12 season ??
Yep.

Did Spurs play in the 2012-13 CL ?? Nope.

1-0 to the stats.

======================


I think the stats man has realised his stats are flawed so is moving the goalposts from “finishing Top 4” to “playing in the CL” . I don’t think anyone has suggested we qualified for the CL – this was a league ranking debate – not a qualifying for CL one .

The stats, regardless of the way you look at them, have Spurs finishing as the 4th highest ranked club – regardless of the “80+” stats you have decided to cherry pick for that season.

And let’s be clear here, this debate came from the suggestion that our form was relegation form, when in fact our form throughout the season (i.e. the main data subject) shows us we were the 4th best - not 18th, 19th, 20th or A N other.

Own goal for the stats man. Back to the drawing board…. Or you could just admit we finished 4th, because the official stats prove it….

Sign in if you want to comment
RATE THIS ARTICLE
Rate Breakdown
5
0 Votes
4
0 Votes
3
0 Votes
2
0 Votes
1
0 Votes

Average Rating: 3.67 from 3 votes

ARTICLE STATS
Day
Article RankingNot Ranked
Article ViewsNot Available
Average Time(mins)Not Available
Total Time(mins)Not Available
Month
Article RankingNot Ranked
Article ViewsNot Available
Average Time(mins)Not Available
Total Time(mins)Not Available