Rumours seem to be gathering pace that potential new investors are close to doing a deal with Levy.
Spurs are always ones to keep things very closely to their chest, so no real circus expected with this deal until there is some solid announcement. Until then its just whispers and rumours.
Anyhoo, that there Amanda Staveley has been heavily linked with putting a deal together. Reportedly not the wealthiest of folk but supposedly one of the best at putting deals together with strong links to the wealth of the middle east.
Recent reports state a deal nearly done @ $700m for 12.5% of the club. That would value the club at about $5.6bn (£4.3bn) which seems very much on the high side when you consider the Utd investment by Sir Jim valued the club at about £4.5bn. That said, their club is saddled with a lot of unproductive debt and requires significant investment in infrastructure, so will have been priced accordingly.
The backing is said to be from a Qatari fund, who want to own the club inside 7 years, taking a % now and buying more each year. It is reported that the fund is collectively worth more than City's owners Not sure thats possible either.
So, many Ifs and Buts and probably a large dose of imagination in some of these latest reports.
However, assuming that we are to sell part, as has been announced by Levy, what do fans think about a deal of this nature.
Happy to see only a small degree of investment to begin with? and gradual takeover? Levy will stay as the big cheese, at least for now.
Any problems with it being middle east money? from an ethical point of view? or more generally about the foreign ownership of the PLs biggest clubs which will bring increasing outside influence to bear on how the league is run?
How much difference will it make in this PSR era where spending is so closely linked to revenues.
Tottenham Sale
posted on 22/10/24
Oh it was Fridge who posted fake news.
Clever
posted on 22/10/24
Wish I had that kind of confidence
posted on 22/10/24
Okay, that’s been misread. Our wages to turnover percentage is lower than Brighton’s. In essence we’re showing less ambition than they are based on revenue. No need for the dramatic responses. Oh, it was Luka, of course it was.
posted on 22/10/24
Misread
Genuinely, how do you do it?
posted on 22/10/24
comment by Bãleș left boot (U22081)
posted 2 minutes ago
Misread
Genuinely, how do you do it?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nuff said 🥴
posted on 22/10/24
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 2 hours, 25 minutes ago
Sure. Our wage bill is now lower than Brighton’s. Nuff said.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Really! I very much doubt that. But you may be able to prove me wrong with some figures.
posted on 22/10/24
Fridgefail
posted on 22/10/24
Wages to turnover being proportionally lower than Brighton is still a concern, even if the original stat was, admittedly, a mistake. It still says we’re working beneath our means.
Paul O’Keefe is far closer to the club than any of us are and he’s adamant that this is not a good sign. He thinks the ultimate aim is to drive it down further, perhaps to make the club more attractive to potential investors. Essentially the focus is on the financial gain rather than any real concern for what this might mean on the pitch. Ultimately though, it’ll depend on performances. If the likes of Kulu, VDV and others continue this form, we’ll have no choice but to either sell or raise the wage bill. Time will tell on that.
posted on 22/10/24
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 24 minutes ago
Fridgefail
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Don’t turn into one of those dev. You know you’re better than that.
posted on 22/10/24
Wages to turnover being proportionally lower than Brighton is still a concern, even if the original stat was, admittedly, a mistake. It still says we’re working beneath our means.
--------------------------------------------
Low wages to turnover ratio has contributed to us being 4th in the net spend league with approx £460m spent in the last 5 years. It is not a concern at all. It averages out to £92m a season net spend.
Last summer our net spend was around £80m. Probably due to the fact we only played 40 odd games. No cash from Europe or the cups.
With Europe this season and better runs in the cups, the two new sponsors on the training kits, we should have a net spend of around £100m or more next summer.
That's what a low ratio of wages turnover gives you.