comment by Brother (U20548)
posted 7 minutes ago
Sandy... If Spurs win our first couple of games, and you're thinking of writing a cringey 'we'll win the league with a bit to spare' article, please don't do it. It's embarrassing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll post what I want fella. I don't tell you what to post, so why are you trying to tell me what I can and cannot post.
I feel a good season is on the cards finally. And I will remain upbeat and let all the moaners and groaners wallow in misery if that is what they want.
Enjoy the good times is my motto.
comment by #LiquidGenius (U20571)
posted 8 seconds ago
They have just list the big advantage they had over Spurs and the rest of the Prem, when the Russian went.
We are talking about now, not the Abramovich era. They will be in no better position now to offer more money than Spurs, in fact they will probably have a lot less income than Spurs.
———————————
I agree with Sandy on this.
With Roman gone, Chelsea don’t have that much pull anymore.
The new ownership group there is a private equity fund, who will only ever invest with a view to make a profit. So they won’t be breaking the bank like Roman did.
Chelsea will now be a club that has to sell to buy (a la LFC under FSG).
They’re struggling to even get Raphina over the line.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But that's not because they can't afford it though, it's coz he wants Barca.
comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 3 minutes ago
Definitely not. We’re a bigger draw than Arsenal right now though, not the other two.
You also have to remember that whilst we’ve had a productive window, we’ve not won anything yet. All those other teams have. Even Arsenal during their shiiiiit years managed to win the FA Cup multiple times.
Think you’re getting ahead of yourself here Sandy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't mention anything about winning trophies. I just asked the question if Spurs are a bigger attraction.
Why do you think Chelsea are a bigger attraction right now?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Coz they can offer better wages, have a much better trophy room, more chance of winning trophies, same calibre of manager, and finished higher than you last season
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They have just list the big advantage they had over Spurs and the rest of the Prem, when the Russian went.
We are talking about now, not the Abramovich era. They will be in no better position now to offer more money than Spurs, in fact they will probably have a lot less income than Spurs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy, they're not going to implode coz he's not there anymore (maybe not yet) and what happened while he was there is still valid (which was only last season). The trophies, titles, CL wins etc still matters to players and they more of all of that than Spurs at the mo.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We will see. But it is pretty obvious already they are not such an attraction now the massive wages are not there.
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 58 seconds ago
comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 3 minutes ago
Definitely not. We’re a bigger draw than Arsenal right now though, not the other two.
You also have to remember that whilst we’ve had a productive window, we’ve not won anything yet. All those other teams have. Even Arsenal during their shiiiiit years managed to win the FA Cup multiple times.
Think you’re getting ahead of yourself here Sandy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't mention anything about winning trophies. I just asked the question if Spurs are a bigger attraction.
Why do you think Chelsea are a bigger attraction right now?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Coz they can offer better wages, have a much better trophy room, more chance of winning trophies, same calibre of manager, and finished higher than you last season
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They have just list the big advantage they had over Spurs and the rest of the Prem, when the Russian went.
We are talking about now, not the Abramovich era. They will be in no better position now to offer more money than Spurs, in fact they will probably have a lot less income than Spurs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy, they're not going to implode coz he's not there anymore (maybe not yet) and what happened while he was there is still valid (which was only last season). The trophies, titles, CL wins etc still matters to players and they more of all of that than Spurs at the mo.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We will see. But it is pretty obvious already they are not such an attraction now the massive wages are not there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
True, it's just the wages..maybe, but the new owners are not broke and CFC have actually been financially stable for a few years now anyway, without Roman injecting large amounts.
I just don't think the shift that you want to happen has happened....yet.
comment by #LiquidGenius (U20571)
posted 3 minutes ago
They have just list the big advantage they had over Spurs and the rest of the Prem, when the Russian went.
We are talking about now, not the Abramovich era. They will be in no better position now to offer more money than Spurs, in fact they will probably have a lot less income than Spurs.
———————————
I agree with Sandy on this.
With Roman gone, Chelsea don’t have that much pull anymore.
The new ownership group there is a private equity fund, who will only ever invest with a view to make a profit. So they won’t be breaking the bank like Roman did.
Chelsea will now be a club that has to sell to buy (a la LFC under FSG).
They’re struggling to even get Raphina over the line.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You got it right fella. I am astonished that supporters think that Chelsea will still be spending like in the Abramovich era. They will have to reign in spending big time now, especially with a smaller stadium income than all of the other so called Prem big boys.
Silly question really. Any player would prefer to go to Chelsea or Utd over Spurs. Arsenal are probably on a par, but have at least won things in recent times.
comment by The God Fowler (U2538)
posted 50 minutes ago
Silly question really. Any player would prefer to go to Chelsea or Utd over Spurs. Arsenal are probably on a par, but have at least won things in recent times.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Eriksen cannot even decide between United & Brentford.
Sandy thinking that the majority of income comes from matchday tickets
In answer to your question.. No, Man Utd will continue to be attractive to players (Erikson a potential exception) for the foreseeable, Arsenal and Chelsea similarly. The only two clubs more attractive right now are City and Liverpool, not Spurs.
Also... Don't think Chelsea won't spend fairly big by the end of the window. It's not like they've been sold to someone on the dole like you're making out!
We’re ahead of Arsenal that’s for sure. I think we will widen that gap. Unfortunately chelsea and United are still bigger brands right now. Who knows what damage to Chelsea will be done after their old owner was finally shown in his true disgusting light.
United are one of the biggest clubs in the world.
Spurs are however a big attraction right now. If we start winning things there’s no reason why we can’t go to the next level, everything is in place.
comment by jesus6662 (U8600)
posted 21 minutes ago
Sandy thinking that the majority of income comes from matchday tickets
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not often that I stick up for Sandy but I will because what you said here is incorrect.
Matchday income is hugely significant and you'll see from the stats below that it is more or less on a par with PL tv revenue.
https://www.thstofficial.com/thst-news/analysis-of-tottenham-hotspur-financial-statements-2020-21
comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 2 hours, 44 minutes ago
comment by #LiquidGenius (U20571)
posted 8 seconds ago
They have just list the big advantage they had over Spurs and the rest of the Prem, when the Russian went.
We are talking about now, not the Abramovich era. They will be in no better position now to offer more money than Spurs, in fact they will probably have a lot less income than Spurs.
———————————
I agree with Sandy on this.
With Roman gone, Chelsea don’t have that much pull anymore.
The new ownership group there is a private equity fund, who will only ever invest with a view to make a profit. So they won’t be breaking the bank like Roman did.
Chelsea will now be a club that has to sell to buy (a la LFC under FSG).
They’re struggling to even get Raphina over the line.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But that's not because they can't afford it though, it's coz he wants Barca.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's the point....in the past they threw more money at him to make it happen....Lukaku being the case in point.
comment by Brother (U20548)
posted 45 minutes ago
comment by jesus6662 (U8600)
posted 21 minutes ago
Sandy thinking that the majority of income comes from matchday tickets
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not often that I stick up for Sandy but I will because what you said here is incorrect.
Matchday income is hugely significant and you'll see from the stats below that it is more or less on a par with PL tv revenue.
https://www.thstofficial.com/thst-news/analysis-of-tottenham-hotspur-financial-statements-2020-21
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh only an idiot would think matchday revenue didn't matter. It matters hugely. Spurs did not invest in a billion pound stadium just so they could just stand still. It was built to generate a huge amount of money over a period of time.
Point taken - but I'd argue that £140m of normalised TV revenue is still a fair bit more than £115m of matchday, and the significance ofmatchday revenue is diluted further by the £180m commercial and £8m prize money.
Given the fact chelsea's TV and prize money revenues are higher than this, and commercial broadly the same, the signifance of their smaller stadium is even less.
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by Brother (U20548)
posted 45 minutes ago
comment by jesus6662 (U8600)
posted 21 minutes ago
Sandy thinking that the majority of income comes from matchday tickets
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not often that I stick up for Sandy but I will because what you said here is incorrect.
Matchday income is hugely significant and you'll see from the stats below that it is more or less on a par with PL tv revenue.
https://www.thstofficial.com/thst-news/analysis-of-tottenham-hotspur-financial-statements-2020-21
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh only an idiot would think matchday revenue didn't matter. It matters hugely. Spurs did not invest in a billion pound stadium just so they could just stand still. It was built to generate a huge amount of money over a period of time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, of course they didn't.
And yes - Chelsea would love to expand their stadium for those exact reasons. But it's very unlikely that they are going to suddenly collapse just because they have a smaller stadium. They have bigger income streams elsewhere.
Similarly, it will likely take decades for the reputation of Man Utd to significantly dwindle. It's more likely they will find success again before that happens
comment by jesus6662 (U8600)
posted 1 minute ago
Point taken - but I'd argue that £140m of normalised TV revenue is still a fair bit more than £115m of matchday, and the significance ofmatchday revenue is diluted further by the £180m commercial and £8m prize money.
Given the fact chelsea's TV and prize money revenues are higher than this, and commercial broadly the same, the signifance of their smaller stadium is even less.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, but you are not looking forward to Chelsea without Abramovich pumping in money. The new owners will be a lot more careful with how they spend.
Chelsea's TV snd prize money arr not guaranteed going toward as being greater than anything Spurs generate.
As I said earlier Chelsea have had a financial advantage past 20 years because of Abramovich. That has now gone. Spurs will now have a massive advantage over Chelsea on matchday revenue alone.
comment by jesus6662 (U8600)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by Brother (U20548)
posted 45 minutes ago
comment by jesus6662 (U8600)
posted 21 minutes ago
Sandy thinking that the majority of income comes from matchday tickets
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not often that I stick up for Sandy but I will because what you said here is incorrect.
Matchday income is hugely significant and you'll see from the stats below that it is more or less on a par with PL tv revenue.
https://www.thstofficial.com/thst-news/analysis-of-tottenham-hotspur-financial-statements-2020-21
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh only an idiot would think matchday revenue didn't matter. It matters hugely. Spurs did not invest in a billion pound stadium just so they could just stand still. It was built to generate a huge amount of money over a period of time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, of course they didn't.
And yes - Chelsea would love to expand their stadium for those exact reasons. But it's very unlikely that they are going to suddenly collapse just because they have a smaller stadium. They have bigger income streams elsewhere.
Similarly, it will likely take decades for the reputation of Man Utd to significantly dwindle. It's more likely they will find success again before that happens
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Man United will be fine, not saying they won't. But definitely expect Chelsea to come back to the pack. They had 20 years of unfair financial doping, now they will have to try to compete on a level playing field, City aside.
Correct I don't have a crystal ball to predict the future. Maybe Newcastle will dwarf us all.
I don't know the impact Boehly will have - I bow down to your conviction that he'll be as miserly as Levy has been down the years.
I suspect, however, that he will continue the good investment. Chelsea's advantage was somewhat diminished by City anyway, and of course FFP.
Who knows? One of us will be wrong when we look back in 10 years at the real impact he's had.
comment by jesus6662 (U8600)
posted 3 minutes ago
Correct I don't have a crystal ball to predict the future. Maybe Newcastle will dwarf us all.
I don't know the impact Boehly will have - I bow down to your conviction that he'll be as miserly as Levy has been down the years.
I suspect, however, that he will continue the good investment. Chelsea's advantage was somewhat diminished by City anyway, and of course FFP.
Who knows? One of us will be wrong when we look back in 10 years at the real impact he's had.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I bloody won't be here in 10 years in all probability.
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by jesus6662 (U8600)
posted 3 minutes ago
Correct I don't have a crystal ball to predict the future. Maybe Newcastle will dwarf us all.
I don't know the impact Boehly will have - I bow down to your conviction that he'll be as miserly as Levy has been down the years.
I suspect, however, that he will continue the good investment. Chelsea's advantage was somewhat diminished by City anyway, and of course FFP.
Who knows? One of us will be wrong when we look back in 10 years at the real impact he's had.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I bloody won't be here in 10 years in all probability.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Are Spurs a Bigger Attraction Now"
Of course they are...much bigger!
Fans on here, including Sandy, should think a little.....
Lewis & Levy are planning to sell up and retire.
They want best price.
So....get a winning manager and build the team he wants.
Prediction: Conte is going to challenge for top spot in the prem, AND go far in the CL.
And... ENIC will sell out by 2024.
As I said elsewhere....Its all coming down the pike, lads!!! ...
Arsenal aren't in CL but their fans "know" they are a force to be reckoned with when it comes to attracting top talents...
Look who they have signed Vieira, Jesus
Spurs don’t win trophies, no major trophies this millennium
Sorry I don’t see the attraction.
4th place again for your lot at best with no silverware.
Tottenham have finished above weak outfit Arsenal for 6 seasons in a row.
Trophy Count
Tottenham 0 Arsenal 2
comment by Fik Tossa (U22768)
posted 16 minutes ago
Tottenham have finished above weak outfit Arsenal for 6 seasons in a row.
Trophy Count
Tottenham 0 Arsenal 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Didn't your legendary manager say CL place is a trophy?
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2012/feb/19/arsene-wenger-arsenal-fourth-place
Fik in every sense
comment by Gaffer Pranks - Suck On Deeeeeeez Nuts (U22336)
posted 24 minutes ago
Spurs don’t win trophies, no major trophies this millennium
Sorry I don’t see the attraction.
4th place again for your lot at best with no silverware.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Shame you guys don't win much either because of Pep and Real Madrid
Always a bridesmaid
We have Conte now, you lost one of your best forward player, and spent £100m on an unproven player. A lot of things could go wrong for you guys
Sign in if you want to comment
Are Spurs now a bigger attraction
Page 2 of 4
posted on 1/7/22
comment by Brother (U20548)
posted 7 minutes ago
Sandy... If Spurs win our first couple of games, and you're thinking of writing a cringey 'we'll win the league with a bit to spare' article, please don't do it. It's embarrassing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll post what I want fella. I don't tell you what to post, so why are you trying to tell me what I can and cannot post.
I feel a good season is on the cards finally. And I will remain upbeat and let all the moaners and groaners wallow in misery if that is what they want.
Enjoy the good times is my motto.
posted on 1/7/22
comment by #LiquidGenius (U20571)
posted 8 seconds ago
They have just list the big advantage they had over Spurs and the rest of the Prem, when the Russian went.
We are talking about now, not the Abramovich era. They will be in no better position now to offer more money than Spurs, in fact they will probably have a lot less income than Spurs.
———————————
I agree with Sandy on this.
With Roman gone, Chelsea don’t have that much pull anymore.
The new ownership group there is a private equity fund, who will only ever invest with a view to make a profit. So they won’t be breaking the bank like Roman did.
Chelsea will now be a club that has to sell to buy (a la LFC under FSG).
They’re struggling to even get Raphina over the line.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But that's not because they can't afford it though, it's coz he wants Barca.
posted on 1/7/22
comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 3 minutes ago
Definitely not. We’re a bigger draw than Arsenal right now though, not the other two.
You also have to remember that whilst we’ve had a productive window, we’ve not won anything yet. All those other teams have. Even Arsenal during their shiiiiit years managed to win the FA Cup multiple times.
Think you’re getting ahead of yourself here Sandy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't mention anything about winning trophies. I just asked the question if Spurs are a bigger attraction.
Why do you think Chelsea are a bigger attraction right now?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Coz they can offer better wages, have a much better trophy room, more chance of winning trophies, same calibre of manager, and finished higher than you last season
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They have just list the big advantage they had over Spurs and the rest of the Prem, when the Russian went.
We are talking about now, not the Abramovich era. They will be in no better position now to offer more money than Spurs, in fact they will probably have a lot less income than Spurs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy, they're not going to implode coz he's not there anymore (maybe not yet) and what happened while he was there is still valid (which was only last season). The trophies, titles, CL wins etc still matters to players and they more of all of that than Spurs at the mo.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We will see. But it is pretty obvious already they are not such an attraction now the massive wages are not there.
posted on 1/7/22
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 58 seconds ago
comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 3 minutes ago
Definitely not. We’re a bigger draw than Arsenal right now though, not the other two.
You also have to remember that whilst we’ve had a productive window, we’ve not won anything yet. All those other teams have. Even Arsenal during their shiiiiit years managed to win the FA Cup multiple times.
Think you’re getting ahead of yourself here Sandy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I didn't mention anything about winning trophies. I just asked the question if Spurs are a bigger attraction.
Why do you think Chelsea are a bigger attraction right now?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Coz they can offer better wages, have a much better trophy room, more chance of winning trophies, same calibre of manager, and finished higher than you last season
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They have just list the big advantage they had over Spurs and the rest of the Prem, when the Russian went.
We are talking about now, not the Abramovich era. They will be in no better position now to offer more money than Spurs, in fact they will probably have a lot less income than Spurs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy, they're not going to implode coz he's not there anymore (maybe not yet) and what happened while he was there is still valid (which was only last season). The trophies, titles, CL wins etc still matters to players and they more of all of that than Spurs at the mo.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We will see. But it is pretty obvious already they are not such an attraction now the massive wages are not there.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
True, it's just the wages..maybe, but the new owners are not broke and CFC have actually been financially stable for a few years now anyway, without Roman injecting large amounts.
I just don't think the shift that you want to happen has happened....yet.
posted on 1/7/22
comment by #LiquidGenius (U20571)
posted 3 minutes ago
They have just list the big advantage they had over Spurs and the rest of the Prem, when the Russian went.
We are talking about now, not the Abramovich era. They will be in no better position now to offer more money than Spurs, in fact they will probably have a lot less income than Spurs.
———————————
I agree with Sandy on this.
With Roman gone, Chelsea don’t have that much pull anymore.
The new ownership group there is a private equity fund, who will only ever invest with a view to make a profit. So they won’t be breaking the bank like Roman did.
Chelsea will now be a club that has to sell to buy (a la LFC under FSG).
They’re struggling to even get Raphina over the line.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You got it right fella. I am astonished that supporters think that Chelsea will still be spending like in the Abramovich era. They will have to reign in spending big time now, especially with a smaller stadium income than all of the other so called Prem big boys.
posted on 1/7/22
Silly question really. Any player would prefer to go to Chelsea or Utd over Spurs. Arsenal are probably on a par, but have at least won things in recent times.
posted on 1/7/22
comment by The God Fowler (U2538)
posted 50 minutes ago
Silly question really. Any player would prefer to go to Chelsea or Utd over Spurs. Arsenal are probably on a par, but have at least won things in recent times.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Eriksen cannot even decide between United & Brentford.
posted on 1/7/22
Sandy thinking that the majority of income comes from matchday tickets
In answer to your question.. No, Man Utd will continue to be attractive to players (Erikson a potential exception) for the foreseeable, Arsenal and Chelsea similarly. The only two clubs more attractive right now are City and Liverpool, not Spurs.
Also... Don't think Chelsea won't spend fairly big by the end of the window. It's not like they've been sold to someone on the dole like you're making out!
posted on 1/7/22
We’re ahead of Arsenal that’s for sure. I think we will widen that gap. Unfortunately chelsea and United are still bigger brands right now. Who knows what damage to Chelsea will be done after their old owner was finally shown in his true disgusting light.
United are one of the biggest clubs in the world.
Spurs are however a big attraction right now. If we start winning things there’s no reason why we can’t go to the next level, everything is in place.
posted on 1/7/22
comment by jesus6662 (U8600)
posted 21 minutes ago
Sandy thinking that the majority of income comes from matchday tickets
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not often that I stick up for Sandy but I will because what you said here is incorrect.
Matchday income is hugely significant and you'll see from the stats below that it is more or less on a par with PL tv revenue.
https://www.thstofficial.com/thst-news/analysis-of-tottenham-hotspur-financial-statements-2020-21
posted on 1/7/22
comment by AFCISMYTEAM (U14931)
posted 2 hours, 44 minutes ago
comment by #LiquidGenius (U20571)
posted 8 seconds ago
They have just list the big advantage they had over Spurs and the rest of the Prem, when the Russian went.
We are talking about now, not the Abramovich era. They will be in no better position now to offer more money than Spurs, in fact they will probably have a lot less income than Spurs.
———————————
I agree with Sandy on this.
With Roman gone, Chelsea don’t have that much pull anymore.
The new ownership group there is a private equity fund, who will only ever invest with a view to make a profit. So they won’t be breaking the bank like Roman did.
Chelsea will now be a club that has to sell to buy (a la LFC under FSG).
They’re struggling to even get Raphina over the line.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But that's not because they can't afford it though, it's coz he wants Barca.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's the point....in the past they threw more money at him to make it happen....Lukaku being the case in point.
posted on 1/7/22
comment by Brother (U20548)
posted 45 minutes ago
comment by jesus6662 (U8600)
posted 21 minutes ago
Sandy thinking that the majority of income comes from matchday tickets
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not often that I stick up for Sandy but I will because what you said here is incorrect.
Matchday income is hugely significant and you'll see from the stats below that it is more or less on a par with PL tv revenue.
https://www.thstofficial.com/thst-news/analysis-of-tottenham-hotspur-financial-statements-2020-21
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh only an idiot would think matchday revenue didn't matter. It matters hugely. Spurs did not invest in a billion pound stadium just so they could just stand still. It was built to generate a huge amount of money over a period of time.
posted on 1/7/22
Point taken - but I'd argue that £140m of normalised TV revenue is still a fair bit more than £115m of matchday, and the significance ofmatchday revenue is diluted further by the £180m commercial and £8m prize money.
Given the fact chelsea's TV and prize money revenues are higher than this, and commercial broadly the same, the signifance of their smaller stadium is even less.
posted on 1/7/22
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by Brother (U20548)
posted 45 minutes ago
comment by jesus6662 (U8600)
posted 21 minutes ago
Sandy thinking that the majority of income comes from matchday tickets
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not often that I stick up for Sandy but I will because what you said here is incorrect.
Matchday income is hugely significant and you'll see from the stats below that it is more or less on a par with PL tv revenue.
https://www.thstofficial.com/thst-news/analysis-of-tottenham-hotspur-financial-statements-2020-21
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh only an idiot would think matchday revenue didn't matter. It matters hugely. Spurs did not invest in a billion pound stadium just so they could just stand still. It was built to generate a huge amount of money over a period of time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, of course they didn't.
And yes - Chelsea would love to expand their stadium for those exact reasons. But it's very unlikely that they are going to suddenly collapse just because they have a smaller stadium. They have bigger income streams elsewhere.
Similarly, it will likely take decades for the reputation of Man Utd to significantly dwindle. It's more likely they will find success again before that happens
posted on 1/7/22
comment by jesus6662 (U8600)
posted 1 minute ago
Point taken - but I'd argue that £140m of normalised TV revenue is still a fair bit more than £115m of matchday, and the significance ofmatchday revenue is diluted further by the £180m commercial and £8m prize money.
Given the fact chelsea's TV and prize money revenues are higher than this, and commercial broadly the same, the signifance of their smaller stadium is even less.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, but you are not looking forward to Chelsea without Abramovich pumping in money. The new owners will be a lot more careful with how they spend.
Chelsea's TV snd prize money arr not guaranteed going toward as being greater than anything Spurs generate.
As I said earlier Chelsea have had a financial advantage past 20 years because of Abramovich. That has now gone. Spurs will now have a massive advantage over Chelsea on matchday revenue alone.
posted on 1/7/22
comment by jesus6662 (U8600)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by Brother (U20548)
posted 45 minutes ago
comment by jesus6662 (U8600)
posted 21 minutes ago
Sandy thinking that the majority of income comes from matchday tickets
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's not often that I stick up for Sandy but I will because what you said here is incorrect.
Matchday income is hugely significant and you'll see from the stats below that it is more or less on a par with PL tv revenue.
https://www.thstofficial.com/thst-news/analysis-of-tottenham-hotspur-financial-statements-2020-21
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeh only an idiot would think matchday revenue didn't matter. It matters hugely. Spurs did not invest in a billion pound stadium just so they could just stand still. It was built to generate a huge amount of money over a period of time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, of course they didn't.
And yes - Chelsea would love to expand their stadium for those exact reasons. But it's very unlikely that they are going to suddenly collapse just because they have a smaller stadium. They have bigger income streams elsewhere.
Similarly, it will likely take decades for the reputation of Man Utd to significantly dwindle. It's more likely they will find success again before that happens
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Man United will be fine, not saying they won't. But definitely expect Chelsea to come back to the pack. They had 20 years of unfair financial doping, now they will have to try to compete on a level playing field, City aside.
posted on 1/7/22
Correct I don't have a crystal ball to predict the future. Maybe Newcastle will dwarf us all.
I don't know the impact Boehly will have - I bow down to your conviction that he'll be as miserly as Levy has been down the years.
I suspect, however, that he will continue the good investment. Chelsea's advantage was somewhat diminished by City anyway, and of course FFP.
Who knows? One of us will be wrong when we look back in 10 years at the real impact he's had.
posted on 1/7/22
comment by jesus6662 (U8600)
posted 3 minutes ago
Correct I don't have a crystal ball to predict the future. Maybe Newcastle will dwarf us all.
I don't know the impact Boehly will have - I bow down to your conviction that he'll be as miserly as Levy has been down the years.
I suspect, however, that he will continue the good investment. Chelsea's advantage was somewhat diminished by City anyway, and of course FFP.
Who knows? One of us will be wrong when we look back in 10 years at the real impact he's had.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I bloody won't be here in 10 years in all probability.
posted on 1/7/22
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by jesus6662 (U8600)
posted 3 minutes ago
Correct I don't have a crystal ball to predict the future. Maybe Newcastle will dwarf us all.
I don't know the impact Boehly will have - I bow down to your conviction that he'll be as miserly as Levy has been down the years.
I suspect, however, that he will continue the good investment. Chelsea's advantage was somewhat diminished by City anyway, and of course FFP.
Who knows? One of us will be wrong when we look back in 10 years at the real impact he's had.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I bloody won't be here in 10 years in all probability.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 2/7/22
"Are Spurs a Bigger Attraction Now"
Of course they are...much bigger!
Fans on here, including Sandy, should think a little.....
Lewis & Levy are planning to sell up and retire.
They want best price.
So....get a winning manager and build the team he wants.
Prediction: Conte is going to challenge for top spot in the prem, AND go far in the CL.
And... ENIC will sell out by 2024.
As I said elsewhere....Its all coming down the pike, lads!!! ...
posted on 2/7/22
Arsenal aren't in CL but their fans "know" they are a force to be reckoned with when it comes to attracting top talents...
Look who they have signed Vieira, Jesus
posted on 2/7/22
Spurs don’t win trophies, no major trophies this millennium
Sorry I don’t see the attraction.
4th place again for your lot at best with no silverware.
posted on 2/7/22
Tottenham have finished above weak outfit Arsenal for 6 seasons in a row.
Trophy Count
Tottenham 0 Arsenal 2
posted on 2/7/22
comment by Fik Tossa (U22768)
posted 16 minutes ago
Tottenham have finished above weak outfit Arsenal for 6 seasons in a row.
Trophy Count
Tottenham 0 Arsenal 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Didn't your legendary manager say CL place is a trophy?
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2012/feb/19/arsene-wenger-arsenal-fourth-place
Fik in every sense
posted on 2/7/22
comment by Gaffer Pranks - Suck On Deeeeeeez Nuts (U22336)
posted 24 minutes ago
Spurs don’t win trophies, no major trophies this millennium
Sorry I don’t see the attraction.
4th place again for your lot at best with no silverware.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Shame you guys don't win much either because of Pep and Real Madrid
Always a bridesmaid
We have Conte now, you lost one of your best forward player, and spent £100m on an unproven player. A lot of things could go wrong for you guys
Page 2 of 4