comment by ●Billy The Spur● LEVY OUT- ENIC OUT! (U3924)
posted 3 hours, 19 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 9 hours, 9 minutes ago
And in response to Dev, he makes some good points. Levy has not been all bad. He’s done a very good job of running the business and operating a football club in the black. Problem is, that’s where his skill set lets us down. It’s all he’s good at. His ‘win’ is to climb the table spending the least amount of money. That’s the game he plays. He’s not in it for the success as we see it. He’s in it for the financial win. That’s what makes him tick so even if we got an investor on board, he wouldn’t relax and spend more. That’s not who he is. The game isn’t winning monopoly. It’s getting as far as you can without spending much money.
Also it’s worth pointing out that the footballing landscape is changing fast with US owners. The sensible spender is a relic, a dinosaur. What was once a valuable skill set in this league is fast becoming obsolete. He was unambitious 5-10 years ago. You imagine what he’ll be like 5-10 years from now when inflation really blows the game up. He’s already having to be clever in the market. It’s completely unsustainable for an ambitious club. We WILL drop down the league if we don’t start spending more money. History teaches us that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is a difference between running a club sustainably and being in something for financial gain.
The argument that he's not interest in success, only profits is false as success = profit.
As for sustainable running of clubs being "a relic" this lays bare your ill considered idea of club ownership.
Where are all these clubs spending 100s if millions beyond their financial means.
Chelsea and City did it when the rules were lapse and developed their clubs into financial powerhouses. City are now sustainable having doped themselves to the top.
United Liverpool Arsenal all spend money they earn. Big wealthy clubs who can afford to spend big.
Spurs also spend big.
How we go about spending that money is a different matter and there is a much evidence to show that we have wasted a lot and the way we get deals done makes our life harder.
You seem to want a Todd Boehly approach to ownership and see that as some new way of owning a club. It isn't. They got the club under value leaving them room to spend wildly. They have rolled the dice massively and are banking on success. Failure to get that success could ruin them. Their fans should be genuinely worried about the fall out of a failure to achieve UCL this season.
I would not want our owners to be playing such a risky game with our club.
So long as we spend what we earn and seek to maximise earnings and investment, then we cannot ask the owners to do more than that, financially. We can demand they put the best structures in place to ensure we give ourselves the best chance of success and that is probably where we have failed in recent years, unable to develop an identity and an ethos that is driven towards success at all levels of the club. City are a great example of how this can be achieved. Our owners have not done this and its been a mess and this is where the strongest criticism should lie...not the fact they havent gambled the clubs future by spending 1bn in 12 months.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Levy can make profits without success on the pitch, that is a problem.
Spurs spend way below their financial means, that is another problem.
These owners are not delivering success on the pitch, and should fack off out of Spurs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is precisely the problem.
Spurs were recently registered as one of the most profitable sporting clubs on earth. This is because of the way the club is run financially. Levy and ENIC have engineered a situation where the THFC brand generates profits via the football club and also via the stadium as an events & entertainment destination.
This does not however translate to footballing success on the pitch, and it never will, because they don’t need it to. All Levy has to do is maintain the current status quo at the club, while generating additional revenue via the stadium, and their end game is sorted - big profits, relatively low outlay. And for the fans it means mediocrity for generations to come. Any fan that thinks THFC will become a serious or successful club under ENIC is deluded. They couldn’t do it when they had a peak team under Poch, they let that slip, and now they have stadium revenue there is no motivation to be too ambitious elsewhere.
Levy - the truth
Page 3 of 3
posted on 1/9/23
comment by ●Billy The Spur● LEVY OUT- ENIC OUT! (U3924)
posted 3 hours, 19 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 17 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 9 hours, 9 minutes ago
And in response to Dev, he makes some good points. Levy has not been all bad. He’s done a very good job of running the business and operating a football club in the black. Problem is, that’s where his skill set lets us down. It’s all he’s good at. His ‘win’ is to climb the table spending the least amount of money. That’s the game he plays. He’s not in it for the success as we see it. He’s in it for the financial win. That’s what makes him tick so even if we got an investor on board, he wouldn’t relax and spend more. That’s not who he is. The game isn’t winning monopoly. It’s getting as far as you can without spending much money.
Also it’s worth pointing out that the footballing landscape is changing fast with US owners. The sensible spender is a relic, a dinosaur. What was once a valuable skill set in this league is fast becoming obsolete. He was unambitious 5-10 years ago. You imagine what he’ll be like 5-10 years from now when inflation really blows the game up. He’s already having to be clever in the market. It’s completely unsustainable for an ambitious club. We WILL drop down the league if we don’t start spending more money. History teaches us that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There is a difference between running a club sustainably and being in something for financial gain.
The argument that he's not interest in success, only profits is false as success = profit.
As for sustainable running of clubs being "a relic" this lays bare your ill considered idea of club ownership.
Where are all these clubs spending 100s if millions beyond their financial means.
Chelsea and City did it when the rules were lapse and developed their clubs into financial powerhouses. City are now sustainable having doped themselves to the top.
United Liverpool Arsenal all spend money they earn. Big wealthy clubs who can afford to spend big.
Spurs also spend big.
How we go about spending that money is a different matter and there is a much evidence to show that we have wasted a lot and the way we get deals done makes our life harder.
You seem to want a Todd Boehly approach to ownership and see that as some new way of owning a club. It isn't. They got the club under value leaving them room to spend wildly. They have rolled the dice massively and are banking on success. Failure to get that success could ruin them. Their fans should be genuinely worried about the fall out of a failure to achieve UCL this season.
I would not want our owners to be playing such a risky game with our club.
So long as we spend what we earn and seek to maximise earnings and investment, then we cannot ask the owners to do more than that, financially. We can demand they put the best structures in place to ensure we give ourselves the best chance of success and that is probably where we have failed in recent years, unable to develop an identity and an ethos that is driven towards success at all levels of the club. City are a great example of how this can be achieved. Our owners have not done this and its been a mess and this is where the strongest criticism should lie...not the fact they havent gambled the clubs future by spending 1bn in 12 months.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Levy can make profits without success on the pitch, that is a problem.
Spurs spend way below their financial means, that is another problem.
These owners are not delivering success on the pitch, and should fack off out of Spurs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is precisely the problem.
Spurs were recently registered as one of the most profitable sporting clubs on earth. This is because of the way the club is run financially. Levy and ENIC have engineered a situation where the THFC brand generates profits via the football club and also via the stadium as an events & entertainment destination.
This does not however translate to footballing success on the pitch, and it never will, because they don’t need it to. All Levy has to do is maintain the current status quo at the club, while generating additional revenue via the stadium, and their end game is sorted - big profits, relatively low outlay. And for the fans it means mediocrity for generations to come. Any fan that thinks THFC will become a serious or successful club under ENIC is deluded. They couldn’t do it when they had a peak team under Poch, they let that slip, and now they have stadium revenue there is no motivation to be too ambitious elsewhere.
Page 3 of 3