How Much, Mr Levy?

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
PleaseNotPoll

PleaseNotPoll

Well-Known Member
Forum Moderator
May 31, 2011
97,704
60,162
113
There's an article doing the rounds about clubs generating revenue through player sales and I think that many people will be unsurprised to see us top the table over the last 6 seasons.
No idea why they've picked 6, by the way, as it's not something that's been created by a Spurs fan.

You must log in or register to see images


Clearly illustrates our MO under the current ownership, but it's one that we'll struggle to develop past until we've sorted the stadium out.
Even then we'll probably have to rely even more heavily on this sort of financing until we've paid it off, though sponsorship, naming rights, etc. should soften the blow.

Interesting to see Redknapp's old side Portsmouth make the list, despite effectively going bust.
Should be something of a heads up for those that lay the blame for that squarely at his door.
 
Surprised at Madrid being that high up to be honest, they usually sell players that are either past their prime or no longer needed so I wouldn't have thought they'd receive too big of a fee, though I suppose they've sold a fair few over the years where the quantity has mounted up to a substantial figure.

Porto I'm not surprised at, Hulk, Falcao, Lisandro, Rodrigues, Moutinho, Meireiles all made lovely profits. Their scouting team should surely be the most sought after in Europe. If I were the Porto chairman I'd make the scouting team the highest paid members of staff at the club!
 
"Clearly illustrates our MO under the current ownership"

Clearly indicates the level of talent Spurs have accrued in the squad over the years,
and the asset-stripping the really big clubs have been doing.
Even if you take Bale off the credit, Spurs are still 7th in the list.
 
"Surprised at Madrid being that high up to be honest"

Not surprised at all. It shows what a meat market their squads are.
Barca have close to half of their figure, which indicates that they get
far longer service from their talent.
 
Spurs, top of a league.....woop woop.

Surely we can derive some bragging writes from this.

There'll be now't else to brag about come end'ah season.
 
Woo hoo!

Proof that the North London Power Shift has already arrived!

<party>
 
Seriously though, take Bale/Berbatoss/ratboy out of that, and nigh on half
has been clear-outs of deadwood, and players who have given fairly long/decent
service to the club.

It is the primary reason why the net spend over the past 4 seasons has been near zero.
 
Interesting to see Redknapp's old side Portsmouth make the list, despite effectively going bust.
Should be something of a heads up for those that lay the blame for that squarely at his door.
Click to expand...

The only blame handed Redknapps way for the Portsmouth situation, are usually from bitter fans or people losing an argument so they chucked in the desperate attempt to suggest Redknapp sent them bust, but Redknapp never wanted to leave Portsmouth, he wasn't looking to move to us, he would have been happy to stay at Portsmouth for the rest of his career so in his mind he was attempting to build a decent team and like any manager that wants to build a decent team, they meet with the chairman and the chairman gives them guidelines on budget and what players they can sign.

All of Redknapps signings where given the agreement by the chief executive and then chairman so the people solely responsible for Portsmouth demise are the people who handled the accounts and agreed the transfers as each time they agreed a transfer they would have been very much aware of the situation regarding their finances and aware they advised Redknapp these signings where financially possible.

Same thing happened with Leeds, David O'Leary doesn't get blame for their demise as he doesn't have the reputation of being "Dodgy David". Ridsdale was the chairman who sanctioned the spending spree and same with that case, the chairman allowed the situation to reach a stage where it put the clubs future at stake.

And thats where I do have respect for Levy, as he ensures our future isn't at stake and he can handle a manager like Redknapp. No one will force Levy to take a risk that he isn't at ease with and while at times it holds us back, Levy himself must feel he wants to take a greater risk but realises the restrictions he has imposed on us and they won't ever be lifted.
 
I always find it funny when fans blame a manager for financial instability.

Similar to what Boss said, fans just use it as a parting shot to the departing manager because of their anger at the club's situation.
 
Remember all the crap we used to get from bitter rivals?

"Redknap will bankrupt your club like he bankrupted WHU and Portsmouth!"

<doh>

I know that the average football fan is reputed to be below average intelligence (present company excluded, of course), but that statement was particularly moronic and lacking in any ounce of footballing knowledge. I particularly remember Chavs and Gooners throwing that one at us.
 
No club board has to buy any players that their manager may desire, whether they can afford
it or not. Leeds and Pompey boards saw the possibilities, took the risk, and it didn't pay off long-term.

Agree with them or not, ENIC have decided they are not playing that game.
And when they have (Arrys' recovery signings in 2008/9 etc) , it actually paid off
(in PL/UEFA aspirations, and sell-on fees for those players - which brings us full circle) .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back