Will Pochettino stay or go?

  • 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!
Status
Not open for further replies.
pass the football said:
But it won't be to whomever inherits the house.
Click to expand...

Well for that to matter we'd have to assume that Markus bought the club in order for his already rich daughter to some day profit from it. (I mean, he obviously did intend for that to happen, but I don't think he wanted to buy a football club for that reason.)

And I'm still far from convinced that the investments he's made in the club could have increased its value by an amount greater than the total amount he's invested. Investments in capital surely increase the club's value by the same amount as the money invested, and all that can really change the value of capital over time is depreciation, which decreases its value. Expenditure on transfer fees can return a profit when the player is sold on, but the money you spend on salaries and agent fees cannot be earned back. We've earned money from promotion and TV rights but that's reinvested into the budgets for the aforementioned things. I think Randy Lerner has claimed it would be an idiotic decision to buy a football club with the intention of making money, and I can see where he's coming from.

Katharina can make a nice bundle now, because it wasn't her money to begin with. The club could have been relegated to the Conference and been worth less £1m at this point but that'd still be £1m gained to her if she sold it.
 
fran-MLs little camera said:
I don't know whether Markus intended to sell on or not, but Nicola probably sold it to him as 'can't lose' scenario. I never understood why there wasn't a queue of people wanting us.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more - spend £20m and I could give you an asset worth £200m in 5 years. Worst case you'll own a stadium that will be worth close to the initial investment - worth a punt? (I've plucked the numbers out of the air before anyone wastes time correcting me!)
 
PO10Saint said:
Couldn't agree more - spend £20m and I could give you an asset worth £200m in 5 years. Worst case you'll own a stadium that will be worth close to the initial investment - worth a punt? (I've plucked the numbers out of the air before anyone wastes time correcting me!)
Click to expand...

Markus has spend at least £200m on the club at this point. I know you plucked the numbers out of the air, but how much do you think the club is worth? Much more than that?
 
Joe! said:
Markus has spend at least £200m on the club at this point. I know you plucked the numbers out of the air, but how much do you think the club is worth? Much more than that?
Click to expand...
15m on the original purchase, 30m odd of debts written off. where's the other 165m?
 
Joe! said:
Well for that to matter we'd have to assume that Markus bought the club in order for his already rich daughter to some day profit from it. (I mean, he obviously did intend for that to happen, but I don't think he wanted to buy a football club for that reason.)

And I'm still far from convinced that the investments he's made in the club could have increased its value by an amount greater than the total amount he's invested. Investments in capital surely increase the club's value by the same amount as the money invested, and all that can really change the value of capital over time is depreciation, which decreases its value. Expenditure on transfer fees can return a profit when the player is sold on, but the money you spend on salaries and agent fees cannot be earned back. We've earned money from promotion and TV rights but that's reinvested into the budgets for the aforementioned things. I think Randy Lerner has claimed it would be an idiotic decision to buy a football club with the intention of making money, and I can see where he's coming from.

Katharina can make a nice bundle now, because it wasn't her money to begin with. The club could have been relegated to the Conference and been worth less £1m at this point but that'd still be £1m gained to her if she sold it.
Click to expand...
The investments he has made have enabled the club to get back into the EPL. From the balance sheet point of view you are right - but the value the club could be sold for is significantly higher than the net asset value. - the main reason for this would be the potential income streams over the next x years that have become very real now we are in the EPL and i would argue established (?!). The point regarding Katherine is just wrong - she will be looking at it based upon the value her father invested and will have a team that reports back on this and the other investments probably monthly.

Your point regarding Randy Lerner is a good one - but he has made that comment with hindsight. He began by trying to buy his way in to the top 4 for a very good reason, he could see that was a way to massively increase income streams and increase the value of his investment. He got it wrong but that was his plan and it was certainly put together with his head not his heart.
 
pass the football said:
£30m for the training ground... not sure about the rest though. The transfer fees and salaries were not paid for by the Liebherr estate.
Click to expand...

I bet you they were. I know people talk about promotion being worth £90m or whatever but it's massive oversimplification. It's not like the club just gets given that much.
 
Joe! said:
I bet you they were. I know people talk about promotion being worth £90m or whatever but it's massive oversimplification. It's not like the club just gets given that much.
Click to expand...

since we've been in the premier league we took finance from third parties rather than the liebherrs didn't we? it would only be a cashflow consideration.
 
Figures look healthy, especially as the income from broadcasting will come in again next season. Think too much was read into that outstanding transfer costs...not massive in the scheme of things and debts are never a problem if you can finance them (which we obviously can).
 
fatletiss said:
Having watched every home game under both managers I can tell you who I believe is the better manager. If you can't see it, fair enough not my problem. Level playing field? Excuse? Resentment? Clear as day to me.

I feel like a lot of you have just been dumped by your girlfriend and you're telling your mates she wasn't as good a shag as the previous one anyway. I bet you still think if her at night though :)
Click to expand...

Well I'm glad that you think Pochettino was such a good shag. However his win ratio was no better than Strachan, Dave Jones, or Chris Nicholl, and it was way lower than Hoddle's. Maybe you just like his cute smile and sexy accent.
 
You have to ask yourself why we've been able to spend so much more than anyone else who has come up since we did. Hull and Palace will have earnt just as much as we have from promotion (it's apparently even more if you go through the playoffs), and their increase from TV money and ticket sales would be in roughly the same ball park as ours. Leicester say they intend to spend tens of millions on players, and how do they intend to do that?
 
Joe! said:
I bet you they were. I know people talk about promotion being worth £90m or whatever but it's massive oversimplification. It's not like the club just gets given that much.
Click to expand...

How do you explain the £27m of debt then? Look at the accounts that get released, we have been operating without any handouts apart from infrastructure costs. Due to the new TV deal, all premier league clubs (without lots of debt to service) should be able to spend £30m+ a season on transfers and still break even.
 
I think we recognised that MP was limited by the depth of our squad...we lost valuable points when injuries hit us. We should have been at least higher than United...definitely better than them at our best. However, he certainly isn't perfect by any means, but he suited a talented team punching over its weight. Don't know if will improve things for Spurs who finished up the table anyway.
 
PS: Not saying I want him back, but we played some absolutely stunning football under Adkins at times. You are quick to forget it seems FLT.
 
pass the football said:
How do you explain the £27m of debt then? Look at the accounts that get released, we have been operating without any handouts apart from infrastructure costs. Due to the new TV deal, all premier league clubs (without lots of debt to service) should be able to spend £30m+ a season on transfers and still break even.
Click to expand...

The £27m of debt, as I understand it, is just installments for signings that we didn't pay up front for. If you spend £30m on transfer fees, you're likely spending at least double that over the year when you include a year's salary for each new signing, plus agent fees, signing fees, appearance fees, and whatever other fees get included in contracts. The TV deal might be able to cover £30m on transfer fees alone, but not the rest of it.

Also I think you might underestimate just how much goes into infrastructure.
 
there's no evidence of significant external funds being invested since we got into the top flight.

there's more evidence indicating that the cupboard was bare.
 
We scored lots of goals with Adkins which outweighed the goals we let in (notably in the Championship). We played a 'we will score one more than you' philosophy. Under MP, we still let in goals, but scored fewer goals (though had masses of chances).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back