Club watch
- Thread starter The RDBD
- Start date
-
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
-
There are rumours that Musk wants to buy Liverpool. I would love him to buy Spurs for all the wrong reasons!
He is the sort of owner I have nightmares about. I wouldn't renew my tickets.
I repeat what I said: if **** For Brains buys Spurs, I'm supporting somebody else
The fact FC Copenhagen have a green third kit this season makes them the frontrunner...
I know chaps! I did say “for the wrong reasons”!
But think about his great business successes (apart from Twitter) and think what he could achieve for Spurs!
But think about his great business successes (apart from Twitter) and think what he could achieve for Spurs!
The whole city ?? Sure he could do that with "back of the sofa" cash.
"I would love him to buy Spurs for all the wrong reasons!"
Becoming a stakeholder and clearing the new WHL
debt would be very interesting.
The data analytics for on-pitch performance would be superb though.
Let me take a quick look at Tesla's share price
...now let see if Timson's share price does the exact opposite at the exact same time people had the urge to buy some spare keys for walking past that one person in their neighbourhood who owned a Hipster Prius
Our home game against City and our FA Cup tie with Villa have had their dates announced.
City is on Wednesday the 26th of February at 7.30pm and Villa is on Sunday the 9th of February at 5.35pm.
No idea what that random time is about, but it's probably TV related.
City is on Wednesday the 26th of February at 7.30pm and Villa is on Sunday the 9th of February at 5.35pm.
No idea what that random time is about, but it's probably TV related.
So our next 3 points will be won on Feb the 26th, you say?
Bit of a wait but can't be helped I suppose.
As per Matt Lawton in The Times, INEOS are looking for an early termination of their sponsorship deal with us as Jim Ratfink is drastically scaling back his sports investments
Gee, I hope there aren't any clubs bankrolled by Jim Ratfink, as this would be appalling news for them to hear...
Gee, I hope there aren't any clubs bankrolled by Jim Ratfink, as this would be appalling news for them to hear...
I saw an estimate somewhere that between him and the Glazers they've taken £1bn out of the club.
People can criticise Levy for a lot of things, but some of the alternatives are genuinely nightmarish.
United have posted a 12% drop in revenue and Arsenal have posted a loss of £17m despite sustained CL qualification and of course not having a stadium to pay for.
The financial situation of most clubs around the world appears to be absolutely dire.
It does bring me back to a point I made elsewhere at some length. I wonder how profitable football actually is anymore?
By that, I mean specifically the price of sustained success. When you look at the amount clubs like City have sunk in order to achieve what they've achieved, then Chelsea who have achieved but significantly less, then United who have achieved f all, the margin of risk is huge compared to the potential net gain you're gambling on.
It's an unspoken effect of blood money clubs doping every single market.
Is it worth it anymore?
Nice are probably going to eat **** this summer because of this
So, anyone fancy some window shopping...?
[LONG-ish]
So, let us start from first principles ...
Q1. Is/was professional football EVER profitable ??
When were the times when all clubs in all leagues
collectively operated as "business of own account" ,
or if in debt not enough to cause waves thru their
creditors ??
If the answer to Q1 is never profitable but
significant debt, then it begs the following .:
Q2. Who are the major creditors ??
Q3. If the debt is significant, why have they never called it in ??
The answer to Q2 historically has been domestic banks.
But nowadays you have other entity types.
For example, PE firms (ex the funders of the Glazers) .
The answer to Q3 is that football clubs historically
acted as a focal point of community (tribal support and
pride) .
The other reason is the potential commercial **** storm
the creditor could face (we know as fact that Barclays did
not call the debts in on Spurs in 1991 for this very reason) .
But nowadays ??
Effectively owned by the likes of PE firms, who have no
community loyalty and often think little of "asset stripping"
their properties to get their money ??
Rather you than me.
To be a bit fairer to the Glazers, I would want
to see the % breakdown of monies taken to
service their PE firm debt / for 'personal enrichment' .
That press release the club sent out stating that the only acceptable shortened version of the club's name is Spurs, and not Tottenham, is definitely not going to cause any issues whatsoever...
So the financial results are out
https://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news/2025/march/financial-results-year-ended-30-june-2024/
Cue the utterly dogshit takes on the data from the usual aggregator accounts. Why yes, SpursWeb have already shat the bed trying to twist the data to their own agenda. How did you guess?
https://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news/2025/march/financial-results-year-ended-30-june-2024/
Cue the utterly dogshit takes on the data from the usual aggregator accounts. Why yes, SpursWeb have already shat the bed trying to twist the data to their own agenda. How did you guess?