Transfer Discussion Thread

[SM]

But the actual purchase happens for the next manager and we keep repeating the endless cycle of nonsense

Did I miss something confirming Ange was going?

 

[largebus]

I always found it fascinating given the clubs trajectories how the media builds up Levy as this master negotiator, while the media here did the same with Adrian Dodoro.

 

[Hamingja]

Did I miss something confirming Ange was going?

He is probably paid too much to do it now but I'd love for him to win the LC & Europa League double then tell the spurs fans to GAGF like he did to FFA after the Asian Cup / qualifying for the world cup

 

[Art Vandelay_]

All 3 of our incomings are loans. 2 with obligation to buy.

So when Levy gets Iraola he can be said to have backed Iraola 2 years later with Danso and Kinsky.

Why is the discussion about each manager individually and not an acknowledgment that by this June we'll likely be over 1bn spent since playing in a CL final. That's 6 seasons. In reality 20/21 was very low due to covid so in 5 seasons we've spent a buttload of cash on the first team.

 

[moomba]

Spurs ruining football.

 

[RPCB]

And just as I am about to head to bed. Can you guys delay the fighting until tomorrow?

 

[moomba]

Barcelona had a 40% sell on clause for Gonzales but Porto exercised an option to reduce it to 20%, and and also cancel a €30m buyback for only €3m.

 

[Yoda_]

I always found it fascinating given the clubs trajectories how the media builds up Levy as this master negotiator, while the media here did the same with Adrian Dodoro.

yep

**** my life Tottenham Bombers hates me

 

[krakouers]

And just as I am about to head to bed. Can you guys delay the fighting until tomorrow?

Wait… isn’t that the cue for more fighting?

 

[RossFC]

 

[RossFC]

 

[jd2010]

Did I miss something confirming Ange was going?

Law of averages.

Without a trophy at the end of this season i don't think he survives.

Avg lifespan of a Levy manager is around 24 months

 

[jd2010]

Why is the discussion about each manager individually and not an acknowledgment that by this June we'll likely be over 1bn spent since playing in a CL final. That's 6 seasons. In reality 20/21 was very low due to covid so in 5 seasons we've spent a buttload of cash on the first team.

And yet walked away with record profits and directors fees at the same time.

 

[jd2010]

He is probably paid too much to do it now but I'd love for him to win the LC & Europa League double then tell the spurs fans to GAGF like he did to FFA after the Asian Cup / qualifying for the world cup

To be honest so would I! Even for just the 1 trophy.

We get the sugar rush feeling of winning something. Ange goes does a hero. And levy still looks like a bellend

 

[chef]

And yet walked away with record profits and directors fees at the same time.

Your wages to revenue percentage is embarrassing low. You could show as much ambition as any other team in the league but choose not too, sucks for your supporters.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Your wages to revenue percentage is embarrassing low. You could show as much ambition as any other team in the league but choose not too, sucks for your supporters.

Disagree strongly.
It's an irrelevant red herring thrown up by too many without context.

In raw terms it's about 80m less than Arsenal, Chelsea and over 100m less than both Manchester clubs. But we aren't beating any of the those 4 or Liverpool* to signing top players needed to succeed.

So all I see as the outcome is an increase in the wage bill to end up like United. Overpaying a group of good players but not good enough, that you then can't move on because you pay them too much and no other club will take them. If the result is beating those clubs to top talent then no brainer go for it. But very sceptical it would.

*Liverpool are the outlier. Through their quality DoF over the years means they're only paying about 15m more to have the best squad in the league.

And yet walked away with record profits and directors fees at the same time.

Directors fees are largely irrelevant. Even halving his fee wouldn't pay for a shit championship player.

As for profits, for a club that since moving into its new home ground is close to 1bn in transfer spending we've accumulated around 180m in profit for that time or roughly 30m a year. We're also still at 850m in loan debt and paying roughly 16m just on loan interest.

And there's been 150m of the owners cash tipped in during that time. Take that out and our profit over 6 years would be 30m.

Spending and how much we squirrel away for later is simply not the issue. The poor quality of returns we get for that spending is the sole issue.

 

[chef]

Disagree strongly.
It's an irrelevant red herring thrown up by too many without context.

In raw terms it's about 80m less than Arsenal, Chelsea and over 100m less than both Manchester clubs. But we aren't beating any of the those 4 or Liverpool* to signing top players needed to succeed.

 

[Sozabarus]

Your wages to revenue percentage is embarrassing low. You could show as much ambition as any other team in the league but choose not too, sucks for your supporters.

And then charge their supporters more than anyone else in Europe to watch them, it would be infuriating.

 

[chef]

And then charge their supporters more than anyone else in Europe to watch them, it would be infuriating.

While their chairman gets paid more than any other.

 

[moomba]

It's a shame but it is a fact of life that if you want to compete at the top of the premier league on a consistent basis you need to pay top wages.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

View attachment 2218655View attachment 2218654

This shows we're wealthy comparative to most of Europe. Still 5 larger.

If high profile trade/FA targets are available how often are you or NM convincing them to choose you over Coll, Carl etc?

Football transfers are a pyramid, the higher up you go the smaller the pool of players and the demand for them is high. Arsenal paid 100m for an Rodri lite. Lewandowski and Kane at 30 or older command high transfer fees because elite CF are hard to find.

The money league shows we're rich, not that it's easy to find players, and pay them.

And then charge their supporters more than anyone else in Europe to watch them, it would be infuriating.

While their chairman gets paid more than any other.

Both of these are fair critiques.

Looking at it slightly different, we charge our fans the highest of high season ticket prices, spend around €200m a year on transfers and yet our wage turnover is low... And to on average retain around only £35m per season at the end of it.

Increasing the wage bill to be comparable to Arse, Che would see losses not profits, and that £250m in stored profits would evaporate quickly. If we matched both for wages on our current trajectory we'd run out of money within 7-10 years. Football is a business and you can't make losses every year or you go broke

What I'm getting at is that we're not making much profit considering the things you're criticising like wage spend. Not even taking into account that spending more on wages to attract better players often means they also cost more to buy.

 

[SM]

Or if you don't want to pay top wages, don't rinse your supporters.

 

[SM]

This shows we're wealthy comparative to most of Europe. Still 5 larger.

If high profile trade/FA targets are available how often are you or NM convincing them to choose you over Coll, Carl etc?

Football transfers are a pyramid, the higher up you go the smaller the pool of players and the demand for them is high. Arsenal paid 100m for an Rodri lite. Lewandowski and Kane at 30 or older command high transfer fees because elite CF are hard to find.

The money league shows we're rich, not that it's easy to find players, and pay them.



Both of these are fair critiques.

Looking at it slightly different, we charge our fans the highest of high season ticket prices, spend around €200m a year on transfers and yet our wage turnover is low... And to on average retain around only £35m per season at the end of it.

Increasing the wage bill to be comparable to Arse, Che would see losses not profits, and that £250m in stored profits would evaporate quickly. If we matched both for wages on our current trajectory we'd run out of money within 7-10 years. Football is a business and you can't make losses every year or you go broke

What I'm getting at is that we're not making much profit considering the things you're criticising like wage spend. Not even taking into account that spending more on wages to attract better players often means they also cost more to buy.

Football clubs rarely if ever go broke for making losses each year. They go broke because owners lose interest and fail to find a buyer. And that is incredibly rare. Spurs wouldn't struggle to find a buyer.

 

[jd2010]

Your wages to revenue percentage is embarrassing low. You could show as much ambition as any other team in the league but choose not too, sucks for your supporters.

Just to get it to a reasonable level of 50% we'd be able to spend about 500-600k per week extra.

Means you get an Eze over a Johnson for 50k a week more. Means you are in the market for Williams on the other wing at 300k a week. In the market for a number 6 offering 200k-300k a week.

You dont win anything paying peanuts

 

[chef]

Just to get it to a reasonable level of 50% we'd be able to spend about 500-600k per week extra.

Means you get an Eze over a Johnson for 50k a week more. Means you are in the market for Williams on the other wing at 300k a week. In the market for a number 6 offering 200k-300k a week.

You dont win anything paying peanuts

Yep. For a club that has the moto to dare is to do you really don't want to dare much.

I dont know how the actual match going supporters put up with being just customers to a business instead of a football club.