Harry Kane

[BAB.DAB]

Regardless of whether Kane joins City this summer, it won’t be because Spurs has to sell.

Over the past couple of pages, I’ve seen claims that Spurs have to pay back the Bank of England imminently and that the debt is growing exponentially because of the interest payable.

It’s simply not true. The £175m BoE COVID loan has been repaid after Spurs recently raised long term debt of £250m via private placement. As to the interest payable on this debt plus the stadium debt, it amounts to some £30-40m per annum. A fair chunk of money, certainly. But easily serviceable for Spurs - especially once the new stadium can start generating income again.

So if Kane is sold to City this summer - and I fully concede that it is possible - it will only be because Spurs have weighed up the pros and cons of keeping or selling a talismanic player who wishes to leave (no doubt about that!). The amount offered will have to be sufficient, in Levy’s opinion, to enable Spurs to rebuild and grow stronger.

Nothing else will influence the decision. It is decidedly not about Spurs being in dire financial straits.

Does depends on the pandemic, another lockdown will hit them financially. A lot of spurs income revenue will be from crowds in the stadium for various events

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

Haaland’s wage demands would be a huge sticking point for us whereas Kane’s wouldn’t. The problem with the Kane deal will be the fee I believe.

Spot on with both, and the reason I hope city are looking elsewhere. Whatever anyone negotiates with Haaland, Riola will be looking to unsettle/move him or renegotiate every 18 months.

 

[Keeper!]

Regardless of whether Kane joins City this summer, it won’t be because Spurs has to sell.

Over the past couple of pages, I’ve seen claims that Spurs have to pay back the Bank of England imminently and that the debt is growing exponentially because of the interest payable.

It’s simply not true. The £175m BoE COVID loan has been repaid after Spurs recently raised long term debt of £250m via private placement. As to the interest payable on this debt plus the stadium debt, it amounts to some £30-40m per annum. A fair chunk of money, certainly. But easily serviceable for Spurs - especially once the new stadium can start generating income again.

So if Kane is sold to City this summer - and I fully concede that it is possible - it will only be because Spurs have weighed up the pros and cons of keeping or selling a talismanic player who wishes to leave (no doubt about that!). The amount offered will have to be sufficient, in Levy’s opinion, to enable Spurs to rebuild and grow stronger.

Nothing else will influence the decision. It is decidedly not about Spurs being in dire financial straits.

Not so sure about that, and the struggle to appoint a new top class manager would suggest there is a problem with investment in the team.

Spurs squad is weak and needs a major, major revamp to even get back into top 4 territory , never mind challenge for titles.

120m for Kane is not going to get them much, they need to replace him for starters and that alone will take away a huge chunk of cash.

 

[feedmpenzaandhewillscore]

I can't think of the last time a transfer like this happened. A major English international of the highest calibre moving from one club to another because he wants trophies. Unless my mind isn't working, I can only think of Gerrard's on/off move to Chelsea, which didn't even happen. I can't even put Cashley Cole or Campbell in the bracket.

Kyle Walker did alright moving here.

 

[Brightwell Bros.]

I can't think of the last time a transfer like this happened. A major English international of the highest calibre moving from one club to another because he wants trophies. Unless my mind isn't working, I can only think of Gerrard's on/off move to Chelsea, which didn't even happen. I can't even put Cashley Cole or Campbell in the bracket.

Sterling, probably, and he got crucified for it.

 

[LangleyBlue1970]

I give you Raheem Sterling, and the mickey mousers claimed it was for money!

Wasn't in his prime though, he was still a prospect at that point.

 

[Keeper!]

Wasn't in his prime though, he was still a prospect at that point.

Maybe not at his prime but it was a hell of a blow to them, he was a star in the making and they knew it full well.

Hence the scouse hate campaign from ex players, fans and club.

It was disgusting, very wrong and very bitter, says everything about them as a club.

I don't like Spurs, they broke my heart in '81, but to be fair to them, a vast majority of their fans seem to understand why Kane wants to go.

 

[LangleyBlue1970]

Maybe not at his prime but it was a hell of a blow to them, he was a star in the making and they knew it full well.

Hence the scouse hate campaign from ex players, fans and club.

It was disgusting, very wrong and very bitter, says everything about them as a club.

I don't like Spurs, they broke my heart in '81, but to be fair to them, a vast majority of their fans seem to understand why Kane wants to go.

Yeah i'm getting that feeling too. On a lesser scale I remember feeling it for SWP.
I think if Gerrard had gone to Chelsea that would rival this signing. I think it really is a first for this type of player. I see you named him as a figurehead in another thread, and that'd what I mean. An English player, figurehead for his club, 'Mr Spurs', let's say, leaving his club in the absolute prime of his career to go to the top dog in the PL. I'm pretty fucking proud we are doing this, should it happen.

 

[Damien10]

Hopefully this doesn’t happen.

 

[FantasyIreland]

Regardless of whether Kane joins City this summer, it won’t be because Spurs has to sell.

Over the past couple of pages, I’ve seen claims that Spurs have to pay back the Bank of England imminently and that the debt is growing exponentially because of the interest payable.

It’s simply not true. The £175m BoE COVID loan has been repaid after Spurs recently raised long term debt of £250m via private placement. As to the interest payable on this debt plus the stadium debt, it amounts to some £30-40m per annum. A fair chunk of money, certainly. But easily serviceable for Spurs - especially once the new stadium can start generating income again.

So if Kane is sold to City this summer - and I fully concede that it is possible - it will only be because Spurs have weighed up the pros and cons of keeping or selling a talismanic player who wishes to leave (no doubt about that!). The amount offered will have to be sufficient, in Levy’s opinion, to enable Spurs to rebuild and grow stronger.

Nothing else will influence the decision. It is decidedly not about Spurs being in dire financial straits.

Would you want to keep a player,your most influential on and off the pitch,if he was miserable and frustrated that his career was being damaged by the refusal to sanction his transfer request?