Harry Kane

[Musampa 209]

Solhekol (SSN) said City's bid was £75m plus player but it if City go to cash only bid in excess of £120m, that's a huge move. I'm sceptical but would like to see it as Kane is the best. I don't have a problem paying at the top of the market for the best players if City can do it.

I wonder what it is that’s made City jump up their valuation so much

 

[Username Required]

nobody ever organised an open-top bus parade for a cheque book.

Well put.

 

[Chi-town blues]

He knows Jack shit, mate

wait a minute! the **** said Grelish is shit ?

 

[LangleyBlue1970]

Under Daniel Levy, Spurs have won 1 League Cup in 20 years, he has a deserved reputation as a fine businessman and a tough negotiator but he is lousy when it comes to football matters.

It's all well and good getting top dollar for the likes of Bale and Modric but if you're neither use nor ornament at recruiting and retaining managers, you're a poor Chairman.

Getting rid of Poch, and more recently Mourinho just before the LC Final, were blunders right up there with the appointment of AVB, Santini and Ramos.

Rather than lauding Levy as a fiscal genius, the Spurs fans should be banging the doors down to get him out, nobody ever organised an open-top bus parade for a cheque book.

Ha reading that you can see the exact point they became ‘Spursy’

 

[Dribble]

Odsonne Édouard, £25M
Andrej Kramarić, £25M
Frank Kessié, £46M
Cristian Romero, £46M
Jerôme Boateng, free transfer
Andre Onana, £6M

And with wages you think these players would replace Kane's goals & bolster Spur's squad?

This is the risk Levy is running. Losing a world class striker & replacing him with potential successes & free transfers. It's risky business & not guaranteed to be successful either.

Now if this were City after a bad season, would you advocate us selling a 28 year old Aguero, & replacing him with the aforementioned? The last time we had a similar window was in 2012. If memory serves me right, every one of those players had been moved on within 2-3 years. Like I said, it's a risky business...

 

[marco]

if its 120m then the add ons 'but NOT for scoring goals' fair enough his payment will increase to around 150m but for Levy to achive that it means we need to clear up on trophys,,think il settle for that

 

[samuelyeboah]

As Kane eluded to, both sides have their take.

I know it has pissed Harry and his brother off even more.

still confused by that. was he intending to skip training?

I guess we'll find out eventually once this is all over

 

[The Clansman]

wait a minute! the **** said Grelish is shit ?

Yeah. Cockney bastard. Mods must have binned him off by now.

 

[The Pandorica Opened]

Its a great point - would you pay 30M extra now if it might mean Pep extends 2 more years yet again?

Yep. Obviously no guarantee that any signing would convince Pep to stay, but if we as fans are aware of how much Pep wants Harry in sky-blue this season then Khaldoon will be doubly so - I really don't think Pep has any interest in another season of playing the false nine. But like I said, I think City are full-on for transfer whatever the motivation beyond just buying the league's best striker. I do think it'll get done at an amount totalling around £150m.

 

[lasereyes]

There is only interest payable on the £637m stadium debt and the recent £250m debt raised to pay off the Bank of England CCFF Covid loan. The former is at an average interest rate of 2.66%, which works out at just under £17m per annum. The latter is at an average interest rate of 2.8%, which works out at exactly £7m per annum. The total interest payable is therefore just under £24m per annum.

The remaining debt is just the standard debt that all clubs have - further instalments on transfers and debt such as amounts falling due within the year - the latter of which being an accounting technicality. It has to be reported as debt even though it constitutes normal operational costs over the coming year. It includes such technicalities as owing season ticket holders the cost of the remaining value if their tickets until all games are played. As such, none of this debt is subject to interest charges.

I do wish you fellas would stop citing ill informed, sensationalist articles written by football hacks who are ignorant about Spurs’ situation and who don’t understand finance. Better to keep the discussion to Harry Kane.

At least we quote sources rather than pulling numbers from out of your arse as you do. Dismissing the bulk of Spurs's debt as "standard debt that all clubs have" is horseshit. The whole point is Spurs have way more debt than anyone else so by definition, that is wrong. Secondly, you still have to service that debt. And there will be debt covenants tied to financial ratios which if breached will change the terms or require prompt repayment - you have no clue what those covenants are. Every corporation that fails claims to be stable until they aren't. You may care to google statements by Lehman Brothers in summer of 2008.

Bottom line, is Spurs are up to their eyeballs in debt and in way worse shape than any other major club.