Spurs would have been in the same financial situation had they sold some players and bought some players and ended up with a zero net spend - as they have generally done for the past 6-7 years. Selling players was the difficult thing this year because of the Premier League's early transfer window closure. No player sales, no players incoming. Same as it ever was for Spurs.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Spurs’ new stadium
- Thread starter Chris Holmes
- Start date
Spurs would have been in the same financial situation had they sold some players and bought some players and ended up with a zero net spend - as they have generally done for the past 6-7 years. Selling players was the difficult thing this year because of the Premier League's early transfer window closure. No player sales, no players incoming. Same as it ever was for Spurs.
dave_blue12
Well-Known Member
Spurs would have been in the same financial situation had they sold some players and bought some players and ended up with a zero net spend - as they have generally done for the past 6-7 years. Selling players was the difficult thing this year because of the Premier League's early transfer window closure. No player sales, no players incoming. Same as it ever was for Spurs.
And why do you think that is ?
Spurs would have been in the same financial situation had they sold some players and bought some players and ended up with a zero net spend - as they have generally done for the past 6-7 years. Selling players was the difficult thing this year because of the Premier League's early transfer window closure. No player sales, no players incoming. Same as it ever was for Spurs.
TV money is at a record high, even Everton are spending £300m over 2.5 seasons.
You haven’t spent because of the stadium.
And why do you think that is ?
TV money is at a record high, even Everton are spending £300m over 2.5 seasons.
You haven’t spent because of the stadium.
Absolutely. The financial prudence is necessitated by the stadium cost.
But the specific point to which I was originally replying was why Spurs bought no one this summer. What was different about this summer wasn't Spurs' net spend on transfers. What was different was that Spurs neither sold nor bought anyone. And the specific reason for that was the early closure of the transfer window and the consequent difficulty of selling the players that Spurs wanted to sell in time to be able to buy.
If, as the two of you are suggesting, this summer was specifically different because Spurs are under overwhelming financial pressure, then they would have sold the players they wanted to sell and still bought no one. But that didn't happen.
Absolutely. The financial prudence is necessitated by the stadium cost.
But the specific point to which I was originally replying was why Spurs bought no one this summer. What was different about this summer wasn't Spurs' net spend on transfers. What was different was that Spurs neither sold nor bought anyone. And the specific reason for that was the early closure of the transfer window and the consequent difficulty of selling the players that Spurs wanted to sell in time to be able to buy.
If, as the two of you are suggesting, this summer was specifically different because Spurs are under overwhelming financial pressure, then they would have sold the players they wanted to sell and still bought no one. But that didn't happen.
Maybe they didn’t want to sell anyone?
The squad is hardly deep, they need to add before selling.
I think they were relatively happy with the team as it is, im not pushing down on this point too much.
The stadium will affect Spurs for the next few years as it did Arsenal though.
Maybe they didn’t want to sell anyone?
The squad is hardly deep, they need to add before selling.
I think they were relatively happy with the team as it is, im not pushing down on this point too much.
The stadium will affect Spurs for the next few years as it did Arsenal though.
Nah. Poch definitely wanted to sell a few - any of Sissoko, Dembele, Alderweireld, Nkoudou, Llorente, Janssen. Obviously wanted to bring in a few too. Just as well with regard to Alderweireld, though, given the injuries to Vertonghen and Foyth.
dave_blue12
Well-Known Member
Absolutely. The financial prudence is necessitated by the stadium cost.
But the specific point to which I was originally replying was why Spurs bought no one this summer. What was different about this summer wasn't Spurs' net spend on transfers. What was different was that Spurs neither sold nor bought anyone. And the specific reason for that was the early closure of the transfer window and the consequent difficulty of selling the players that Spurs wanted to sell in time to be able to buy.
If, as the two of you are suggesting, this summer was specifically different because Spurs are under overwhelming financial pressure, then they would have sold the players they wanted to sell and still bought no one. But that didn't happen.
The point is that the sell to buy policy is because of the stadium.
Make no mistake that the stadium is something of a gamble.
Poch could get fed up of no money for players and leave, which could in turn lead to a player exodus. Add in the fact that there are 6 teams with genuine aspirations to finish top 4, Spurs could easily spend a few years out of the CL which will mean a significant reduction in income along with the impact it could have on player retention and recruitment.
These are interesting times for Spurs and it may all work out well but that is by no means a given.
FWIW I think Spurs are being prepped for sale. Which is potentially a whole other can of worms - leveraged buy out ?
The new stadium highlights one of those weird things you get in football, clubs getting their own fans excited about the idea of them taking more of their money. The entire reason for the move is to try to double matchday revenue, as far as I can tell. So they are spending Spurs fans money, instead of to improve the team, but to improve the clubs ability to extract yet more money from the fans. And yet the fans just buy into that as a good thing.
That's not a dig specifically at Spurs fans, but football fans in general. People brag about how much revenue their club has made, completely ignoring the fact that it's come out of their own pocket, whether it be from ridiculous ticket prices, concessions or the obscene price of replica kits and tv subscriptions. It's a weird one, I genuinely can't remember when giving a shit about your clubs finances became a thing? (as long as you weren't going broke)
That's not a dig specifically at Spurs fans, but football fans in general. People brag about how much revenue their club has made, completely ignoring the fact that it's come out of their own pocket, whether it be from ridiculous ticket prices, concessions or the obscene price of replica kits and tv subscriptions. It's a weird one, I genuinely can't remember when giving a shit about your clubs finances became a thing? (as long as you weren't going broke)
The point is that the sell to buy policy is because of the stadium.
Make no mistake that the stadium is something of a gamble.
Poch could get fed up of no money for players and leave, which could in turn lead to a player exodus. Add in the fact that there are 6 teams with genuine aspirations to finish top 4, Spurs could easily spend a few years out of the CL which will mean a significant reduction in income along with the impact it could have on player retention and recruitment.
These are interesting times for Spurs and it may all work out well but that is by no means a given.
FWIW I think Spurs are being prepped for sale. Which is potentially a whole other can of worms - leveraged buy out ?
The stadium is a gamble in so far as any business decision is a gamble. But it is not a decision that has been hurried or taken without very careful consideration.
As to spurs being "prepped for sale", who knows? People have been speculating to that effect for the past 15 years. And yes, if it were to happen, I'm sure that you would be delighted if it was by leveraged buyout! ;-)
The stadium is a gamble in so far as any business decision is a gamble. But it is not a decision that has been hurried or taken without very careful consideration.
As to spurs being "prepped for sale", who knows? People have been speculating to that effect for the past 15 years. And yes, if it were to happen, I'm sure that you would be delighted if it was by leveraged buyout! ;-)
It's an interesting one that. There's not much in the way of owner investment in Spurs, and that's usually the indicator of a long term ownership plan because it takes so long to reap the rewards for it. After 10 years Sheikh Mansour is only now starting to see the beginnings of a financial return for example. And that's where with Tottenham it becomes curious, because the reluctance to invest from outside rather limits the potential value in the future. I'm genuinely not sure what Joe Lewis' strategy is.