Spurs Thread - 2021/22

[JimB]

Spurs, on the other hand, have £823million of long-term debt

Tottenham Hotspur Stadium leaves Daniel Levy and Spurs with huge debts

The construction of Tottenham Hotspur Stadium has come at a huge cost to the club

www.football.london

£25m repaid over 30 years equals £750m and that’s with out interest.
He's bloody good account that Daniel Levy if he can repay less than the full loan amount without interest too.

You have misread.

£25 million is the annual interest on the long term debt. Repayments can be made at any time but if the debt was to be paid in equal annual instalments, it would amount to c. £40m per annum. If the full amount isn’t paid at maturity, then whatever debt remains will be refinanced - which is quite normal.

Combined repayment and interest of £65m per annum is certainly a lot. But then, so is a revenue increase of £100-120m as a consequence of the new stadium. Overall, Spurs will be far better off than when they were debt free but in the old stadium.

 

[BAB.DAB]

You have misread.

£25 million is the annual interest on the long term debt. Repayments can be made at any time but if the debt was to be paid in equal annual instalments, it would amount to c. £40m per annum. If the full amount isn’t paid at maturity, then whatever debt remains will be refinanced - which is quite normal.

Combined repayment and interest of £65m per annum is certainly a lot. But then, so is a revenue increase of £100-120m as a consequence of the new stadium. Overall, Spurs will be far better off than when they were debt free but in the old stadium.

Once again, the stadium debt is costing Spurs c. £16m per annum. The recent £250m private placement (that allowed the club to repay the Bank of England CCFF loan) is costing the club a further £7m per annum.
Misread?

What warranties have spurs put up for the private placement?

 

[mccity]

Ok, I'm ready for pelters here, but I do think that we as City fans should know a thing or two about lecturing to other fans about their own club's finances. I imagine everything being said here has been said to the Spurs fans before elsewhere by other non-Spurs fans and they'll know precisely or not the truth and gravity behind them.

 

[lasereyes]

I didn't dismiss the bulk of Spurs' debt as "standard debt that all clubs have". That's merely your misreading of my post. I had already specifically discussed the stadium and COVID loans.

Do I really need to provide links to my figures, as if my post was some sort of PhD paper? The figures are taken from Spurs' own finance announcements, along with Bank of America.

Once again, the stadium debt is costing Spurs c. £16m per annum. The recent £250m private placement (that allowed the club to repay the Bank of England CCFF loan) is costing the club a further £7m per annum.

The other "debt" consists of future instalments on player purchases and amounts falling due within one year - current liabilities - such as payroll, taxes, accrued expenses, and accounts payable. It also includes unearned revenue: an accounting technicality that records services yet to be provided as a debt - in this instance, football clubs owing season ticket holders the cost of however many matches have yet to be fulfilled.

All of this other "debt" is common to every other football club and none of it is subject to interest charges. So I repeat, contrary to your claim, Spurs' total interest payable per annum is less than £25m.

Of course I cannot absolutely rule out the possibility that Spurs are concealing the fact that they are facing imminent financial collapse but, as of now, there is no evidence to suggest that that is the case. The debt is all long term and low interest. And while it is quite valid to cite past instances of companies claiming financial stability before crashing, the number of such cases pales into insignificance by comparison to the number of companies that claim to be stable and are, in fact....................exactly that.
So unless you can furnish the discussion with any evidence beyond the simplistic "Spurs are up to their eyeballs in debt", your argument will remain nothing more than wishful thinking.

PhD paper - what the fuck are you on about. If you post wild stuff without sources, the assumption is it is either your opinion or you made the stuff up. In your case, seems to be a bit of both.

Your < £25m debt servicing costs is based on no factual source. You don't know any of the terms of Spurs's debt other than a 2.66% rate that was quoted in the Guardian for a portion that was re-financed. You don't know the interest rate on the remaining debt (but given Spurs's debt-ridden balance sheet, you can bet it's higher than other top 10 clubs). You have no idea what the debt covenants are conditions are on either the stadium or the remaining debt. In short, all you have is rose-tinted, hope-laced assertions.

On the other hand, the fact that Spurs are the most indebted club is just that - fact.

And btw, I couldn't give a flying fuck about Spurs's finances. I think about them as a club only twice a season.

 

[LangleyBlue1970]

The daft cunts will think Martinez is their aguero. He won’t be. Average striker.

 

[JimB]

Ok, I'm ready for pelters here, but I do think that we as City fans should know a thing or two about lecturing to other fans about their own club's finances. I imagine everything being said here has been said to the Spurs fans before elsewhere by other non-Spurs fans and they'll know precisely or not the truth and gravity behind them.

Exactly. Thank you.

 

[Vienna_70]

I wonder if Levy regrets not stumping up Villa's asking price for Jack a few years ago.

 

[JimB]

PhD paper - what the fuck are you on about. If you post wild stuff without sources, the assumption is it is either your opinion or you made the stuff up. In your case, seems to be a bit of both.

Your < £25m debt servicing costs is based on no factual source. You don't know any of the terms of Spurs's debt other than a 2.66% rate that was quoted in the Guardian for a portion that was re-financed. You don't know the interest rate on the remaining debt (but given Spurs's debt-ridden balance sheet, you can bet it's higher than other top 10 clubs). You have no idea what the debt covenants are conditions are on either the stadium or the remaining debt. In short, all you have is rose-tinted, hope-laced assertions.

On the other hand, the fact that Spurs are the most indebted club is just that - fact.

And btw, I couldn't give a flying fuck about Spurs's finances. I think about them as a club only twice a season.

"Wild stuff without sources"? I already told you the source: Spurs' official announcements. Since you appear to be unwilling to google for yourself:

Club Refinances Construction Debt | Tottenham Hotspur

The Club today (Friday 20 September) closed its refinancing of the loans put in place to support the construction of our new stadium.

www.tottenhamhotspur.com

Club announcement - Finance update - CCFF repaid, short-term debt replaced with long-term | Tottenham Hotspur

The Club has completed on an institutional fund raising of £250m, with an average tenure of over 20 years and an average interest rate of circa 2.8%. The debt stack includes a new 30-year tranche, with a bullet repayment in 2051 and is a unique financing for any sports entity with the long-term...

www.tottenhamhotspur.com

Agreed, I don't know what covenants are attached to the various loans. Neither do you. But bond covenants will pertain to myriad contractually binding agreements such as debt to asset ratio or interest coverage ratio or accounting compliance or credit rating etc. Covenants do not determine or affect the amount of interest to be paid unless the borrower defaults - in which event, the bond rating could be downgraded and borrowing costs increased.

It is a common misconception that debt is inherently a bad thing. Debt can be bad, of course, when it is used to splurge on consumption or depreciating assets (think Leeds Utd c. 2000). But it can also be good when used to invest in assets that greatly increase earnings and net worth.......like a new stadium. Of course, even good debt can become bad debt in the hands of a reckless borrower who fails to do his sums diligently and consequently bites off more than he can chew. But does that sound like Daniel Levy to you?

 

[JimB]

I wonder if Levy regrets not stumping up Villa's asking price for Jack a few years ago.

I bet he does!

But the fault is not his alone. Problem was that Poch wasn't very keen on Grealish. So although others at the club liked and recommended him, it's understandable that Levy didn't meet Villa's £30m demand for, what was then, a largely unproven player.

Definitely one that got away.

 

[Vienna_70]

Spurs supporters gave Arsenal's Bukayo Saka a warm round of applause, when he came on as a substitute in their friendly this afternoon:

I know a lot of us have very little time for Tottenham, but credit where it is due; good for them.