The Tottenham Thread 13/14 part 2.

[squirtyflower]

Re: The Tottenham Thread 13/14

In addition, Spurs received an extra £3,000,000 when Giovani Dos Santos was sold-on from Mallorca to Villarreal on 9th July.

i've just seen on SSN that QPR have made an 'offer' to spurs

he hasn't gone so how can there be a fee?

 

[The Flash]

Re: The Tottenham Thread 13/14

Since the Premier League Era began, Spurs have spent a total of £547,406,000 on new players.

During the same period, Spurs have received £380,696,180 for players sold-on.

This gives a total net spend of £166,709,820 for the 22 seasons of the competition - an average of £7,577,719 per season.

The cost of Tottenham's current squad to assemble was £171,680,000.

This means that Spurs have actually made a slight profit from player trading during the Premier League Era.

No it doesn't at all. You really are a fucking liar.

Well instead of throwing childish insults, why don't you try and prove me wrong?

Because this is a City forum you deluded swellhead.

We don't give a merry fuck about Spurs, what you've spent, blah-de-fucking-blah.

You've got a history of massaging the figures and telling downright lies.

Do you get it yet?

 

[moomba]

Re: The Tottenham Thread 13/14

Thanks - I was looking forward to seeing City too on ITV 4 last season but they never made it that far.

This twat is getting far too cocky - over stayed his welcome for me. One off banter ok but he's chipping away all the time.

Anyway the reports are that Bale comes in for training, then disappears - he obviously wants to move to a club who win things.

Because the fact is (and graphs about net spend don't hide this) that since Levy arrived Spurs have spent the best part of £600m (transfer market de) in an attempt to build a successful team and have won a league cup. How many times have they even been top 3?

Net spend is bollocks, it's mainly the result of selling on failed transfers in the first place.

Since the Premier League Era began, Spurs have spent a total of £547,406,000 on new players.

During the same period, Spurs have received £380,696,180 for players sold-on.

This gives a total net spend of £166,709,820 for the 22 seasons of the competition - an average of £7,577,719 per season.

The cost of Tottenham's current squad to assemble was £171,680,000.

This means that Spurs have actually made a slight profit from player trading during the Premier League Era.

Conveniently forgotting that the value of the squad wasnt £0 when it started.

 

[THFC6061]

Re: The Tottenham Thread 13/14

Conveniently forgotting that the value of the squad wasnt £0 when it started.

Well going back to 1908, which is when Spurs joined the Football League, we get these figures:

Total Amount Spent: £570,746,959

Total Amount Received: £397,578,280

Net Spend: £173,168,679

Total Seasons: 106

Net Spend per Season: £1,633,667

Cost of Current Squad to Assemble: £171,680,000


So overall, Spurs have spent £1,488,679 on players transfers plus the cost of the current squad to assemble during our entire League history.

 

[Matty]

Re: The Tottenham Thread 13/14

Thanks - I was looking forward to seeing City too on ITV 4 last season but they never made it that far.

This twat is getting far too cocky - over stayed his welcome for me. One off banter ok but he's chipping away all the time.

Anyway the reports are that Bale comes in for training, then disappears - he obviously wants to move to a club who win things.

Because the fact is (and graphs about net spend don't hide this) that since Levy arrived Spurs have spent the best part of £600m (transfer market de) in an attempt to build a successful team and have won a league cup. How many times have they even been top 3?

Net spend is bollocks, it's mainly the result of selling on failed transfers in the first place.

Since the Premier League Era began, Spurs have spent a total of £547,406,000 on new players.

During the same period, Spurs have received £380,696,180 for players sold-on.

This gives a total net spend of £166,709,820 for the 22 seasons of the competition - an average of £7,577,719 per season.

The cost of Tottenham's current squad to assemble was £171,680,000.

This means that Spurs have actually made a slight profit from player trading during the Premier League Era.

No, it doesn't.

Firstly, you can't claim, just because you bought the players for £171m that you can sell them for £171m. Some, like Bale, will have increased in value, others, like Gomes, will have decreased in value.

Secondly, you're completely ignoring the potential cost of replacing the entire squad, if you were to sell them for £171m. All youth players? No, you'd need to spend, and spend big, to replace them, probably at least as much as the £171m you'd get from selling them.

Thirdly, at the start of the Premier League era Spurs had a full squad of players, most of them will have been purchased for a fee of some description. You can't count the revenue gained from selling them yet ignore the cost of purchasing them, it's disingenuous.

What this all ignores is the fact that, in the Premiership era, Spurs have spent, even by your own figures, around £550m, and they've won 2 League Cups. That's exactly the same return, over the same period, that Leicester City have achieved. You can argue about net spend all you like, but the players sold are simply the players you previously purchased, who failed to win you anything or merit.

 

[waspish]

Re: The Tottenham Thread 13/14

Conveniently forgotting that the value of the squad wasnt £0 when it started.

Well going back to 1908, which is when Spurs joined the Football League, we get these figures:

Total Amount Spent: £570,746,959

Total Amount Received: £397,578,280

Net Spend: £173,168,679

Total Seasons: 106

Net Spend per Season: £1,633,667

Cost of Current Squad to Assemble: £171,680,000


So overall, Spurs have spent £1,488,679 on players transfers plus the cost of the current squad to assemble during our entire League history.

How many trophies have spurs won in there history?

 

[Seasideblue]

Re: The Tottenham Thread 13/14

In which case, what on Earth is a Hammers fan giving stick about Europe for?

The last time West Ham won anything in Europe colour television hadn't been invented yet.

Why take the piss out of city.

Just a bit of friendly banter.

Was you in the champions league last year ? was you fuck

Did you qualify Did you fuck
Did you qualify this year Did you fuck
Go make a graph of that you twat



just a bit of banter dickhead :-)

 

[Matty]

Re: The Tottenham Thread 13/14

Conveniently forgotting that the value of the squad wasnt £0 when it started.

Well going back to 1908, which is when Spurs joined the Football League, we get these figures:

Total Amount Spent: £570,746,959

Total Amount Received: £397,578,280

Net Spend: £173,168,679

Total Seasons: 106

Net Spend per Season: £1,633,667

Cost of Current Squad to Assemble: £171,680,000


So overall, Spurs have spent £1,488,679 on players transfers plus the cost of the current squad to assemble during our entire League history.

Now you're being deliberately obtuse.

You spent £99,999 on Jimmy Greaves, from AC Milan, in 1961. That looks like an insignificant, chicken-feed, figure, yet the reason it looks such an unusual amount was to not put Greaves under the pressure of being a £100,000 player! So, clearly a hugely significant, and sizeable, figure at the time, but boiled down to be irrelevant in your "summary".

 

[Manc in London]

Re: The Tottenham Thread 13/14

Thanks - I was looking forward to seeing City too on ITV 4 last season but they never made it that far.

This twat is getting far too cocky - over stayed his welcome for me. One off banter ok but he's chipping away all the time.

Anyway the reports are that Bale comes in for training, then disappears - he obviously wants to move to a club who win things.

Because the fact is (and graphs about net spend don't hide this) that since Levy arrived Spurs have spent the best part of £600m (transfer market de) in an attempt to build a successful team and have won a league cup. How many times have they even been top 3?

Net spend is bollocks, it's mainly the result of selling on failed transfers in the first place.

Since the Premier League Era began, Spurs have spent a total of £547,406,000 on new players.

During the same period, Spurs have received £380,696,180 for players sold-on.

This gives a total net spend of £166,709,820 for the 22 seasons of the competition - an average of £7,577,719 per season.

The cost of Tottenham's current squad to assemble was £171,680,000.

This means that Spurs have actually made a slight profit from player trading during the Premier League Era.

...and won no major trophies since the early 1990's.

Meanwhile, Wigan have spent much less than Spurs and won a major trophy recently. This year, I will have to award them the PWC/Deloitte Touche Cup for services to value for money.

How much do you benefit as a supporter from Levy saving money in teh transfer market? Why does it give you a warm glow? Has Daniel Levy passed on any of those savings to ytour fans? I heard that Spurs commissioned the services of Stub Hub to sell/exchange tickets. A bog standard ticket for the Cardiff game was on sale (seat located in an area similar to 202/205 at The Etihad) for over £200. Spurs get a cut of that. I wish I supported a club that was good at raising revenue and driving down costs. It would make me feel morally superior.

 

[THFC6061]

Re: The Tottenham Thread 13/14

Conveniently forgotting that the value of the squad wasnt £0 when it started.

Well going back to 1908, which is when Spurs joined the Football League, we get these figures:

Total Amount Spent: £570,746,959

Total Amount Received: £397,578,280

Net Spend: £173,168,679

Total Seasons: 106

Net Spend per Season: £1,633,667

Cost of Current Squad to Assemble: £171,680,000


So overall, Spurs have spent £1,488,679 on players transfers plus the cost of the current squad to assemble during our entire League history.

Now you're being deliberately obtuse.

You spent £99,999 on Jimmy Greaves, from AC Milan, in 1961. That looks like an insignificant, chicken-feed, figure, yet the reason it looks such an unusual amount was to not put Greaves under the pressure of being a £100,000 player! So, clearly a hugely significant, and sizeable, figure at the time, but boiled down to be irrelevant in your "summary".

Yes, there were many big-money transfers during Bill Nicholson's reign (Martin Chivers was a British record £125,000 and Martin Peters another record at £200,000) but in almost all cases, these players were allowed to leave on a "free" at the end of their Spurs careers.

We did get £54,000 of that £99,999 back for Jimmy Greaves when we sold him to West Ham though.

 

[Matty]

Re: The Tottenham Thread 13/14

Well going back to 1908, which is when Spurs joined the Football League, we get these figures:

Total Amount Spent: £570,746,959

Total Amount Received: £397,578,280

Net Spend: £173,168,679

Total Seasons: 106

Net Spend per Season: £1,633,667

Cost of Current Squad to Assemble: £171,680,000


So overall, Spurs have spent £1,488,679 on players transfers plus the cost of the current squad to assemble during our entire League history.

Now you're being deliberately obtuse.

You spent £99,999 on Jimmy Greaves, from AC Milan, in 1961. That looks like an insignificant, chicken-feed, figure, yet the reason it looks such an unusual amount was to not put Greaves under the pressure of being a £100,000 player! So, clearly a hugely significant, and sizeable, figure at the time, but boiled down to be irrelevant in your "summary".

Yes, there were many big-money transfers during Bill Nicholson's reign (Martin Chivers was a British record £125,000 and Martin Peters another record at £200,000) but in almost all cases, these players were allowed to leave on a "free" at the end of their Spurs careers.

We did get £54,000 of that £99,999 back for Jimmy Greaves when we sold him to West Ham though.

Not really my point.

My point was, back in the 1960's those sums were pretty substantial, however in your summary they look insignificant. So, when you say, Spurs have spent £1,633,667 net per season, whilst technically correct, this figure fails to take into account whatsoever inflation, both in real terms, and in football terms (which in many cases is much higher). How much would that £99,999 figure for Greaves be actually worth in 2013 terms? £10M? £20M? £30M? That would make a monumental difference to the overal figures, and is really the only way to accurately assess spending over such an elongated time period.

 

[THFC6061]

Re: The Tottenham Thread 13/14

Now you're being deliberately obtuse.

You spent £99,999 on Jimmy Greaves, from AC Milan, in 1961. That looks like an insignificant, chicken-feed, figure, yet the reason it looks such an unusual amount was to not put Greaves under the pressure of being a £100,000 player! So, clearly a hugely significant, and sizeable, figure at the time, but boiled down to be irrelevant in your "summary".

Yes, there were many big-money transfers during Bill Nicholson's reign (Martin Chivers was a British record £125,000 and Martin Peters another record at £200,000) but in almost all cases, these players were allowed to leave on a "free" at the end of their Spurs careers.

We did get £54,000 of that £99,999 back for Jimmy Greaves when we sold him to West Ham though.

Not really my point.

My point was, back in the 1960's those sums were pretty substantial, however in your summary they look insignificant. So, when you say, Spurs have spent £1,633,667 net per season, whilst technically correct, this figure fails to take into account whatsoever inflation, both in real terms, and in football terms (which in many cases is much higher). How much would that £99,999 figure for Greaves be actually worth in 2013 terms? £10M? £20M? £30M? That would make a monumental difference to the overal figures, and is really the only way to accurately assess spending over such an elongated time period.

Yes, I agree with much of what you say.

I think if Greaves in his prime was available today, you'd be looking at Gareth Bale-like figures for his transfer - say £100m.

 

[SWP's back]

Re: The Tottenham Thread 13/14

This twat is getting far too cocky - over stayed his welcome for me. One off banter ok but he's chipping away all the time.

Anyway the reports are that Bale comes in for training, then disappears - he obviously wants to move to a club who win things.

Because the fact is (and graphs about net spend don't hide this) that since Levy arrived Spurs have spent the best part of £600m (transfer market de) in an attempt to build a successful team and have won a league cup. How many times have they even been top 3?

Net spend is bollocks, it's mainly the result of selling on failed transfers in the first place.

Since the Premier League Era began, Spurs have spent a total of £547,406,000 on new players.

During the same period, Spurs have received £380,696,180 for players sold-on.

This gives a total net spend of £166,709,820 for the 22 seasons of the competition - an average of £7,577,719 per season.

The cost of Tottenham's current squad to assemble was £171,680,000.

This means that Spurs have actually made a slight profit from player trading during the Premier League Era.

No, it doesn't.

Firstly, you can't claim, just because you bought the players for £171m that you can sell them for £171m. Some, like Bale, will have increased in value, others, like Gomes, will have decreased in value.

Secondly, you're completely ignoring the potential cost of replacing the entire squad, if you were to sell them for £171m. All youth players? No, you'd need to spend, and spend big, to replace them, probably at least as much as the £171m you'd get from selling them.

Thirdly, at the start of the Premier League era Spurs had a full squad of players, most of them will have been purchased for a fee of some description. You can't count the revenue gained from selling them yet ignore the cost of purchasing them, it's disingenuous.

What this all ignores is the fact that, in the Premiership era, Spurs have spent, even by your own figures, around £550m, and they've won 2 League Cups. That's exactly the same return, over the same period, that Leicester City have achieved. You can argue about net spend all you like, but the players sold are simply the players you previously purchased, who failed to win you anything or merit.

I see that THFC has, as usual totally ignored these points.

 

[The Flash]

Re: The Tottenham Thread 13/14

Yes, there were many big-money transfers during Bill Nicholson's reign (Martin Chivers was a British record £125,000 and Martin Peters another record at £200,000) but in almost all cases, these players were allowed to leave on a "free" at the end of their Spurs careers.

We did get £54,000 of that £99,999 back for Jimmy Greaves when we sold him to West Ham though.

Not really my point.

My point was, back in the 1960's those sums were pretty substantial, however in your summary they look insignificant. So, when you say, Spurs have spent £1,633,667 net per season, whilst technically correct, this figure fails to take into account whatsoever inflation, both in real terms, and in football terms (which in many cases is much higher). How much would that £99,999 figure for Greaves be actually worth in 2013 terms? £10M? £20M? £30M? That would make a monumental difference to the overal figures, and is really the only way to accurately assess spending over such an elongated time period.

Yes, I agree with much of what you say.

I think if Greaves in his prime was available today, you'd be looking at Gareth Bale-like figures for his transfer - say £100m.

You really are a poor, misguided fool.

Any shred of credibility that you had remaining has just been blown away with that last statement.

Jimmy Greaves £100m in today's money?????

You really are making yourself look like a complete cock.

 

[THFC6061]

Re: The Tottenham Thread 13/14

Not my stats, so don't bite my head off please, but nevertheless interesting...

...Spurs very much punching above their weight, while Arsenal have sold-off the family jewels to pay for their new stadium.

 

[Anonymous]

Re: The Tottenham Thread 13/14

Not really my point.

My point was, back in the 1960's those sums were pretty substantial, however in your summary they look insignificant. So, when you say, Spurs have spent £1,633,667 net per season, whilst technically correct, this figure fails to take into account whatsoever inflation, both in real terms, and in football terms (which in many cases is much higher). How much would that £99,999 figure for Greaves be actually worth in 2013 terms? £10M? £20M? £30M? That would make a monumental difference to the overal figures, and is really the only way to accurately assess spending over such an elongated time period.

Yes, I agree with much of what you say.

I think if Greaves in his prime was available today, you'd be looking at Gareth Bale-like figures for his transfer - say £100m.

You really are a poor, misguided fool.

Any shred of credibility that you had remaining has just been blown away with that last statement.

Jimmy Greaves £100m in today's money?????

You really are making yourself look like a complete cock.

He didn't say Greaves £99k transfer = £100m n today's money.

He said Greaves would be worth that today. Personally, I agree that Greaves (check his record out) doing that today would make him worth at least that, based on the amounts being bandied around for the likes of Bale, Ladyboy Show Pony and Lionel Messi.

 

[squirtyflower]

Re: The Tottenham Thread 13/14

Not my stats, so don't bite my head off please, but nevertheless interesting...

...Spurs very much punching above their weight, while Arsenal have sold-off the family jewels to pay for their new stadium.

and in those five years
City
Chelsea
Liverpool
Scum
Swansea and
Wigan
have won a trophy or two, i'd say that was money well spent

 

[lancs blue]

Re: The Tottenham Thread 13/14

Not really my point.

My point was, back in the 1960's those sums were pretty substantial, however in your summary they look insignificant. So, when you say, Spurs have spent £1,633,667 net per season, whilst technically correct, this figure fails to take into account whatsoever inflation, both in real terms, and in football terms (which in many cases is much higher). How much would that £99,999 figure for Greaves be actually worth in 2013 terms? £10M? £20M? £30M? That would make a monumental difference to the overal figures, and is really the only way to accurately assess spending over such an elongated time period.

Yes, I agree with much of what you say.

I think if Greaves in his prime was available today, you'd be looking at Gareth Bale-like figures for his transfer - say £100m.

You really are a poor, misguided fool.

Any shred of credibility that you had remaining has just been blown away with that last statement.

Jimmy Greaves £100m in today's money?????

You really are making yourself look like a complete cock.

Did you ever see Greaves play? Just curious because I would think most people who saw him live wouldn't dispute THFC's point.

 

[The Flash]

Re: The Tottenham Thread 13/14

Yes, I agree with much of what you say.

I think if Greaves in his prime was available today, you'd be looking at Gareth Bale-like figures for his transfer - say £100m.

You really are a poor, misguided fool.

Any shred of credibility that you had remaining has just been blown away with that last statement.

Jimmy Greaves £100m in today's money?????

You really are making yourself look like a complete cock.

He didn't say Greaves £99k transfer = £100m n today's money.

He said Greaves would be worth that today. Personally, I agree that Greaves (check his record out) doing that today would make him worth at least that, based on the amounts being bandied around for the likes of Bale, Ladyboy Show Pony and Lionel Messi.

I didn't mention the 99k being the equivalent, I just laughed at the ludicrous figure plucked from thin air of £100m.

You say judge him on his record, but if I'm doing that, then you have to judge him on his lifestyle. There's no way Jimmy Greaves would be able to compete in the modern game boozing and smoking and with the 'working' man's diet of the time.

The whole comparison is pointless.

 

[squirtyflower]

Re: The Tottenham Thread 13/14

You really are a poor, misguided fool.

Any shred of credibility that you had remaining has just been blown away with that last statement.

Jimmy Greaves £100m in today's money?????

You really are making yourself look like a complete cock.

He didn't say Greaves £99k transfer = £100m n today's money.

He said Greaves would be worth that today. Personally, I agree that Greaves (check his record out) doing that today would make him worth at least that, based on the amounts being bandied around for the likes of Bale, Ladyboy Show Pony and Lionel Messi.

I didn't mention the 99k being the equivalent, I just laughed at the ludicrous figure plucked from thin air of £100m.

You say judge him on his record, but if I'm doing that, then you have to judge him on his lifestyle. There's no way Jimmy Greaves would be able to compete in the modern game boozing and smoking and with the 'working' man's diet of the time.

The whole comparison is pointless.

he was such a great player he was dropped from the England team that won the world cup for Hurst