UK time is: 18:31:30
Vital Login
Social Login

Choose your club

Other Sites

Network Navigation

Vital Partners

'If It's Football, It's Vital'

Perspective, it's all about Perspective

With Juande Ramos latest comments about the Spurs board placing money above medals the latest round of debates has started about us being a selling club.

Personally this drives me up the wall and round the bend. Yes we sell players, yes we sell them at a profit and yes we buy them young hoping to produce the next Gareth Bale. I wanted to put a few thoughts across about our 'selling' mentality. I have witnessed several professional pundits credit Liverpool and Manchester United for holding onto their players whilst criticising Spurs for selling, there has also been more than a few on this site that have echoed their statements.

Let us put this into perspective shall we. Does anyone actually believe if Arsenal had offered £65 million let alone £85 million Liverpool would have said no? If it had been Real Madrid, Bayern Munich or Barcelona does anyone believe that Suarez would still be there? In regards to Man United, they are the second richest club worldwide and the most dominant English club for two decades. To compare their ability to hold onto a player to ours is as ridiculous as it is staggering.

I think a good way to put some perspective into this is to look at our transfers over the last few years alongside of others. Liverpool sold Fernando Torres for £50 million, not a good transfer in hindsight because he failed to recapture his previous form but for a while he was in the conversation as the best striker in Europe. Manchester United, the giants of English football failed to hold on to Ronaldo. Van Persie forced through a bitter move from Arsenal to United. Even Barcelona was forced to sell Figo to Real Madrid. The list goes on and on with clubs selling players they don't want too, but were left with little other choice. Does this make Barcelona and Man United selling clubs?

It includes the two clubs who have been widely credited for holding onto their players, selling players they didn't want too (if anyone says Liverpool wanted to sell just remember they spent most of the proceeds on Carroll). If the offers had been right and from the right clubs I fully believe that Suarez and Rooney would be plying their trade elsewhere. When recalling our transfers to view the club in a negative light a lot of facts are often overlooked. We turned down Chelsea for a huge sum of money not to sell to a local rival, this is barely mentioned. Berbatov was sent on a plane to City, not United and this is completely forgotten.

The majority of our big sales have been to either Manchester United or Real Madrid, the biggest clubs in the world! (Bale, Modric, Carrick, and Berbatov). How could we stand in the way of Robbie Keane playing for one of his seventeen boyhood clubs? It would have been immoral. These five sales have generated roughly £190 million for our club, in my opinion that is sensational business. Through targeting young and promising players our club has been able to reinvest the profits enabling us to compete at the right end of the premier league and are we not far superior than we were ten years ago? Have we not gone from strength to strength?

In a league being dominated by obscene money are we not still competitive? The constant rebuilding is frustrating but we are not going backwards. Aston Villa was on the verge a couple of seasons ago and look at where they are now. I believe the board should have invested at the right times and have missed opportunities. I would have preferred that the stadium had at least been started by now. But we are in the motions of building a new stadium, we have arguably the strongest squad we have ever had and a brand new state of the art training complex.

I don't believe we are a selling club. As long as the price is right and the profits are reinvested I will back our policy. It is the reinvestment of sales which is the difference! between a club selling and a selling club after all unless we are bought by a sugar daddy it is the only formulae for sustained success.

Written by spurticus87

Use your social login to comment on front page articles. Login using you Facebook, Twitter, Google or LinkedIn accounts and have your say!

Click here to join in the debate on the club forum.

The journalist

Writer: spurticus87 Mail feedback, articles or suggestions

Date:Monday February 17 2014

Time: 10:41AM

Your Comments

You have to speculate to accumulate.
repeated from a post i made the other day on another thread. For us to be a selling club in the first instance we must have bought something......
well said top
Agree totally with the Sentiment of the article. A) A selling club cannot have an iteratively improving squad - as we do have. The difference in player quality is astounding in comparison to when Levy and co took over. B) A selling club continuously recoups more than they spend. Other clubs such as Chelsea & Liverpool spend vastly more than they recoup. This is much to do with higher revenue, but also to the wrong mentality. A club that roughly breaks even - as we have done recently - is doing it the correct way. You make the squad pay for itself. Any surplus cash gets reinvested into the squad, and the squad improves because not only the initial outlay on a player is invested, but the profits made on him too. This way, you can also hedge yourself: to be able to sign Soldado for 26m, you need to be able to potentially waste that 26m. He may fail. He may have a sell on value of a third of what you paid. But if you do it correctly, you make astute signings at the same time: Lloris, Sandro, Eriksen for example. These guys cost a lot less, and profits on them could pay for a failed Soldado or Lamela. The other thing is that people forget the extreme initial outlay that Enic brought to us when the took over. We had a huge spend early on, and a few seasons where we did spend more than recouped. Once the squad is of sufficient quality, the squad should pay for itself. Look at ManC, they are doing the same thing. They are not continuing the crazy spending of a few seasons back, They are now in a more controlled manner. c) The last thing is that there is a world of difference between Berbatov / Carrick's sales to Modric/Bale's. Modric and Bale gave us a combined number of 11 or so seasons! A selling club moves on players quickly. These guys were great servants for us. They progressed us, they were great value whilst playing for us, and they gave us great profit....and they joined Real/Barca - just like how ManU sold Ronaldo/Van Nistelrooy/Beckham to Real, Liverpool sold Owen/McManaman to Real etc... Arsenal sold Fabregas/Henry to Barca. Selling clubs...? No. ALL teams sell to Real/Barca. Berba - was of the age where he had to move earlier...and he forced that move. I was fine for that. Carrick I feel was not going to progress us, and it was great business. In short. I my terms, we are not a selling club. But even if other peoples' criteria make us a "selling club", then I am not ashamed of it, because we do it correctly. I'd rather buy Bale/Modric for cheap, get 5 seasons from them and sell them on for deserved profit than buy Shevchenko/Carroll for inflated prices and move them on after 1-2 years for nothing....taking a huge loss.
Lazy Tired arguemnt to brand a club as a "selling" club. If only we exisited in a world where you could choose to be a football club or a business. Regretably we exist ina aworld where professional football is just that from the grass growning on the pitch to the chairman of the board it is all professional. The first factor is survival, not just in terms of league position but also in actual terms, can we meet the bills and pay the debts? If the answer to eithe rof these questios is no then it doesn't matter who you keep or sell! If a club is ran sensibly then a level of success can be expected. The level of expection is tempered by the size of the club and the finacial clout it can wield.
Slurms McKenzie
spurticus87 proudly tells us that the sells of Bale, Modric, Carrick, and Berbatov which bought into the club £190 million is "sensational business" for the owners of THFC who have the worst trophy per season percentage of any THFC owners in over half a century, despite having 4.5 billion quids worth of board members, who have only qualified for the CL only once in 14 seasons (on the back of a Harry Redknapp relegation rescue mission), who have failed to reach a single FA Cup final in 14 seasons, who have finished below Arsenal in every season they have underachieved our club, who have failed to add more than approx 200 seats to White hart Lane in 14 seasons and counting after stating on their arrival that increasing stadium on the their arrival was a priority, whilst the THFC trophy cabinet remains empty... Sensational business for all ENIC HOTSPUR FANS!!!
Yes Pele10 this is the article for you to express these views and we all bemoan the the trophey flood gates closing as soon as ENIC took over. Regardless of whether I agree or disagree you are in the right place.
Slurms McKenzie
Hahaha that is one large can of worms you’ve just opened!! Oh just wait until our resident Journo wanna-be comes on here. Well I may aswell chip in, It all depends on which way you look at it really. We buy players, and we sell players. We do some good business and sometimes get stung big time….Bentley….Soldado?? It’s not like we scratch around at the bottom end all the time, trying solely make a big buck, but the problem is without regular CL football, Trophies or the massive wages we will lose players. Although we all like to think so, We are not an A list club ala Juve, AC, Chelsea etc and we are certainly not a giant ala Man U, Madrid, Bayern etc so we have to accept that if one of our players develops into a “Category A” player it’s only a matter of time until we lose him. I was gutted when bale left as I thought he would give us another year BUT the fact is he carried us for 2 seasons and needed to move on for himself. He clearly wanted to move but did so in a (reasonably) dignified manner unlike Modrid and Berbatov who just refused to play, train, and constantly bleated to the media

My Problem with the club seems to be that the BOARD simply don’t understand where we are as a club. The constant hiring and firing, the strict DEMAND for CL football, the amount of time it seems for us to complete our business in comparison with other clubs (lost Willian due to messing around), I just don’t think they know which direction they are heading in. There are realistically 7 teams competing for 4 places. Two of those teams due to their financial backing are almost guaranteed, that leaves Liverpool, Arsenal, United, Everton and us all fighting for two places. The board have pretty much said 5th isn’t good enough. That is my problem. They must realise that in order to get into that top 4 you need your best players, holding onto them is another matter, but it all depends how much £86m is worth I footballing terms. Just seems to me we start from scratch every 2 years but stand around wondering why we aren’t Moving anywhere. WE invest in players, then we sell and make a profit. That’s business, but football is more than a business. I have no issue whatsoever with the amount of investment, I just have a problem with the way its invested. It’s not about ENIC, it’s about the guy who’s paid to steer the ship.
The problem becomes when we buy a young player, let them appreciate in their market value, sell them BUT pocket the profit. There is no way we can accuse Levy of that. He has always let the balance sheet run at break even or a slight loss which is proof in itself he is putting the money back in. The problem is that football fans and ignorant football men like Ramos and Redknapp haven't got a clue about finance. If they run the club, there wouldn't be a club as they would be bankrupt.

Redknapp had his sly little digs at Levy but conveniently forgets that his chairman let him take the wage bill up from £67m to £92m and then hold it there way beyond us having Champs League. Had Redknapp managed the squad correctly and made it small but competitive then he could have had best of both worlds. Instead, he let the squad proliferate with a bunch of average players, ostracised some and overall devalued all his deadwood. Levy is also to blame for letting it happen but has righted the ship since.

We will continue to sell players who insist on leaving but keep the ones that want to stay and pay them within our means. I'm fine with that as I'd rather have a Spurs rather than consign them to history. I also think there is a very high probability that we will be bought within the next 5 years.
Are we a selling club of course we are and because we have little or no choice, we buy a relatively middle of the road player, let them light up the premier league, than because we fail to make the CL we lose them to a bigger fish !! that's why we have to start again with the rebuilding, but the same can be said for any team not competing for a top 4 place every year, had we managed to make the CL for 4 or 5 seasons in a row, then the first argument that players make in wanting to play at the highest level is removed !! we have become a feeder club to the likes of Manure and Real Madrid !! whether we like or agree with it that's the current status, I see the same issue at the end of this season if we don't make 4th !
hudderspur ... Good post! There's a lot of sense in what you said.
We all, by now, accept that football is no longer just a sport; it's also big business. This is the way that most major sports have, for want of a better word, progressed! The business side of the coin is about buying, selling, marketing, etc. So the buying/selling part of it is a given. But it should be characterised by good business sense. I believe, under ENIC, our club is being run as a sound business. I also believe, sadly, that this has to be the priority to ensure that THFC maintains long-term financial stability. This will, of course, impact on the footballing success of the club. We do not have the 'sugar-daddy' mentioned on a recent thread, and it's probable that most supporters don't want to travel that road in any case. We also do not, as yet, have the stadium and sponsorship contracts that would generate more income and allow us to be more competitive in terms of transfers and wages. But that will come. So, that leaves the reality; footballing success in terms of trophies and European competitions will, for a while, be few and far between. But we can still remain competitive and mix it with the top clubs in the PL. Like most supporters, I'm tired of waiting too, but I'd prefer to exercise a little more patience than risk going the way of Leeds United or Rangers. This, obviously, is just my opinion! COYS
hudderspur has it right, if you accept we have limited finance then the logic is we need to build a squad. That means sticking with a manager as every time you change you start again. Suarez at Liverpool is an interesting one, why has no one launched a mega bid for him ? I suspect it is to do with his behaviour, the few clubs that have the cash to make Liverpool an offer they couldn't refuse have decided there are safer targets to pursue. Don't forget though Liverpool have agreed to pay him £200k a week, so there is a cost even when you keep a player like that.
Jod, people also forget because we have been on a level playing field with Liverpool in football terms that their heritage and financial power eclipses ours
Pele10, tell me a better owner of a club in the premier league over the past decade.
Jod this summer will be the true test of Liverpools resolve! Again I don't think it is unrealistic to predict an 80million+ bid arriving after the world cup from somewhere in Europe!
Slurms McKenzie
Spurticus - Delia Smith hands down the best club owner!
Slurms McKenzie
Of course we are a selling club, every bid that comes in for a player above current value is met, what choice do we have with our wage structure in place?
foods crap though slurms
Joe Lewis has never spent his own money on financing any transfers at Spurs. Why does anyone think this would or should change. He made his money through smart investments, and just because we have a billionaire owner does not mean he has to throw huge amount of money at the club. It would be great if he does, but he chooses not to. Same as arsenal, they have Usamov, who I believe is richer than Abramovic, they don't want his money. I am not saying I wouldn't like Joe to say tomorrow, here is 400m for the stadium and another 100m for players, but I don't hate the man for not doing so. Spurs are one of the best run clubs in the world. Sadly, you cannot translate that into trophies, but compared to watching Kevin Scott, Steve Sedgley, Gary Doherty and Goran Bungyjump, I would much rather have seen Berba, Modric, and Bale play for us and leave knowing that we have gone from mid table mediocrity to challenging for a CL place. Would I take CL every season instead of a trophy every few seasons? Yes, because the money would allow us to grow. The evidence for this is clear with arsenal and chelsea. I am not proclaiming to love ENIC, but there is no one who can say, we are not a bigger, stronger, better club than we were under Alan Sugar.
Italian the fact is we are both a buying club and a selling club. Now I would think anyone out of the womb would be able to understand that. You are well out of the womb a company director and as your posts show on here an intelligent man. So to disagree with that clear fact suggests you have some festing vested interest driving you on this thread. Does anyone want to argue with me for three weeks against my position. WE ARE BOTH A BUYING AND A SELLING CLUB. Any takers?
I am also not saying that ENIC have got every decision right, if they listened to us, there would be 50 in/out transfers every window, and a new manager every few months.
Vic thats very true
The claim that Spurs as a club in it's entirety places money before medals is patently true, it's not just a question of transfer policy, but a total lack of competitive investment, by an owner and board of directors absolutely awash with money, with the collective wealth of Messrs Lewis, Ashcroft, Sugar, and Levy amongst others, would if channeled strategically, have made us a competitive club with the best. OK they chose not to go down that route, which of course they are perfectly entitled to do, but this only confirms the view that those at the top put money before medals, or success on the pitch. The directors can't have it both ways, they are obviously running a business, rather than wanting to run a competitive and truly successful football club, so when somebody simply points that out, surely there can be no complaint. The opposite view was taken by the backers of Chelsea, and Man City who have invested heavily into elevating their club to the top table, again as they are perfectly entitled to choose to do, but that has cost neither club the sort of money we could have raised, were the will to be there. Man City claim to have spent a billion, and Chelsea similar, significantly less than our directors collective wealth. Both attitudes have their pluses and minuses but both a matter of choice by those concerned.
Frank - "Competitive Investment" ? what on earth does that mean ? To be competitive in the premier league requires you to lose money, that's how both City and Chelsea are run. But an investment implies a return, that you will get your money back and more. So even though you've only used two words you've managed to contradict yourself.
Pele, this is one of the reasons that you ***** so many people off! You belittle my opinion, then when I try to engage debate with you and put forward a question you hide! Pathetic
Frank, Man city spent hundreds of millions and obscene wages yet struggled to achieve anything for 3 years! The kind of money required to pay the wages after the initial investment is what places the clubs financial well being at risk
Tophobunty of course you are absolutely right to point out that we are both a buying, and selling, club. The issue is that we both allegedly seek success, and yet we trade on every quality player that will return a profit on the original investment, irrespective of the effect this has on success, or otherwise, on the pitch. Of course it can be, and often is, alleged that all of these players were desperate to leave, and had become disruptive in their persuit of the transfer. To an extent this maybe true. but has to be taken with a pinch of salt, and where it is true it has probably been due to the ease in the past, that the club has caved in to such demands, but is also used as a convenient excuse to facilitate the moves, for profit. In recent seasons we have sold Carrick, Berbatov, Van Der Vaart, Modric, and Gareth Bale, all top quality players, as well as some more than useful squad players, who were key to the team at the time they were sold, and none has been replaced by players of similar quality, and with the same attributes, meaning managers/coaches have continually been playing catch up with rivals for at least 5 or 6 seasons. On top of this we have made some expensive buys from these profits, that currently look highly unwise, as the players concerned are yet to contribute anything to the fortunes of the team on the pitch, the two most obvious examples being Soldado, and Lamela who cost between them, depending on whose figures you believe, somewhere between £52m and £56M, and the return on that investment is currently zero. If you wish to operate a revolving door transfer policy, then it is essential that those coming in have at least similar qualities to these going out, and indeed are the "right player". Unfortunately our talent for selling players, has not been anywhere near matched by our ability to source, scout, and sign players, good enough to fill the leaver's shoes. Even the engagement of a DOF has had a negative effect, as we seem to have reinvested £109M gleaned from player sales during his tenure on 7 signings, and only 3 or 4 of those players have emerged as yet as good enough to contribute, not a very impressive result. In most business organisations if somebody had been responsible for the investment of >£100M with some 50% of that additional investment making a contribution to the success of the business, he would be very quickly be "down the road", so we await news of Baldini's fate.
Even if we spent 100m every season, it still does not guarantee you a trophy! You still have to go out on the pitch and score more goals than you let in, something we have had a problem doing for the last 50 years! How many trophies did we win under Bill Nic during the 60's? Yes, we challenged and we won a few, but considering he was in charge for all of the 60's, we never really dominated the English league like we should have. The point that we only won 1 title is proof enough. Yet, we still refer to this as our golden period, our 'Glory days'. Why?, because we were challenging, we were entertaining, we played beautiful football, all those glory cup and European nights, games where we scored 5,6 7 goals and even being the first English club to win a European trophy. The glory was that we were always near, if not the best, then on our night, we could be. If we are going to be so pedantic about success, then lets go back to our last title in 1961. After that, we have done nothing in the league, under different chairmen and managers. We can play the blame game till the cows come home. What we have always been is entertaining. We lose, but we do it in style and that's he Spurs way. Yet, if we start winning every game 1-0 with boring football, then we all start complaining!! You can't please all the people all the time. Being a Spurs fan is to serve a life sentence of frustration. If you don't understand this by now, you should go support another team.
Pele10, I have never addresses you personally before, but I would like to ask you a question. If ENIC do go, who or what do you want to take over and what do they have to do to make you happy? Its easy to criticise, but how about putting forward some solutions!
Jod, that it the whole point, the premise on which the article is based is that "Spurs put money ahead of medals", and it is true. If you invest sufficient funds, and ignore the fact that at least for a number of years you will lose money, then you will probably become competitive for honours as Chelsea and Man City, two clubs who were also rans, have proved. My point was, that if we had wished to go down the same route, there is more than sufficient personal wealth within the club, for us to have done the same. Neither City of Chelsea have spent much more than £1billion, a fraction of the collective wealth our directors have. It is purely a matter of choice as to which strategy you follow, but there can be no objection if somebody points out the fact that "Spurs put money before medals", as they obviously choose to do. You say that to do it involves losing money, yes of course it does, that is precisely the point.
Frank yes of course those two buys are looking plonk, but you seem to be forgetting we bought lloris, Dembele, Ade, Sandro, Kaboul, Verts, Paulinho Eriksen and a few more. plus we also bought the ones we VDV could only walk around for 60 mins in his last year with us.
Frank, our owners don't have a spare billion I can promise you that, there is a huge difference between what people are worth on paper and what they actually have! Vicspur, Pele won't awnser you because he's incapable of doing so. He has no awnsers, no comebacks, he is incapable of backing up his statements with well balanced argument! He is an exceptionally patronising, one trick pony that uses warped facts to back up his own misguided anti-spurs ranting
ps Frank I dont see 1billion as a fraction of the wealth of our owners which appears to be anywhere between $2.8 and around $4.7 billion $....pretty bloody big fraction in my world.
Spurticus I was thinking Elton John.
Frank - You've not actually answered my question have you ? If you are talking about subsidies and buying success why don't you just say what you mean ? Why start talking about "Investments" when you mean the opposite ? Incidentally it won't work. The only winner in that game is the one with the most money. Since both Man City and PSG have the wealth of an Arab oil economy behind them everybody else loses, you spend a billion they spend two, whatever it takes, its just petty cash to them. That's why Abramovich has brought Mourinho back, he can't just buy success any more.
Rocket man would propel us into the champions league! Also been doing some rigging! In our trophy less time Everton, Sunderland, Newcastle and Aston Villa have won nothing, all clubs on a similar infrastructure and playing field as well as heritage to us. Perspective
I'm not at all sure what being a "selling club" is supposed to mean. We buy some, we sell some. It's football, but it's also big business. It's what all professional clubs are and it's what they all do.
a man said to a woman I'll give you £50 if you sleep with me, she said 'I'm no prostitute'....another man offered her a million and she agreed...he said 'now, we've established what you are, we're just haggling over the price'....same as us, we're a selling club...
Shed boy, great analogy but missing the point! It's about mentality! Everything is for sale and everything has a price, the first time it was prostitution the second it was opportunistic
As for investing in the would think a well run club would have a transfer budget to buy players over and above whatever money could be recouped through selling...after all we do generate income from our current stadium together with TV and commercial revenue but we've not spent any of it in the past three years on transfers....we may not like it but Ramos was right...
spurticus87- no the point is if the woman isn't a prostitute she says soon as she says yes, she is prostituting herself...the point is we are a selling club...the rest is just haggling....
to be a selling club you must be a buying club, there is no such thing as a pure selling club in any world with intelligence. Appreciate some less fortunate will see us as a selling club.
shed you just described the Leeds and Portsmouth model, well done mate.
Tophobunty, you and I often sing off of the same hymn sheet, but the comparison between what Shedboy was suggesting and the situation at either Leeds Utd and Portsmouth is just incorrect. Both of these clubs were for several seasons spending more than they had, without any finances behind them. They both lacked the likes of Joe Lewis, Michael Ashcroft, Alan Sugar, And Daniel Levy amongst others, collectively worth several billion pounds, and they were both trying to punch way above their weight, they had become paupers, their ultimate demise was inevitable, and their recovery will be a long process if in fact in Portsmouth's case it ever happens.
Nice analogy shed boy, a ho is a ho, but i think a business / football club is a slightly different situation than €50 or a €mill with a woman. Put in perspective, the film indecent proposal. she didn't set out to be a ho, but the husband got greedy. portsmouth are ho's, city are robert redford, spurs are a balance between woody and redford. no whoring going on, but good business, if that makes sense. I do see your point however, in the contact of liverpool and Suarez..., offered €40m, no, if they were offered €80m prob yes whoring or business? but they could book a G++++++g for themselves with that money, as we did, or they could buy another carroll!!!
Dublin Hotspur
great topic and well said spurticus all true. I notice that some who speak have hidden from qusetions and i don't know why? Also i would like anyone to tell me any big sells that levy has sanctioned that they think he could have stopped? Point is the overall improvement to the club is immense look at our level as one of the richest clubs keep improving without CL football. I like spurticus and vic challenge anyone to actually tell me a better board in last 10 years in the prem who hasn't had a sugardaddy help them ?
Frank yes I know we do sing the same stuff almost all of the time, here is the comparison as i see it......"you would think a well run club would have a transfer budget to buy players over and above whatever money could be recouped through selling" ....i see that as the Leeds and Portsmouth model Frank.
If anyone's interested - Pritchard is playing for Swindon tonight against Peterborough. He's being played out of position at right wing back but is still one of Swindon's main attacking threats... Here's the link -
rahn DMC
... And he's just scored!!!
rahn DMC
Frank- Tops bless him doesn't have a grasp of figures...of course he would see a transfer budget as doing a 'leeds'...the reality is when a club is raking in x millions a year in TV, ticket and commercial revenue just to spend 5-10% of that on transfers is good, prudent business far from describing Leeds I actually articulated the first years of the ENIC model!...Dublin...good business? or whoring? could be one and the same...depends what business you're in?..;)...I thought we were in the football business but I I fear ENIC are now in the property business...
Well done Shed, shall we run this one for one month? i suits your previous model. I will need to take time out for work, but will answer you posts/questions after.
Do you want to start by creating a model P&L Shed, spending 5-10% or gross income on incoming transfers. Be sure to include players wages and agent fees along with all traditional and football specific overheads.
That was to you Shed, it would be good to back up the numbers you often quote.
and whilst me move forward Shed, i will remind you of an unanswered question in our fledgling relationship. Name me one premier league club which brought in more than 7 international players during the 2103 August transfer window....On topic....Perspective, it's all about Perspective.....
ffs - tops go back and read the thread you'll find an answer to your narrow, pointless point trying to answer or explain to you..if you wear earrings I expect they clink as you walk you're so narrow minded...
i think Shed if you read my postings they will clearly illustrate open mindedness and yours the opposite. Have a read.
Shed quite honestly I don't see what your issue is with the club we both appear to support. Do you honestly not see the significant progress the club has made over the past ten years? Can you deny it?
topho, every club buys and sells. And yes if someone comes in and "makes you an offer you can't refuse" you take it, even United succumbed to a very good offer for Ronaldo. Our problem is that we succumb a bit too often, if the "price is right we come on down every time".
vicspur ... I have to agree with you're post .... the one ending, 'being a Spurs fan is a life sentence of frustration'!
Italian Yiddo didn't Chelsea make the right offer? The characters of Berba and Modric dictated the fact that we had to sell, added to that we told united to ***** off until city put in an acceptable bid. Robbie keane handed in a transfer request and wasn't worth over 20 million. The problem isn't the money but the fact that the 4 biggest transfer in our history all went to, and this is not exaggerating but a statistical fact.....The 2 Biggest AND Richest clubs in the history of the game.....
spurticus, difficult to keep players that want to go, agreed, but not impossible as Liverpool have shown. Than again they have made him an offer he couldn't refuse, £200K pw.
vicspur, You ask me who I would like to take over from Lewis as THFC owner? I would follow the LFC route when they sold the club in 2007. The board announced LFC was up for sell and invited enquires, and after careful consideration the Fenway Sports Group owned by John W Henry were selected based on their experience in the sports business. In contrast the last two owners of THFC were not selected by a panel where different applicants put forward their proposals and were selected based on being the best potential new owner for the club. Both Sugar and Lewis got in through inside contacts at the club. Firstly Sugar by using Venables and then dumping him, and then Sugar who brought in Levy and Lewis because he wanted to stay on the board and keep a large portion of his shares. Sugar did not sell the club to ENIC based on their credentials, he brought them because it sorted him financially. He sold his stake in the club in two stages. What I would do is put the club on the open market and select the best applicant as Liverpool did. Only trouble with this with Levy and Lewis running the show is that it is quite possible they will sell to the wrong person, who gives them the right deal...
spurticus87, you write "when I try to engage debate with you and put forward a question you hide! Pathetic." Sorry to tell you I do not spend spend 24 hours a day on this site. I come onto the site a couple of times a day for 20 minutes or, if I have time, and have only just seen your question... No need to get abusive because a Vital Spurs member does not respond to you in a time scale that suits you! So to answer your question. You ask, "Pele10, tell me a better owner of a club in the premier league over the past decade." Well our local rivals Arsenal have had two owners in the past decade who have achieved much more for their club than our owner, the triple billionaire Joe Lewis. The last two AFC owners have kept the club in the Champions League for the past 16 seasons on the spin, have built the club a new stadium (the best in London), have won 2 Premiership titles, 3 FA Cups and reached a Champions League final during the period Joe Lewis has underachieved us both on the stadium front and on the pitch! Thank god the silverware has dried up at AFC in recent seasons, otherwise the figures would be even more embarrassing for Levy and Lewis. I could also speak about the highly successful Russian at Chelsea as well, who totally blown away Joe Lewis away, but that would only wind up the ENIC Hotspur fans on here... I would also swap the Liverpool owner for Lewis in a heart beat!!!
Italian, this issue was raised in the article. no big club met his value, if real or Bayern had offered 65 million he would be gone. Pele, awful example. Liverpool previous owners tried suing the people who sold the club after they nearly destroyed it. If spurs had sacked our equivalent of King Kenny after winning silverware you would be furious with our board. hypocritical awnser
spurticus, the fact remains in that Suarez is still a Liverpool player and he has signed a new 200k contract. Did we make Bale a similar offer? Not that I know of, had we said to him here is 200k a week and we are going to build a team round you it might have been tempting, we could have kept him and invested the £50m TV money in players and wages. Whilst Enic are unwilling or unable to make the extra calculated investment to make us challengers for the title we will continue selling our best players. Llorris, Verts, Sandro and Paulinho will be next and if Bentaleb progresses he will be next in line.
Absolutely spot o Italian Yiddo.
Pele10, I think you miss the point. It does not matter who the owners are if you can't get it right on the pitch. There is no guarantee that by selecting certain owners, it is going to bring you success. How do you know who the right people to sell to are? If Lewis and Levy had outlined their long term plan in 2002, we would all have been impressed. Here is billionaire owner with vast knowledge of finance and history of success in all that he has done. Master plan is to build a new stadium, new training complex and build a team capable of challenging for champ league football, and hopefully build on to a title challenge. This is what every possible new owner will tell you. What you want is a billionaire who will say, I am going to spend 250m on the team, money is no object, I will finance it myself, use my own millions and massage my own ego like Mansour or Abramovic. That is the only way you are going to get what you want and even then, there is no guarantee of success as there can only be 1 winner of the league and the cups. If you are runner up in all 3, then that wont be good enough. As for your comparison to what arsenal has achieved, yes, they have built their stadium and financed it without a sugar daddy, and since you keep going on about trophies, what have they won since they opened the new stadium? So if you talk about how Wenger has kept them in the Cl league for the last 16 years+, then that is down to Wengers brilliance not the arsenal board or owners. What you want is Joe Lewis to suddenly say, here is £400m, become another chelsea in 2 seasons. Not gonna happen. Levy has to take responsibility for the appointments he has made and sacked, but ultimately if a manager can't get his team to play, how is that Levy's fault. Even if we appointed Brendan Rogers, we won't be 4th. Martinez, not a big enough name. There is no, onestop solution, but to deny we are not better off than we were when ENIC took over is just silly.
Pele10, every word of your latest post is absolutely true. All the claims you make re. Arsenal compared to us during the Joe Lewis tenure are unfortunately spot on. The point is of course that any club owner has the choice of which way they wish to go, are they intent on running a frugal business, or are they determined to be a successful football club, and how you measure the term successful, do we count trophies, and CL seasons, and league championships, or do we measure it by consultation with the balance sheet. Our ownership has obviously made their clear choice, they have chosen "money over medals" as the article suggests, which is fine if that 's the way they wish to go, it's their right to decide, it's their money. The real problem is that neither the ownership, or their disciples on here, are prepared to concede, and to admit to the choice they have made, and to the inevitable football consequences. They just churn out platitudes and excuses at every verse end, to explain the gulf that has developed between the two clubs. Why can't they be just be honest, and admit their true objectives i.e. to enhance the value of the business in readiness to sell, maximising their profit, exactly the same as ENIC has, in the previous football clubs they have owned, or controlled. I am old enough to remember the situation in the 60s at Arsenal, when on the odd occasions any of us ventured to Highbury, we were rebuked and accused of "only coming down here to take the p..s". The contrast in the clubs progress, fortunes, and status since then is amazing, and very regrettable from a Spurs supporter's point of view, and it has come about by virtue of timing, bravery, and sensible targeted and sustained investment, or you could say "putting medals over money". They have had a plan, and have taken the "bull by the horns", whilst we missed the boat. The best example being the stadium situation, they struck when the time was right, borrowed money was cheap, and low and behold their 60,000 plus revenue raising stadium was completed several seasons ago, whilst we, despite recognition of, and a promise to address the question of stadium capacity some 14 years ago, are still in our 36,000 ground, and apparently still years away from our much vaunted and ever discussed new stadium, with the inevitable result that every season the clubs will drift further and further apart, with regards to financial ability, and therefore success on the pitch. They are currently suffering a drought in terms of trophies, but their haul and their 16 straight seasons in the CL, far exceed our 1 CC in the same period.
Go and look at our trophy records and achievements pre Enic and then look at Arsenals, they have been more successful because they have always been more succesful and were far far superior to us when Enic took over! Absolutely dominant infact, now we have pushed them consistently for 5/6 seasons! That would suggest to me in that time we have improved and they have regressed, awful awnser! If you want to make comparisons with clubs on the same level as us then the reality is its Everton, Newcasrle, Aston villa. These are the clubs we are in the same catogery as. Chelsea, City, United, Arsenal and Liverpool with their superior wealth/heritage. Not spot on at all frank/Italian Liverpool have a far superior revenue to ours so can afford to okay the top wages, the example of them keeping Suarez in comparison to bale is worryingly distorted, I repeat if Real Madrid had offered 85 million for Suarez then that's where he would be playing! I struggle to fathom how you don't get this....
Again spurticus spot on arsenal were more successful before enic and before wenger, also most would claim that considering they play CL every year they are actually more tight than our board or in fact run thier mosel in the same way, Also i don't think arsenal on pitch performances have improved over last 10 years ours have.
spurticus, we are not on the same level as Everton, Newcastle and Villa. We are the 6th richest club in the land, if Enic want to push the boat out a bit more we could be challenging for titles without compromising the financial stability of the club. Their money, they want to keep it safe, fair enough, but don't expect/demand top four, it can only happen if one of the bigger boys messes up.

Have Your Say

Log in...
with your social network     OR     with your Vital account

Recent Spurs Articles

Leicester City vs. Tottenham Hotspur. (Wednesday December 24 2014)

Is Defoe, Worth Another Go? (Wednesday December 24 2014)

Paulinho; First Out? (Wednesday December 24 2014)

Captain, Not-So-Fantastic? (Tuesday December 23 2014)

What Now For Eric? (Tuesday December 23 2014)

A New Transfer Structure? (Tuesday December 23 2014)

Yedlin Work Permit Secured? (Monday December 22 2014)

20-goals Is Kane's Next Target (Monday December 22 2014)

Lennon....Lucas - Easy Mistake To Make! (Monday December 22 2014)

Archived Spurs Articles

List All Vital Spurs Articles
Have your say
Click here to suggest an article
Click here to suggest a poll

Vital Members League (view all)

1. Highgatespur 430
2. Spursex 367
3. 80deg16minW 311
4. MAN ON! 265
5. Real Deal 257
6. Jables 213
7. Greavswasthegreatest 197
8. Big Chiv 182
9. Spurfect11 177
10. spursgirl_4_life 176

League Results (view all)

Latest Results
Leicester City 1 - 2 Spurs
Spurs 2 - 1 Burnley
Swansea 1 - 2 Spurs
Spurs 0 - 0 Crystal Palace
Chelsea 3 - 0 Spurs
Spurs 2 - 1 Everton

League Table (view table)

Team P W D L GD Pts
3. Man Utd 18 10 5 3 14 35
4. Southampton 18 10 2 6 17 32
5. West Ham 18 9 4 5 8 31
6. Spurs 18 9 3 6 0 30
7. Swansea 18 8 4 6 4 28
8. Arsenal 17 7 6 4 9 27
9. Liverpool 18 7 4 7 -2 25

Breaking League News

» Everton : 26/12/2014 18:00:00
» WBA : 26/12/2014 17:35:00
» Hull City : 26/12/2014 17:30:00
» Newcastle : 26/12/2014 17:24:00
» Sunderland : 26/12/2014 17:24:00

Current Site Poll (view all polls)

Would you re-sign Defoe for £6m?
Suggested By:  Vital Spurs
Yes! 29%
No! 70%
Maybe... 1%