Jump to content

Spurs Spending.


Crumpy Gunt
 Share

Recommended Posts

Harry is the common denominator.  Come back in 3-4 yrs and they will be like Southampton, Pompey and Hammers.  Good old twitcher, as long he as he is hiding his income he's appy arry.  Thank fuk he didnt come here, things are bad enough.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't see how Spurs are going to sustain the spending they have been doing. Eventually the owners must say enough is enough. There wage bill must be astronomical.

 

Will Harry walk away from the 4th Club to hit hard times?

??? How do you figure? They consistently sell players at a profit and supposedly have a rather strict wage structure in place. I'd be more worried about the likes of Villa, tbh.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Couldn't gibe a shit, if their was one team who deserved to go down last season between us and them (which it was for a large part of the season) then it was them, not us. The bubble is going to burst on them.

 

Until they won twice as many games as us and finished in the top half of the table of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Spurs have been the only English club outside ManU, Liverpool and Arsenal to turn a profit before they panicked and brought in Redknapp. They've been a consistently average selling club since the Premier League started, and only the last few seasons have they spent big money. Basically, they were the blueprint of what Fat Ashley wanted to do with Newcastle, but they managed to turn it around before they were relegated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look at the Deloitte Touche surveys from the Levy/Jol era onwards, Spurs have consistently had one of the lowest two or three ratios of wages to turnover in the Premiership. For example, the last full breakdown I found (2006-7) had us first on 42%, Man U on 44%, Arsenal on 50%. Other included Newcastle on 72%, Everton on 75% and Villa on 82%. Levy ballsed it up with Jol, but he's running the place well.

 

Spurs and Newcastle have consistently generated a lot of money without qualifying for the Champions League - more than most (e.g. Everton or Villa). The problem is maintaining that while keeping wages low. We seem to have managed it so far, but I'll be impressed if Levy keeps it going.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If THEY were getting 50,000 average you could understand it.

They're not.

Wheres the money coming from and who's going to keep funding it ?

Arsenal have a much higher average gate, yet are watching the pennies.

 

Also, I can understand having back up in forward positions - but I mean. How many "name" forwards do they need ? Shades of Man U - just to stop other teams having them.

Sort of stops the young lads coming through a bit.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If THEY were getting 50,000 average you could understand it.

They're not.

 

Money from bums on seats plays a far, far less important role in football finances these days.

 

Besides which, I wonder how much their season tickets cost in relation to most of the rest of the league.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If THEY were getting 50,000 average you could understand it.

They're not.

 

Money from bums on seats plays a far, far less important role in football finances these days.

 

Besides which, I wonder how much their season tickets cost in relation to most of the rest of the league.

 

Highest prices after Chelsea I think, it's unreal how much it costs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If THEY were getting 50,000 average you could understand it.

They're not.

 

Money from bums on seats plays a far, far less important role in football finances these days.

 

Besides which, I wonder how much their season tickets cost in relation to most of the rest of the league.

 

Highest prices after Chelsea I think, it's unreal how much it costs.

 

Not just that, but London clubs can charge for - and get much more - corporate entertainment than provincial clubs can.

 

Back to STs, though, my mate is an Arsenal ST holder. His costs him 1200 quid. Mine, best in the house, costs 520 quid. That's the London factor for you.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Roger Kint

Can't see how Spurs are going to sustain the spending they have been doing. Eventually the owners must say enough is enough. There wage bill must be astronomical.

 

Will Harry walk away from the 4th Club to hit hard times?

 

Took 10 seconds to find this

 

http://www.footballeconomy.com/stats2/eng_tottenham.htm

 

They made £39m profit last year.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't see how Spurs are going to sustain the spending they have been doing. Eventually the owners must say enough is enough. There wage bill must be astronomical.

 

Will Harry walk away from the 4th Club to hit hard times?

 

Took 10 seconds to find this

 

http://www.footballeconomy.com/stats2/eng_tottenham.htm

 

They made £39m profit last year.

 

 

 

Player trading profit of 56m.

 

They're very good at getting top dollar for their players.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Roger Kint

Can't see how Spurs are going to sustain the spending they have been doing. Eventually the owners must say enough is enough. There wage bill must be astronomical.

 

Will Harry walk away from the 4th Club to hit hard times?

 

Took 10 seconds to find this

 

http://www.footballeconomy.com/stats2/eng_tottenham.htm

 

They made £39m profit last year.

 

 

 

Player trading profit of 56m.

 

They're very good at getting top dollar for their players.

 

Exactly, they get good money from sales and run a tight ship.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If THEY were getting 50,000 average you could understand it.

They're not.

 

Money from bums on seats plays a far, far less important role in football finances these days.

 

Besides which, I wonder how much their season tickets cost in relation to most of the rest of the league.

 

Highest prices after Chelsea I think, it's unreal how much it costs.

 

Not just that, but London clubs can charge for - and get much more - corporate entertainment than provincial clubs can.

 

Back to STs, though, my mate is an Arsenal ST holder. His costs him 1200 quid. Mine, best in the house, costs 520 quid. That's the London factor for you.

 

 

 

While it's still a massive difference I heard that the £1,200 included their first 7 cup games as well. That should cover as far as the next round of the Champions' League if it's true. Still pricey.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If THEY were getting 50,000 average you could understand it.

They're not.

 

Money from bums on seats plays a far, far less important role in football finances these days.

 

Besides which, I wonder how much their season tickets cost in relation to most of the rest of the league.

 

Highest prices after Chelsea I think, it's unreal how much it costs.

 

Not just that, but London clubs can charge for - and get much more - corporate entertainment than provincial clubs can.

 

Back to STs, though, my mate is an Arsenal ST holder. His costs him 1200 quid. Mine, best in the house, costs 520 quid. That's the London factor for you.

 

 

 

The highest tier of Arsenal tickets is the highest price in the country I think, there are some more acceptably priced seats iirc. I know someone who's paid £850 for a shite view in one of the corners at WHL, it's unbelievable. Corporate is a massive factor, you're right. Spent a week of 'work' at Stamford Bridge (which cost the company a shitload) and there are huge number of boxes owned by banks etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Their net spend is usually fairly low, they've got a tight wage structure, fill their ground every week despite exorbitant prices. I don't think they're doing much wrong tbh.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Roger Kint

Their net spend is usually fairly low, they've got a tight wage structure, fill their ground every week despite exorbitant prices. I don't think they're doing much wrong tbh.

 

Saw an article on their corporate packages and they make huge amounts on that side of it. Doing nothing wrong, living well within their means while spending big.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Their net spend is usually fairly low, they've got a tight wage structure, fill their ground every week despite exorbitant prices. I don't think they're doing much wrong tbh.

 

Saw an article on their corporate packages and they make huge amounts on that side of it. Doing nothing wrong, living well within their means while spending big.

 

their turnover is around 120M which means they can spend big with a tight wage budget

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Roger Kint

Their net spend is usually fairly low, they've got a tight wage structure, fill their ground every week despite exorbitant prices. I don't think they're doing much wrong tbh.

 

Saw an article on their corporate packages and they make huge amounts on that side of it. Doing nothing wrong, living well within their means while spending big.

 

their turnover is around 120M which means they can spend big with a tight wage budget

 

Thats what i said

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...