Spurs new stadium | Loses NFL for 2020 but gains appearance in Gangs of London £££

[Enigma_87]

You display your ignorance I'm afraid. Spurs - Tottenham Hotspur Ltd - are not registered in the Bahamas. Our registered office is Lilywhite House, 782 High Road, London, N17 0BX, which is the new building that adjoins our new stadium and is linked to it by a pedestrian bridge.

You're living in cloud cuckoo land if you actually think that Spurs will have to pay £100m per year - around 25% of our entire projected income (and nearly one-third of our income as record in in the most recent financial statement) - in debt/interest payments.

Toby's contract does not run out next year, as Spurs have the option to extend it. Eriksen? Well, similar things have been said about Kane, Pochettino, Son etc … all of whom have signed new contracts this summer, so don't be surprised if the club announce that Eriksen has done the same.

So we have already raised our wage bill from the new contracts issued, with more such announcements to come. And the main point here is that keeping most of our squad and manager together is far more important than signing the new players that so many are obsessed about.

I don't know why we didn't sign any new players - I certainly expected one or two. But there are many possible reasons other than some alleged lack of money. It could be, for example, that we simply couldn't get the players identified at a price that Levy and Pochettino considered reasonable, and so preferred to keep their powder dry until prices drop, which I believe they will. And nor do I consider failing to sign Grealish or Zaha or whoever as that important, given that we already have a strong squad IMO.

And after all, United mostly failed to get the players they wanted, despite having bags of money, so a lack of funds it not necessarily the reason for a lack of signings.

Stadium debt payments are a downside, of course, but far outweighed by the net positives stemming from the new stadium

I’m not talking about the Ltd. but Joe Lewis and Enic who own excess of 70% of your club. Those profits you keep mentioning end up in the pockets of the shareholders not buying players as seen this Summer. It's easier to issue dividends and keep you profitable so they can fill their pockets.

You are delusional if you think it won't have impact in grand scheme of things - wages, transfer kitty, etc.

Toby is gone next summer, doubt you would use your extension option,and keep not 100% focused player for 2 seasons in a row at the club.

You keep mentioning those 100m as a net profit but those like many others are just projections and they are usually increased forecasts.

In terms of whether you'll keep your squad and manager it's again projections and if a big offer come for Poch, Kane or Eriksen I wouldn't be sure if they would be content with yet another season without CL football and no financial backing like this Summer.

 

[LilyWhiteSpur]

A lot of this reflects how I felt about FSG. It seemed like Klopp was their golden ticket. A way to assemble a squad on a shoestring budget and churn out profits whilst delivering top 4 finishes without ever really threatening.
I think spurs are going to have to cash in on one of Alli Eriksen Kane for big money and reinvest much like we did with Coutinho. The investment has to be spot on though.
Standing still is a big risk but spurs are probably the most equipped out of all the top clubs to be able to handle that.

You rewriting history here, you sound like Coutinho didn't want the move and you chose to sell him. We won't sell any of our key players that don't want a move.

 

[GlastonSpur]

I’m not talking about the Ltd. but Joe Lewis and Enic who own excess of 70% of your club. Those profits you keep mentioning end up in the pockets of the shareholders not buying players as seen this Summer. It's easier to issue dividends and keep you profitable so they can fill their pockets.

You are delusional if you think it won't have impact in grand scheme of things - wages, transfer kitty, etc.

Toby is gone next summer, doubt you would use your extension option,and keep not 100% focused player for 2 seasons in a row at the club.

You keep mentioning those 100m as a net profit but those like many others are just projections and they are usually increased forecasts.

In terms of whether you'll keep your squad and manager it's again projections and if a big offer come for Poch, Kane or Eriksen I wouldn't be sure if they would be content with yet another season without CL football and no financial backing like this Summer.

Wherever Joe Lewis and ENIC are registered has no bearing on Spurs or the UK taxes that we pay or the profits that we make …. so I don't know why you keep dragging them into the discussion. Spurs are UK registered and pay UK taxes like any other UK-registered company.

Most of the profits we've made have been ploughed back into our new training centre and new stadium complex, so where you do get the idea that they all gone to line shareholder's pockets?

As for Toby, of course we'll trigger his contract extension, because otherwise we'd lose him for nothing, assuming that he doesn't want to stay.

Finally, I haven't mentioned any forecast of £100m net profit. The £100m figure comes from either you or some other poster in an absurd claim of how much debt/interest repayments we'll supposedly have to make each year.

 

[LilyWhiteSpur]

I’m not talking about the Ltd. but Joe Lewis and Enic who own excess of 70% of your club. Those profits you keep mentioning end up in the pockets of the shareholders not buying players as seen this Summer. It's easier to issue dividends and keep you profitable so they can fill their pockets.

You are delusional if you think it won't have impact in grand scheme of things - wages, transfer kitty, etc.

Toby is gone next summer, doubt you would use your extension option,and keep not 100% focused player for 2 seasons in a row at the club.

You keep mentioning those 100m as a net profit but those like many others are just projections and they are usually increased forecasts.

In terms of whether you'll keep your squad and manager it's again projections and if a big offer come for Poch, Kane or Eriksen I wouldn't be sure if they would be content with yet another season without CL football and no financial backing like this Summer.

We will take up the option on Toby, like @GlastonSpur says if we don't he walks for free.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

Your explanation re. United might well be true, but it still shows that transfers can be a complex business with many possible reasons for not succeeding other than a lack of money.

Pochettino would care because excess money spent on Player A now, means less money down the road (in January or next summer) to try and get players B and C. It's fine not to care if you are a short-term and cheque-book manager like Mourinho, who'll likely be gone next summer anyhow. But Pochettino has been at Spurs for 4 years now and counting and has just signed on for another 5 years.

I agree that Pochettino will care less than Levy about money, but to suggest that he doesn't care about it all is not likely to be true IMO.

As I've said before, Levy is on record as saying that he thinks the transfer bubble will burst and prices will drop. Now he may be right or he may be proved wrong, but at least he has a clear strategy and is sticking to it.

You can't compare Liverpool's signing of VVD in the 'reasonableness' stakes to that of Spurs' approach. First because they received a huge sum for Coutinho and second because they don't have a new stadium to fund. I'm sure if the situations were reversed then Levy might consider VVD's price to be a lot more reasonable in the circumstances.

Yeah, but that doesn't mean that fans don't have a right to be angry when they feel the 'complex reasons' aren't to the benefit of their football club. For example, with the Woodward situation some United fans seem to think he is making sporting decisions about the club that he simply isn't qualified to make, overriding Mourinho's wishes in favour of what is financially beneficial. End of the day, the fans have a right to push back when they feel their club is focusing too much on interests of profit rather than trying to be a successful team, so personally I think complaints about our lack of business were also justified. We should have signed someone at least as cover, we didn't do so (IMO due to too much focus on transfer prices) and fans were unhappy. Not the end of the world, but I also think it's right to say we we made a mistake by refusing to bring in a player or two to freshen the squad up.

The 'less money down the road' argument is true, but my point is that as long as managers are being backed, I doubt they care too much for the details of transfer prices, whether they are short or long term. Guardiola has spent tonnes of money, Klopp had his 'principles' (until he didn't), most managers will spend the money if it's available. I guarantee if Pochettino went to Madrid he wouldn't care less about what the club was paying for players.

You have a point about Liverpool's situation being different, but the original point is that there's plenty of occasions where people go 'what a stupid fee!' and then end up looking silly when the player in question is fantastic, it can often be more risky to go for cheaper options, with a higher chance of failure, than it is to go for the more proven option who may cost more. I can't see Levy ever splashing 75m on a central defender or a goalkeeper, even when we got the Bale money we went down the route of signing a number of players, rather than going for one 'big' transfer.

IMO if our strategy is reliant on a Levy prediction (which even if it does happen, could not be for a long while) then that is a worry. I'd be very concerned if we were outright refusing to engage with the market like we did this summer on that basis, because that could mean years of neglecting the squad. What if next summer the prices actually go up, which is entirely possible with the current trend? Do we just continue to sit in the corner and not take part? I agree that transfers are overrated and that keeping hold of players etc is more important, but completely failing to do anything in the market could be very damaging.

 

[GlastonSpur]

… IMO if our strategy is reliant on a Levy prediction (which even if it does happen, could not be for a long while) then that is a worry. I'd be very concerned if we were outright refusing to engage with the market like we did this summer on that basis, because that could mean years of neglecting the squad. What if next summer the prices actually go up, which is entirely possible with the current trend? Do we just continue to sit in the corner and not take part? I agree that transfers are overrated and that keeping hold of players etc is more important, but completely failing to do anything in the market could be very damaging.

I doubt that it's an outright refusal to engage with the market … more likely to be just a refusal to engage with some of it's current demands.

There is already a sign of the market cooling. Prem clubs spent far less this summer than last: the biggest percentage drop since the Prem era began. See the graph given here: https://www.ft.com/content/4353f920-9bc4-11e8-9702-5946bae86e6d

Now some of this may be due to shortened window this time around, but all of it?

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

I doubt that it's an outright refusal to engage with the market … more likely to be just a refusal to engage with some of it's current demands.

There is already a sign of the market cooling. Prem clubs spent far less this summer than last: the biggest percentage drop since the Prem era began. See the graph given here: https://www.ft.com/content/4353f920-9bc4-11e8-9702-5946bae86e6d

Now some of this may be due to shortened window this time around, but all of it?

Can't read the article, it's behind a paywall.

I think it's probably because it was a World Cup year, some clubs like Fulham, Wolves, Liverpool still did tons of business, and individual fees didn't really go down it's just less players were signed. Did Keita's fee count as part of this year, or last? The biggest spending club did their business in January/already had the Keita deal sorted the previous summer, so that is something to consider. Also, we did absolutely no business .. so I'm guessing that had a significant impact. That and City only signed Mahrez because they basically have a perfect squad they can't really do much with (unless an absolute worldie becomes available) so I'm not sure if it's really a 'trend', the teams who felt they needed to spend did so lavishly.

 

[Ooh2B]

I doubt it will effect what Levy has always tried to do in the transfer window which is look for value. We will continue as normal, not you but some people on here are suggesting we wound be able to pay the loans, which is just moronic.

I don’t think ENIC will struggle to pay off the loans, banks and whatever lenders they’re using will happily extend or renegotiate terms for as long as it takes.

I think the point that is being missed is that having this burden of debt will affect the squad investment. Levy has made some absolute blinders of deals down the years, what’s going against him going forward is this same debt, buyers will be aware that you’re servicing this debt and it will be leveraged against him in the negotiations for ins and outs.

You’ve been in consecutive Champions leagues, have Kane, Poch, new stadium etc, but if a couple of these things slip, it’ll be an almighty slog out.

It’s not wishful thinking, it’s just discussing how people outside of the Spurs spectrum perceive things and how they’re going.

 

[VeevaVee]

I've not been following this so don't know what's known but my mate works for ADT and is cracking up that they've wired the entire stadium wrong.

 

[MDFC Manager]

I've not been following this so don't know what's known but my mate works for ADT and is cracking up that they've wired the entire stadium wrong.

Typical Spurs

 

[Champ]

I can't accept it, because it's simply not true that Spurs owe £700m.

Here's the most recent financial statement: https://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/media/5679/2017-tottenham-hotspur-plc-annual-report.pdf

So go see for yourself, rather than trying to pretend that any debts owed by one of our investors somehow become debts that Spurs have to pay.

Levy and family also own a substantial percentage of shares in Spurs. But likewise, any debts that he or his family members have are not debts that accrue to Spurs.

https://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news-archive-1/club-announcement-new-stadium-scheme-financing/

Please read. Please note Tottenham Hotspur the club in the statement.
Now please get your head out from the sand and realize that everything I'm saying is actually true.

 

[B20]

I am confused. Does Glaston actually think that the 700m loan taken for spurs to build a new stadium does not belong to spurs?

 

[Sunspear17]

My friend got a text yesterday from a job agency regarding labourers wanted for the new spurs stadium. I thought it was close to completion. £11 per hour if anybody is interested haha.

 

[Acole9]

They were gloating that it cost less and was being built faster than any other stadium and they're broke now too. The club are going to the cleaners.

 

[groovyalbert]

Apparently there was a fresh set back today with a water pipe bursting over live electrics for over 45 minutes. Reported in The Sun, so could well be nonsense, but this stadium is becoming rather farcical.

*edit - for those interested, you can follow live progress of the build here

http://new-stadium.tottenhamhotspur.com/interact/

This does not look like a stadium close to completion.

 

[Moshe Dayan]

Apparently there was a fresh set back today with a water pipe bursting over live electrics for over 45 minutes. Reported in The Sun, so could well be nonsense, but this stadium is becoming rather farcical.

You've clearly never been on a big building site then.

 

[Scroto Baggins]

Well at least we can add beavertown microbrewery/Lloris jokes now to the stadium thread

 

[groovyalbert]

You've clearly never been on a big building site then.

True... is this all part of the expected progress then?

 

[Primativ]

Levy's refusal to invest in the squad over the summer certainly seems to suggest there is a lack of funds at present given the move to the new stadium, indicating that the club needs to sell certain valuable assets (Alli, Eriksen, Kane for example) before any acquisitions can be made.

Is that reasonable enough?

No it isn't reasonable enough. Pretty much all of the big clubs bar Liverpool struggled to strengthen. How much did United spend? Does that mean you are skint too?

Spurs didn't sign anyone because they didn't find any deals worth doing which they thought would make the squad stronger. It's clear we would have liked Martial but the deal wasn't possible. We were interested in Zaha but Palace wanted 75 million which is laughable. Spurs weren't spending that. You mistake Spurs being prudent, which we have always been under levy, to having no money to spend at all.

 

[Primativ]

Isn't it the case that United simply have a case of Woodward/Mourinho not quite being on the same page, with the latter wanting to sign the likes of Alderweireld and Perisic, but Woodward simply not liking the profile/age of these players as it isn't a 'sound' investment? Which (if that is true) would be less a failure in terms of attracting players, more a problem with the club's current direction. United fans also seem pretty annoyed, justifiably IMO, with the lack of investment during the summer.

Also, why would Pochettino give two hoots whether the price for a player was 'reasonable' ? Was 75m for VVD 'reasonable' ? No, but it's still a very successful signing for Liverpool, I doubt managers pay much attention to transfer fees as long as they're getting the players they feel are needed. If there's a problem with us refusing to pay a certain amount, that will all be down to the owners/Levy, let's not pretend it's Pochettino going 'Yeah you're right, way too pricy'.

Poch is well aware of how Spurs operate, he knows he isn't at a club who will spend vast sums of money and over pay for players.

 

[Primativ]

Glaston does have a point though. Every year it's Spurs will slip out of the top 4, Poch will leave, Spurs will sell all their best players. None of it has happened. We are on the verge of finishing the best football stadium in the country, which we can proudly call our home, on the site of our old one and now it's people trying to say we can't afford it or it will cripple us financially.

As much as rival fans may wish these negative scenarios to come to fruition, they aren't based in reality. The stadium is fully funded and covered and it certainly will not be to the detriment of our on the field side of the club. Yes, it may mean we can't be as gun ho as Liverpool in the transfer market, but it doesn't mean we were poverty stricken either.

 

[groovyalbert]

Glaston does have a point though. Every year it's Spurs will slip out of the top 4, Poch will leave, Spurs will sell all their best players. None of it has happened. We are on the verge of finishing the best football stadium in the country, which we can proudly call our home, on the site of our old one and now it's people trying to say we can't afford it or it will cripple us financially.

As much as rival fans may wish these negative scenarios to come to fruition, they aren't based in reality. The stadium is fully funded and covered and it certainly will not be to the detriment of our on the field side of the club. Yes, it may mean we can't be as gun ho as Liverpool in the transfer market, but it doesn't mean we were poverty stricken either.

I actually think Spurs will thrive in the long run, and that keeping hold of key players this window was a sensible priority by your board. Even if it means taking a hit on Toby, to have let him come to us this window would have set a poor precedent for the rest of the squad.

That said, I think you may be buying into the land of milk-and-honey scenario a little too readily. Truth is, you don't know when you'll be playing at your new stadium after a window which saw Spurs become the first team in the history of the Premier League not to bring in a single new player.

Yes, you have a strong squad already, but when everyone you're competing with is improving, you do need to keep up/ahead. You finished 3rd last season, 7 points above 5th. I think the battle for 3rd and 4th is going to be a lot tighter this season between Chelsea, us and you. Even the most ardent Spurs fan would have to concede that dropping out of the top 4, and losing UCL money, would be a big blow to the club's finances. It appears you're currently operating on a temporary shoe-string budget, losing that sort of income could have a very real impact. Cautious optimism is the most Spurs fans should have right now.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

Poch is well aware of how Spurs operate, he knows he isn't at a club who will spend vast sums of money and over pay for players.

I never said otherwise. I mean that Pochettino would not be complaining if we suddenly overpaid for one of his targets, if Levy suddenly decided to invest heavily in the playing squad, Pochettino would not be complaining. As for overpaying for players, we as a club have to get used to the simple fact that teams are not going to sell us players on the cheap when we consistently demand huge fees for our own players. The way football operates now with the money at every level of the game, you aren't signing proven talents for bargain prices, even players who aren't world class (VVD, Richarlison, Zaha etc) are valued extremely highly.

'Overpaying' is entirely subjective, people thought Liverpool overpaid for VVD and he is now a fan favourite and crucial to the team. As a club I don't think we can continue to operate purely on bargain basement level signings, we aren't going to continually strike gold in the market and we have a long list of duds recently which we can't get rid of, most of which were punts or panic buys. If we want to solidify our club as a top 4 side (Or, push on?) we need to start accepting the realities of the market and start to try and compete, because whilst we've been very fortunate with a few signings/the breakthrough of Kane, it's very dodgy to rely on it long term.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

Glaston does have a point though. Every year it's Spurs will slip out of the top 4, Poch will leave, Spurs will sell all their best players. None of it has happened. We are on the verge of finishing the best football stadium in the country, which we can proudly call our home, on the site of our old one and now it's people trying to say we can't afford it or it will cripple us financially.

As much as rival fans may wish these negative scenarios to come to fruition, they aren't based in reality. The stadium is fully funded and covered and it certainly will not be to the detriment of our on the field side of the club. Yes, it may mean we can't be as gun ho as Liverpool in the transfer market, but it doesn't mean we were poverty stricken either.

Glaston is right in that opposition fans are constantly telling us we'll soon drop back down to being a mid-table team (which is entirely false), but I think some of the concerns expressed in this thread are valid, though some are blatantly just doomsday scenarios which are very unlikely to actually take place.

We have a fantastic new stadium, but we have to be careful to guard against complacency. A big, shiny stadium does not make for a great team, look at Arsenal's projection since moving in to the Emirates. They had much the same optimism as Glaston does now, that it would bring in pots of cash which would be used to compete with the bigger sides. It didn't happen, and we have to make sure that we don't suffer similarly because for us, dropping out of the top four could mean losing some once in a generation players for us, and we could be waiting a very long time to get back to where we are now.

 

[GlastonSpur]

https://www.tottenhamhotspur.com/news-archive-1/club-announcement-new-stadium-scheme-financing/

Please read. Please note Tottenham Hotspur the club in the statement.
Now please get your head out from the sand and realize that everything I'm saying is actually true.

Perhaps you'll explain how you arrive at the conclusion - from the financial statement cited - that Spurs currently owe £700m for the new stadium-complex construction.

 

[GlastonSpur]

I am confused. Does Glaston actually think that the 700m loan taken for spurs to build a new stadium does not belong to spurs?

What £700m loan? People keep citing it, but nobody provides evidence for its existence.

 

[GlastonSpur]

I've not been following this so don't know what's known but my mate works for ADT and is cracking up that they've wired the entire stadium wrong.

The issue is with the wiring for the fire safety system, not the entire stadium … sorry to disappoint.

 

[GlastonSpur]

… Cautious optimism is the most Spurs fans should have right now.

Fully agree. And I don't know a single Spurs fans who expresses more than this.

But what we get from some oppo fans, in the face of this cautious optimism, is an endless stream of doom-laden predictions … predictions which then all fade away like Scotch mist come the dawning reality.

And when we express this cautious optimism, backed up by reasoned argument, this is translated as "gung-ho predictions of world domination". Hey-ho.

 

[Random Task]

No it isn't reasonable enough. Pretty much all of the big clubs bar Liverpool struggled to strengthen. How much did United spend? Does that mean you are skint too?

Spurs didn't sign anyone because they didn't find any deals worth doing which they thought would make the squad stronger. It's clear we would have liked Martial but the deal wasn't possible. We were interested in Zaha but Palace wanted 75 million which is laughable. Spurs weren't spending that. You mistake Spurs being prudent, which we have always been under levy, to having no money to spend at all.

There are many theories floating around as to why Woody decided not to spend heavily this summer, some plausible some not so much, the only thing we know for certain is that it was not due to a lack of funds.

Can you say, categorically, that the funds were available to Poch all summer?

 

[VeevaVee]

The issue is with the wiring for the fire safety system, not the entire stadium … sorry to disappoint.

The one that goes around the entire stadium..

 

[Thunderhead]

Perhaps you'll explain how you arrive at the conclusion - from the financial statement cited - that Spurs currently owe £700m for the new stadium-complex construction.

yeah I just read that article, £400m of which they had drawn £100m, there was £340m mentioned but that's not full debt from what I can see and had already been accounted for, how much is actual debt it doesn't say. I think people are adding the two totals together and working on £700m of debt which doesn't appear to be the case.

 

[LilyWhiteSpur]

yeah I just read that article, £400m of which they had drawn £100m, there was £340m mentioned but that's not full debt from what I can see and had already been accounted for, how much is actual debt it doesn't say. I think people are adding the two totals together and working on £700m of debt which doesn't appear to be the case.

People read the news, see £800M stadium and thats all they want to see.

 

[do.ob]

No it isn't reasonable enough. Pretty much all of the big clubs bar Liverpool struggled to strengthen. How much did United spend? Does that mean you are skint too?

Spurs didn't sign anyone because they didn't find any deals worth doing which they thought would make the squad stronger. It's clear we would have liked Martial but the deal wasn't possible. We were interested in Zaha but Palace wanted 75 million which is laughable. Spurs weren't spending that. You mistake Spurs being prudent, which we have always been under levy, to having no money to spend at all.

Leaving aside that other PL top clubs still spent a lot of money (City being a the lowest (net) spenders at €46m): do you honestly think the Spurs squad is so strong it can't be improved with reasonably priced transfers? Even serial winners like Real, Barca, Bayern or Juventus always try to improve their squad, even when clubs are happy with their first team they still don't sit idle, but look for some youngsters to improve them mid-term. Are third placed Spurs the exception to that?
If club doesn't do any business at all there are two likely reasons for it: their management fecked up monumentally or there is no money for transfers at the moment.

 

[Hammerfell]

The one that goes around the entire stadium..

You're wasting your time.

 

[Mastadon]

Perhaps you'll explain how you arrive at the conclusion - from the financial statement cited - that Spurs currently owe £700m for the new stadium-complex construction.

You do realize those financial statements are up to 30 June 2017? 14 months is a long time time time to be involved in the business end of a project with massive cost overruns being reported in the last 6 months.

 

[Champ]

Perhaps you'll explain how you arrive at the conclusion - from the financial statement cited - that Spurs currently owe £700m for the new stadium-complex construction.

Because it replaced an existing £200m loan, add the £50m loan from ENIC and other existing debts and voila.
In fact the total payments will be topping £900m plus, hell £340m was just for planning.
Anything else you need to know about your beloved club?

Edit: I realise that I actually have a £100m shortfall as only £100m was drawn from the original £200m loan, for that I apologize.

 

[Ooh2B]

Glaston is right in that opposition fans are constantly telling us we'll soon drop back down to being a mid-table team (which is entirely false), but I think some of the concerns expressed in this thread are valid, though some are blatantly just doomsday scenarios which are very unlikely to actually take place.

We have a fantastic new stadium, but we have to be careful to guard against complacency. A big, shiny stadium does not make for a great team, look at Arsenal's projection since moving in to the Emirates. They had much the same optimism as Glaston does now, that it would bring in pots of cash which would be used to compete with the bigger sides. It didn't happen, and we have to make sure that we don't suffer similarly because for us, dropping out of the top four could mean losing some once in a generation players for us, and we could be waiting a very long time to get back to where we are now.

In fairness, the Emirates move for us has generated sheds loads of cash, (I believe last years accounts showed net debt @£50 mil and profit of £45 mil) the problem is the owner not leveraging that for squad investment.

£300 mil in the bank, £700 mill in tangible assets etc..

It’s a pure goldmine and is generating everything we as supporters had hoped, but Kroenke came in at the wrong time for us, but perfect for him.

I live in hope now he owns the lot that him or his son get some ambition on the football front, because they have no financial issues pertaining to the club.

 

[SquishyMcSquish]

In fairness, the Emirates move for us has generated sheds loads of cash, (I believe last years accounts showed net debt @£50 mil and profit of £45 mil) the problem is the owner not leveraging that for squad investment.

£300 mil in the bank, £700 mill in tangible assets etc..

It’s a pure goldmine and is generating everything we as supporters had hoped, but Kroenke came in at the wrong time for us, but perfect for him.

I live in hope now he owns the lot that him or his son get some ambition on the football front, because they have no financial issues pertaining to the club.

That's the point though, Arsenal fans were sure that the money you generated would be invested in to the squad, when the reality is that most football owners are out there for profit. I think it's naive for us to think ENIC/Levy are any different, so it's up to the fans to make sure that a situation like you have with Kroenke never happens here. Hence why I think it's good that there was a backlash against signing nobody this summer, no way should we have been happy with zero investment in the squad this summer, it was unacceptable, new stadium or not.

 

[GlastonSpur]

You do realize those financial statements are up to 30 June 2017? 14 months is a long time time time to be involved in the business end of a project with massive cost overruns being reported in the last 6 months.

First of all, this is not evidence that Spurs currently have a £700m stadium debt - a mythical figure plucked from thin air and based on zilch.

Second, the alleged "massive cost overruns" are similarly based on zero evidence.

Many people don't care about facts and many people see only what they want to see. They see a reported figure of £750m (for instance) and say "hey, wasn't the stadium supposed to cost £400m?" … but don't want to know that the headline figure is for the entire project - hotel, apartments, health centre, extreme sports centre (etc. etc. etc.), not just the stadium itself. It's a stadium complex, not just a stadium.

 

[B20]

Tells us how big the loan is then, Glaston.