Welcome Ange: To Dare is to Didgeridoo

[DeanoAustin]

My belief is that if you take our (total wagebill) and divide it by (revenue less the annual debt repayment) then the ratio is very comparable to the other clubs.

We service the stadium debt from the P&L and I thought that was now counting in PSR calculations because the project is complete.

Not correct I don't believe. It's a down and dirty exercise where I'll stand open to correction but our debt payments each year are £28.2m (https://sportsjournal.io/premier-league-football-clubs-debt-data) which is the highest in the league. But not that much higher than Man U and City for example.

We are the only club who spends less than 50% of our unadjusted revenue on wages (https://www.deloitte.com/uk/en/serv...of-football-finance-premier-league-clubs.html).

If you adjust our revenue for the debt repayment, we still pay only 48% of our revenue in wages. So our adjusted number is still lower than any other club's unadjusted number. You adjust City and they're at 60%, United are at 52.5%, Liverpool are at 64%, Woolwich are at 51.5% and Chelsea are at 79% as they apparently have no debt.

We are a brilliantly managed business. Levy is a bloody genius when it comes to cost control. But cost control wins you very little on the pitch.

 

[Baleforce]

We spend more than enough. We should probably stop using it as an excuse eventually. It was clearly an issue for 20 of the 25 years, especially the Poch years where we had our hands tied.

I think we’ve always spent enough to achieve our goals myself, we just didn’t get the maximum possible out of all the players at the same time.

 

[Baleforce]

Not correct I don't believe. It's a down and dirty exercise where I'll stand open to correction but our debt payments each year are £28.2m (https://sportsjournal.io/premier-league-football-clubs-debt-data) which is the highest in the league. But not that much higher than Man U and City for example.

We are the only club who spends less than 50% of our unadjusted revenue on wages (https://www.deloitte.com/uk/en/serv...of-football-finance-premier-league-clubs.html).

If you adjust our revenue for the debt repayment, we still pay only 48% of our revenue in wages. So our adjusted number is still lower than any other club's unadjusted number. You adjust City and they're at 60%, United are at 52.5%, Liverpool are at 64%, Woolwich are at 51.5% and Chelsea are at 79% as they apparently have no debt.

We are a brilliantly managed business. Levy is a bloody genius when it comes to cost control. But cost control wins you very little on the pitch.

How much would it cost us to put the current squads salaries up to get us to 60%?

Do we have that money sat there waiting to spent for the duration of those contracts?

 

[DeanoAustin]

How much would it cost us to put the current squads salaries up to get us to 60%?

Do we have that money sat there waiting to spent for the duration of those contracts?

It'd cost about 60m. That's over a million a week. You could get some pretty decent players for that sort of money.

We have almost 200m in cash on the balance sheet as of June 2023. It's possible to do it but it comes with an element of risk. The revenue numbers I quoted contain CL revenue (and the wages contain CL bonuses). There is scope here for Levy to gamble a bit to push us on but he chooses not to do it because the worst case scenario, i.e. not qualifying for Europe, could badly impact our financial results.

It's not that the money isn't there and it's not possible to do. It's that our chairman is fiscally very conservative and cautious. And there is a really good logic to that. But in an environment where other clubs are generating more money, paying more wages and trying to get around the rules, it leaves us in the hal'penny place when it comes to being competitive.

 

[Baleforce]

It'd cost about 60m. That's over a million a week. You could get some pretty decent players for that sort of money.

We have almost 200m in cash on the balance sheet as of June 2023. It's possible to do it but it comes with an element of risk. The revenue numbers I quoted contain CL revenue (and the wages contain CL bonuses). There is scope here for Levy to gamble a bit to push us on but he chooses not to do it because the worst case scenario, i.e. not qualifying for Europe, could badly impact our financial results.

It's not that the money isn't there and it's not possible to do. It's that our chairman is fiscally very conservative and cautious. And there is a really good logic to that. But in an environment where other clubs are generating more money, paying more wages and trying to get around the rules, it leaves us in the hal'penny place when it comes to being competitive.

we can't spend CL revenue as we don't have it

you don't spend money you haven't earned yet

 

[DeanoAustin]

we can't spend CL revenue as we don't have it

you don't spend money you haven't earned yet

Our wage spend will also go down because it's heavily bonused and we've shifted the likes of Harry Kane. The numbers may well be lower in terms of revenue and cost but the percentages will be the same which show an underspend compared to every other club in the league.

 

[Baleforce]

Our wage spend will also go down because it's heavily bonused and we've shifted the likes of Harry Kane. The numbers may well be lower in terms of revenue and cost but the percentages will be the same which show an underspend compared to every other club in the league.

I think its much more likely its the other clubs with an overspend.

 

[Mcfee]

Our wage spend will also go down because it's heavily bonused and we've shifted the likes of Harry Kane. The numbers may well be lower in terms of revenue and cost but the percentages will be the same which show an underspend compared to every other club in the league.

Well, there’ll be no bonuses for finishing 14th or wherever. Daniel really is the ultimate evil genius!

 

[Bedfordspurs]

It'd cost about 60m. That's over a million a week. You could get some pretty decent players for that sort of money.

We have almost 200m in cash on the balance sheet as of June 2023. It's possible to do it but it comes with an element of risk. The revenue numbers I quoted contain CL revenue (and the wages contain CL bonuses). There is scope here for Levy to gamble a bit to push us on but he chooses not to do it because the worst case scenario, i.e. not qualifying for Europe, could badly impact our financial results.

It's not that the money isn't there and it's not possible to do. It's that our chairman is fiscally very conservative and cautious. And there is a really good logic to that. But in an environment where other clubs are generating more money, paying more wages and trying to get around the rules, it leaves us in the hal'penny place when it comes to being competitive.

The cash is likely there as debt security
Exactly the same thing Arse had for years

 

[Glenda's Legs]

The cash is likely there as debt security
Exactly the same thing Arse had for years

Yes I think it’s been said before that a certain cash holding is likely to to be one of the loan terms. Plus I’d imagine Covid scared the life out of Levy (especially given our circumstances at the time) and having a cash cushion is no bad thing.

 

[DeanoAustin]

Well, there’ll be no bonuses for finishing 14th or wherever. Daniel really is the ultimate evil genius!

No doubt he'll have a "non Europe penalty" and "bottom half penalty" for each player. It'll cost them money to play for Spurs this season.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

No doubt he'll have a "non Europe penalty" and "bottom half penalty" for each player. It'll cost them money to play for Spurs this season.

But they will all be getting paid a lot more then the fans
Even the players who haven’t played earn so much more than us poor smucks

 

[Raziel]

Not correct I don't believe. It's a down and dirty exercise where I'll stand open to correction but our debt payments each year are £28.2m (https://sportsjournal.io/premier-league-football-clubs-debt-data) which is the highest in the league. But not that much higher than Man U and City for example.

We are the only club who spends less than 50% of our unadjusted revenue on wages (https://www.deloitte.com/uk/en/serv...of-football-finance-premier-league-clubs.html).

If you adjust our revenue for the debt repayment, we still pay only 48% of our revenue in wages. So our adjusted number is still lower than any other club's unadjusted number. You adjust City and they're at 60%, United are at 52.5%, Liverpool are at 64%, Woolwich are at 51.5% and Chelsea are at 79% as they apparently have no debt.

We are a brilliantly managed business. Levy is a bloody genius when it comes to cost control. But cost control wins you very little on the pitch.

Look, in theory, spend more, win more, sound logical. The problem is our spend is closer to Liverpool's, than Liverpool's is to the Scum, and all three of us, spend nowhere near United

So will just spending more on wages help? I'm sure, does it guarantee winning something? no, and hence we get back to the club itself being risk adverse

 

[DeanoAustin]

The cash is likely there as debt security
Exactly the same thing Arse had for years

There is no way we have to hold 200m in cash against that loan. We also have a 50m credit facility with the bank that we haven't drawn down.

Look, in theory, spend more, win more, sound logical. The problem is our spend is closer to Liverpool's, than Liverpool's is to the Scum, and all three of us, spend nowhere near United

So will just spending more on wages help? I'm sure, does it guarantee winning something? no, and hence we get back to the club itself being risk adverse

There is no guarantee. You could spend more and get worse. I'm sure Levy looks at times he pushed the boat out (Ndombele, Lo Celso, Werner (wages), Soldado) and we got burned. So there is no guarantee, absolutely. But there is also a much stronger likelihood that if you don't spend, you won't compete. That's a fact sadly and it's borne out by looking at the clubs who win trophies.

I'm not damning Levy or ENIC. They run a very tight ship and they have done wonders for the club and the local area in terms of infrastructure and on-pitch performance when you look at league finishes. But to push on, we need to take risks that Levy doesn't seem willing to take.

There is logic to the way he operates but it just flies in the face of the numbers to claim that he doesn't have scope to spend more. He does and he chooses not to.

 

[Bedfordspurs]

There is no way we have to hold 200m in cash against that loan. We also have a 50m credit facility with the bank that we haven't drawn down.


There is no guarantee. You could spend more and get worse. I'm sure Levy looks at times he pushed the boat out (Ndombele, Lo Celso, Werner (wages), Soldado) and we got burned. So there is no guarantee, absolutely. But there is also a much stronger likelihood that if you don't spend, you won't compete. That's a fact sadly and it's borne out by looking at the clubs who win trophies.

I'm not damning Levy or ENIC. They run a very tight ship and they have done wonders for the club and the local area in terms of infrastructure and on-pitch performance when you look at league finishes. But to push on, we need to take risks that Levy doesn't seem willing to take.

There is logic to the way he operates but it just flies in the face of the numbers to claim that he doesn't have scope to spend more. He does and he chooses not to.

Oh you have to have loads of security
Arae had £150m ish on half the loan we had

 

[P.D.]

Re the manager's "poor performance", the Board's perspective on our performance will be heavily influenced by data. Just started reading "How to win the Premier League" by a guy who worked for Decision Technology, (contracted to Spurs by Damien Comolli) before being head hunted by FSG to work for Liverpool. It's essential reading - and if and when a decision is made to replace Ange, it will be because the stats show that the team is underperforming, not because we are in the bottom half of the league or the fans are fed up.

This book looks really interesting, definitely going to give it a read.

 

[P.D.]

There is no way we have to hold 200m in cash against that loan. We also have a 50m credit facility with the bank that we haven't drawn down.


There is no guarantee. You could spend more and get worse. I'm sure Levy looks at times he pushed the boat out (Ndombele, Lo Celso, Werner (wages), Soldado) and we got burned. So there is no guarantee, absolutely. But there is also a much stronger likelihood that if you don't spend, you won't compete. That's a fact sadly and it's borne out by looking at the clubs who win trophies.

I'm not damning Levy or ENIC. They run a very tight ship and they have done wonders for the club and the local area in terms of infrastructure and on-pitch performance when you look at league finishes. But to push on, we need to take risks that Levy doesn't seem willing to take.

There is logic to the way he operates but it just flies in the face of the numbers to claim that he doesn't have scope to spend more. He does and he chooses not to.

I've always wondered 2 things, did he think that the PL financial rules might one day limit wages to a percent of revenue that's close to our historical average and are we more attractive to buyers with the books as they are (risk of spending is it doesn't work out and you have high fixed costs with no glory to match it).

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

There is no way we have to hold 200m in cash against that loan. We also have a 50m credit facility with the bank that we haven't drawn down.


There is no guarantee. You could spend more and get worse. I'm sure Levy looks at times he pushed the boat out (Ndombele, Lo Celso, Werner (wages), Soldado) and we got burned. So there is no guarantee, absolutely. But there is also a much stronger likelihood that if you don't spend, you won't compete. That's a fact sadly and it's borne out by looking at the clubs who win trophies.

I'm not damning Levy or ENIC. They run a very tight ship and they have done wonders for the club and the local area in terms of infrastructure and on-pitch performance when you look at league finishes. But to push on, we need to take risks that Levy doesn't seem willing to take.

There is logic to the way he operates but it just flies in the face of the numbers to claim that he doesn't have scope to spend more. He does and he chooses not to.

Obviously there are the upper limits to this model BUT that upper limit is pretty similar to Arsenal and Liverpool, ours and their income fluctuate depending on league and euro cup competition outcomes.

It's fairly remarkable we are in that ball park at all, and although they certainly have a greater legacy pull when chasing players, we still have a chance of success if they do. We probably have to hit the bullseye with a manager (Klopp, Wenger) and keep the BTS stuff stable, but another Poch type journey we could crack it.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

It'd cost about 60m. That's over a million a week. You could get some pretty decent players for that sort of money.

We have almost 200m in cash on the balance sheet as of June 2023. It's possible to do it but it comes with an element of risk. The revenue numbers I quoted contain CL revenue (and the wages contain CL bonuses). There is scope here for Levy to gamble a bit to push us on but he chooses not to do it because the worst case scenario, i.e. not qualifying for Europe, could badly impact our financial results.

It's not that the money isn't there and it's not possible to do. It's that our chairman is fiscally very conservative and cautious. And there is a really good logic to that. But in an environment where other clubs are generating more money, paying more wages and trying to get around the rules, it leaves us in the hal'penny place when it comes to being competitive.

Supporters need to remember that DL, although being a part owner, has no personal wealth (to speak of) to bankroll any cash injections or lumpy spending.

It's Lewis with the money and his share now appears (or is likely to be) sliced and diced into a series of trusts. Plus I'd guess he's probably sliding into various 'old-man' syndromes....so that avenue is long gone

Hence the public call for outside investment.

In the meantime.....DL has to spend what we earn, there's no alternative financer or safety net available (cash on hand notwithstanding)

 

[Bullet]

I assume Levy would rather get a good prospect on e.g. £50kpw and if he performs well on the pitch (and off the pitch has the right mentality and lifestyle) then he will up that to £100kpw or whatever with a new contract and if he still performs well it will go up and up and up.

Rather than starting someone from abroad on e.g. £150kpw and hoping they retain their goalscoring form, as we've seen LOTS of players fail to score in the Prem and then we cannot sell them because nobody will pay that much for a dud, so they just stink the place out for years.

We've just cleared out a load of chod nobody would buy. So I'm OK with that model. Man Utd are suffering this now with several players.

We should pay someone a lot IF they are proven e.g. 3 years in the Prem doing great things. That is fine.