***Official Mike Ashley Euro express thread***

[Park Life 71]

Yeah, they spunked loads on players like Bentley. I read Bale was 5 rising to ten in several sources. Their current squad cost far less than the other big 6 (apart from Arsenal) though.

 

I was going to add earlier they need upgrades in def and one or even two new strikers and that lot won't come cheap. They've been aided by Walker coming through so well of course.

[TicTacWoe 0]

Yeah, and several of their recent additions are temporary in Friedel (ancient), Adebayor (loan) and to a lesser extent Parker. They're doing well though as much as I loathe them.

[The Fish 10963]

 

 

Though they spent quite a lot on flops like Pavluchenko and Gomes who haven't worked out.

 

Those expenditures are the one's we must look at.

 

Bassong, Bentley and Bent are chief amongst them.

[Toonpack 9945]

For the record:

 

Spurs have made one loss in the last 6 years (£7Mill in 2010) they were back into profit last year, only a measly half a million quid mind, but at the same time as making said measly profit, they increased their capital assetts by £20 Mill (training ground and property developments) and reduced their debt by £10 Mill (£60 mill-ish to £50 Mill-ish, all their debt is property development related).

 

They simply do not, ever, spend what they don't have. They are not haemorrhaging money, nor are they likely to. Their Chairman/Owner won't allow it.

 

They also have strength in depth at all levels – of all teenage starters in the Championship and League One, 12% of them belong to Spurs.

 

(all above info is from their accounts, easily found via Google).

 

It’s a complete fallacy to suggest that Spurs are “chasing the dream” or over spending, they do not, and never have and their ownership certainly don’t dip into their own pockets.

 

They have the ultimate "sustainable" model, they started this way 10 years ago mind.

[Guest alex]

Spurs got their money back on Bent though tbf, Fish.

[LeazesMag 0]

I'd also say that if LM insists being half decent at the moment is due to a fluky management appointment which is fair comment, I'd say the previous regime only progressed when they fluked two good managers and their response to adversity under shit managers they appointed took us backwards massively.

 

rubbish

 

Could you see Mike Ashley attracting a manager who had won the title with 2 premiership clubs, or a manager regarded at the time as one of the best up and coming in the game, having won the FA Cup and leaving his club 3rd in the league and the latter stages of the Champions League for starters ?

 

Keegan was a gamble that came off for the previous regime, but Ashley couldn't keep him for 5 minutes before Keegan sussed him out.

 

And could Mike Ashley attract a manager of the calibre of Sir Bobby Robson ?

 

Some people don't half talk some shite.

Edited January 12, 2012 by LeazesMag

[Happy Face 29]

For the record:

 

Spurs have made one loss in the last 6 years (£7Mill in 2010) they were back into profit last year, only a measly half a million quid mind, but at the same time as making said measly profit, they increased their capital assetts by £20 Mill (training ground and property developments) and reduced their debt by £10 Mill (£60 mill-ish to £50 Mill-ish, all their debt is property development related).

 

They simply do not, ever, spend what they don't have. They are not haemorrhaging money, nor are they likely to. Their Chairman/Owner won't allow it.

 

They also have strength in depth at all levels – of all teenage starters in the Championship and League One, 12% of them belong to Spurs.

 

(all above info is from their accounts, easily found via Google).

 

It’s a complete fallacy to suggest that Spurs are “chasing the dream” or over spending, they do not, and never have and their ownership certainly don’t dip into their own pockets.

 

They have the ultimate "sustainable" model, they started this way 10 years ago mind.

 

The Swiss Ramble gave an updated view on Spurs less than a month ago...

 

 

In any case, they have done very well to compete at the highest levels without compromising the financial future of the club. Going forward, whether they can manage to address the twin challenges of regularly qualifying for the Champions League and building a new stadium is a whole new ball game.

 

http://swissramble.b...ptimism-or.html

Edited January 12, 2012 by Happy Face

[LeazesMag 0]

To be fair, his assertion is that H&S backed their manager regardless of his ability. He also states Ashley does not.

 

There are so many flaws in his argument it makes my head spin. However until he can be held accountable, he won't change the way he builds a position.

 

there are no flaws whatsoever. I've stuck to my guns for years, and Kevin Keegan agrees with me, because I'm spot on and always have been spot on.

 

When Mike Ashley decides to put up a challenge to the likes of Liverpool and Spurs, come back and state your point again.

[Toonpack 9945]

For the record:

 

Spurs have made one loss in the last 6 years (£7Mill in 2010) they were back into profit last year, only a measly half a million quid mind, but at the same time as making said measly profit, they increased their capital assetts by £20 Mill (training ground and property developments) and reduced their debt by £10 Mill (£60 mill-ish to £50 Mill-ish, all their debt is property development related).

 

They simply do not, ever, spend what they don't have. They are not haemorrhaging money, nor are they likely to. Their Chairman/Owner won't allow it.

 

They also have strength in depth at all levels – of all teenage starters in the Championship and League One, 12% of them belong to Spurs.

 

(all above info is from their accounts, easily found via Google).

 

It’s a complete fallacy to suggest that Spurs are “chasing the dream” or over spending, they do not, and never have and their ownership certainly don’t dip into their own pockets.

 

They have the ultimate "sustainable" model, they started this way 10 years ago mind.

 

The Swiss Ramble gave an update view on Spurs less than a month ago...

 

 

In any case, they have done very well to compete at the highest levels without compromising the financial future of the club. Going forward, whether they can manage to address the twin challenges of regularly qualifying for the Champions League and building a new stadium is a whole new ball game.

 

http://swissramble.b...ptimism-or.html

 

He also said, to maintain profits, they'd have to sell players (as they always have).

[LeazesMag 0]

There are 5 teams with significantly greater resources than us: Man C (bankrolled), Man U (bigger natural resources), Chelsea (bankrolled), Arsenal (bigger natural resources) and Liverpool (bigger natural resources and bankrolled), so we're not doing badly to be 7th in our second season back.

 

It's fair to say it might not last and it's fair to say we need to bust a gut to retain key personnel, but we all have a healthy dose of cynicism about that, nobody is deluded no matter what Leazes tries to make out. Ashley could clearly spend more as an owner and it would make a big difference to us as fans, but that difference might only be one place in the league, which means absolutely nowt to him. He won't spend CL money to get amongst the CL that's for certain, as that would mean saddling himself with extra (essentially personal liabilities) of hundreds of millions of pounds (tens of millions in transfer fees and hundreds of millions in wages over eg 5 year deals) for perhaps only one appearance in the competition if we fail to repeat the fate of qualification. Leazes has already said he doesn't advocate that we compete with the top teams on spending anyway so theres not a massive amount of difference between his position and Ashley's in that particular sense. So the only route left is to try and get amongst it on a moderate trajectory and to that end Tottenham are the beacon. If they get a season in the CL it will make them, if they miss out it won't matter to them (financially).

 

That's the absolute height of Ashley's ambition in any sane reality. I'd love to see us push on in the manner Tottenham have but I don't for a second assume it'll happen. For that the austerity we've seen will at some point need to move more towards the happy medium that Alex and a few others have referred to previously. The timing of that will be massively important and even failing to do so on time will cost us dearly. It will result in plateau and the end of footballing 'progress'. If it doesn't happen at all then timing is neither here nor there.

 

In any event, I intend to enjoy the fact we have a team which fights for the shirt and is looking up rather than down, because that's how it should be and for too long we had players who just took the piss. And I mean way longer than any genuinely 'big club' would tolerate, hence why we'd long since ceased to be anything of the kind.

 

the last regime also had to compete against the wealth of Jack Walker and the global appeal of Man U, they made a much better attempt and beat Liverpool and Arsenal on occasions and Spurs hands down for the vast majority of the time. So your point simply doesn't stand up at all. There is no excuse for a club of the size of NUFC [to remind you, 14th highest turnover in world football due to the previous regime and what they built up over 15 years] to behave like one of the minnows of the premiership, selling the best players and not backing their managers with the cash, and more.

[Toonpack 9945]

I'd also say that if LM insists being half decent at the moment is due to a fluky management appointment which is fair comment, I'd say the previous regime only progressed when they fluked two good managers and their response to adversity under shit managers they appointed took us backwards massively.

 

rubbish

 

Could you see Mike Ashley attracting a manager who had won the title with 2 premiership clubs, or a manager regarded at the time as one of the best up and coming in the game, having won the FA Cup and leaving his club 3rd in the league and the latter stages of the Champions League for starters ?

 

Keegan was a gamble that came off for the previous regime, but Ashley couldn't keep him for 5 minutes before Keegan sussed him out.

 

And could Mike Ashley attract a manager of the calibre of Sir Bobby Robson ?

 

Some people don't have talk some shite.

 

Would that be the SBR who was out of work and approached the club when the vacancy was there when the club didn't approach him first ???

 

In the same circumstances SBR would take the job today (if he were alive of course)

 

The time SBR was approached and he was in a job, he didn't come (sadly).

[LeazesMag 0]

I'd also say that if LM insists being half decent at the moment is due to a fluky management appointment which is fair comment, I'd say the previous regime only progressed when they fluked two good managers and their response to adversity under shit managers they appointed took us backwards massively.

 

rubbish

 

Could you see Mike Ashley attracting a manager who had won the title with 2 premiership clubs, or a manager regarded at the time as one of the best up and coming in the game, having won the FA Cup and leaving his club 3rd in the league and the latter stages of the Champions League for starters ?

 

Keegan was a gamble that came off for the previous regime, but Ashley couldn't keep him for 5 minutes before Keegan sussed him out.

 

And could Mike Ashley attract a manager of the calibre of Sir Bobby Robson ?

 

Some people don't have talk some shite.

 

Would that be the SBR who was out of work and approached the club when the vacancy was there when the club didn't approach him first ???

 

In the same circumstances SBR would take the job today (if he were alive of course)

 

The time SBR was approached and he was in a job, he didn't come (sadly).

 

he was only interested in managing his home town club because the previous regime had made it into a big club. He wasn't the slightest bit interested when it was managed by 2nd rate small timers, like now.

 

Your building up of Spurs is laughable. Alan Sugar ran them like your man is attempting to run NUFC now and they were nowhere for years, and we trounced them on and off the pitch during that time.

[Christmas Tree 4827]

Had we not being through "those years" with Ashley I think some would look at how we are currently run, bearing in mind the reality of today's football world, and come to the conclusion we have never been run better.

 

Every aspect of the club from financial to youth to backroom to management to quality on the pitch seems excellent.

 

Sure we will sadly have to sacrifice the odd Tiote along the way, but there isn't really any other way to do it these days unless you bag an Arab.

 

Comparing the football financial reality of today to the times of SJH is just stupidity. Worlds apart.

[Guest alex]

Given he cost £3.5m and is paid within the current wage structure you can maintain where we are currently at / progress within those contraints without selling the likes of Tiote. I'd suggest the owner's reaction to bids for him is another litmus test as to where he actually wants to take us.

[LeazesMag 0]

Given he cost £3.5m and is paid within the current wage structure you can maintain where we are currently at / progress within those contraints without selling the likes of Tiote. I'd suggest the owner's reaction to bids for him is another litmus test as to where he actually wants to take us.

 

Sadly Alex, the answer to that one is fairly obvious. To most people, including you I would imagine.

[Guest alex]

Given he cost £3.5m and is paid within the current wage structure you can maintain where we are currently at / progress within those contraints without selling the likes of Tiote. I'd suggest the owner's reaction to bids for him is another litmus test as to where he actually wants to take us.

 

Sadly Alex, the answer to that one is fairly obvious. To most people, including you I would imagine.

I'm deeply cynical, as you know, but one can always hope. It would be nice if he came out and said where he actually wanted to take us though. Although the last time he did that (in those programme notes which the press seem to have completely forgotten about / ignored) it was a pack of lies. A lot of water under the bridge since then though.

[LeazesMag 0]

Had we not being through "those years" with Ashley I think some would look at how we are currently run, bearing in mind the reality of today's football world, and come to the conclusion we have never been run better.

 

Every aspect of the club from financial to youth to backroom to management to quality on the pitch seems excellent.

 

Sure we will sadly have to sacrifice the odd Tiote along the way, but there isn't really any other way to do it these days unless you bag an Arab.

 

Comparing the football financial reality of today to the times of SJH is just stupidity. Worlds apart.

 

sadly, this is where you and others like you fall down.

 

What I say is correct. There is no reason whatsover why we should behave like Bolton, Blackburn etc rather than the likes of Liverpool, Arsenal and Spurs etc, like we did previously.

[Toonpack 9945]

I'd also say that if LM insists being half decent at the moment is due to a fluky management appointment which is fair comment, I'd say the previous regime only progressed when they fluked two good managers and their response to adversity under shit managers they appointed took us backwards massively.

 

rubbish

 

Could you see Mike Ashley attracting a manager who had won the title with 2 premiership clubs, or a manager regarded at the time as one of the best up and coming in the game, having won the FA Cup and leaving his club 3rd in the league and the latter stages of the Champions League for starters ?

 

Keegan was a gamble that came off for the previous regime, but Ashley couldn't keep him for 5 minutes before Keegan sussed him out.

 

And could Mike Ashley attract a manager of the calibre of Sir Bobby Robson ?

 

Some people don't have talk some shite.

 

Would that be the SBR who was out of work and approached the club when the vacancy was there when the club didn't approach him first ???

 

In the same circumstances SBR would take the job today (if he were alive of course)

 

The time SBR was approached and he was in a job, he didn't come (sadly).

 

he was only interested in managing his home town club because the previous regime had made it into a big club. He wasn't the slightest bit interested when it was managed by 2nd rate small timers, like now.

 

Your building up of Spurs is laughable. Alan Sugar ran them like your man is attempting to run NUFC now and they were nowhere for years, and we trounced them on and off the pitch during that time.

 

Who's building up Spurs ???? I'm just quoting facts and information freely available. Levy runs a tight ship, they make profits from player sales, the club makes sustained profits.

 

They've been operating that way for 10 years.

 

What's hard to understand ???

[Toonpack 9945]

Had we not being through "those years" with Ashley I think some would look at how we are currently run, bearing in mind the reality of today's football world, and come to the conclusion we have never been run better.

 

Every aspect of the club from financial to youth to backroom to management to quality on the pitch seems excellent.

 

Sure we will sadly have to sacrifice the odd Tiote along the way, but there isn't really any other way to do it these days unless you bag an Arab.

 

Comparing the football financial reality of today to the times of SJH is just stupidity. Worlds apart.

 

sadly, this is where you and others like you fall down.

 

What I say is correct. There is no reason whatsover why we should behave like Bolton, Blackburn etc rather than the likes of Liverpool, Arsenal and Spurs etc, like we did previously.

 

Who consistently "cash in" on players and thus make profits and thus are sustainable and thus have become relatively succesfull.

 

Edit: The other two you mention do not, as a rule, make losses on player transactions either btw. and the absolutely don't "go into debt" to buy players - ever.

 

What you are complaining about at NUFC is EXACTLY 100% how the succesfull teams operate, i.e. within their means. Greater means = greater player investment (much of which is based upon a history of buying low and selling high). It really is that simple.

Edited January 12, 2012 by Toonpack

[Happy Face 29]

Spurs were spending £13m to £20m gross, season on season ten years ago, at least between 2001 and 2004. Net spend was £5m to £10m.

 

Wondering if that was within their means at that time? Their profits over 7 years are impressive, but if it's a position ten years in the making were they speculating to accumulate in those interim years?

 

Even a decade later, it's cloud cuckoo land that we would spend that kind of money.

Edited January 12, 2012 by Happy Face

[Guest alex]

You probably need to go back about 3 seasons though for the last time Spurs sold a proper first-team starter (when everyone was fit), i.e. Berbatov. Since then it's always been those surplus to requirements, which probably accounts for their recent arrival as genuine contenders / possible CL regulars. Sooner or later you have to start hanging onto your better players.

[Christmas Tree 4827]

Given he cost £3.5m and is paid within the current wage structure you can maintain where we are currently at / progress within those contraints without selling the likes of Tiote. I'd suggest the owner's reaction to bids for him is another litmus test as to where he actually wants to take us.

 

But he has already said the club needs to be self financing so I guess you could argue that one Tiote sold for £20 million gets you another Santon, Cabaye, and still have 10 mill change.

 

Of course I would prefer him hoying his own money at it but we all know that's not the plan.

[Guest alex]

Given he cost £3.5m and is paid within the current wage structure you can maintain where we are currently at / progress within those contraints without selling the likes of Tiote. I'd suggest the owner's reaction to bids for him is another litmus test as to where he actually wants to take us.

 

But he has already said the club needs to be self financing so I guess you could argue that one Tiote sold for £20 million gets you another Santon, Cabaye, and still have 10 mill change.

 

Of course I would prefer him hoying his own money at it but we all know that's not the plan.

Tiote does fall within that self-financing plan though. Especially post-Carroll.

[Happy Face 29]

one Tiote sold for £20 million gets you another Obertan, Xisco, Marveaux and still have 10 mill for undersoil heating.

 

FYP

[Guest alex]

I know what you're getting at btw, CT. But it doesn't work out that easily imo. Graham Carr has done well so far but to expect him to keep it up and not to sign the off duffer is unrealistic. I mean, if he was a genius he would've been doing it forever, wouldn't he? Anyway, all I meant was that keeping Tiote falls within that notion of sustainability because of what he cost and his wages, therefore we can keep him without Ashley throwing his own money at the club.