pax

Well, i completely and utterly disagree. The only way Spurs have the players they do now and the salaries they are on is because their owner put the money in. It's as simple as that. I work with quite a few Spurs fans who have told me this is the way it is. Tottenham cannot be self sufficient without a new stadium and Levy would have to put a large sum of money in to get them the new stadium, which he doesn't want to do. This is the reason they went after the free Olympic stadium.

I haven't read something as stupid in my entire life? Seriously what planet are you on? 1) Please point me in the direction where i clearly define what 'Nil Statis' means? 2) Spain and Germany, it may have escaped your attention but Everton play in the premier league. You're comparison to Spanish and German leagues is as pointless, stupid and irrelevant as you are. 3) Since it's inception, only 4 clubs have won the Premier league. Arsenal, Blackburn Rovers, Chelsea and Manchester United. Blackburn bank rolled by Jack Walker, Arsenal with expensive signings like Bergkamp, Overmars, Petit, Pires, Henry etc, Chelsea - Bank rolled by a billionaire and Man Utd - one of the richest clubs in the world. So that dispels you're stupid opinion that you don't need large sums of money to win the Premier League. 4) Arsenal's league titles nearly all came before Abramovich arrived at Chelsea. Pretty sure they haven't won one since. 5) How did the ego's at Chelsea get on when they were winning their 3 league titles, 3 FA Cup's and 2 league cups ??? In case you haven't noticed, Man City finished 3rd in the league this season. Their ego's really failing there. So that's another of you're opinions rubbished. 6) A mega expensive and highly paid team can't be carefully put together? You really are beyond stupid.

I hate to say it, but Liverpool seem to have the take over i'd like to see happen at Everton ! A group or individual who has experience and success in turning around a large old club/franchise that has fallen away from the best and turning them into a championship winning side. A medium to long term well planned and careful strategy aided by serious investment potential. I think the strategy of buying the best and most talented young players in order to form a team with huge potential, that will develop, get better every year and potentially stay together for many many years as a team is absolutely on the money. Not only that but they have realised that you absolutely need a new revenue making stadium in order to help become self sufficient. I have no idea what their plans are for increased revenue around the world but i know they will have a strategy and i know it will be much easier to create or develop increased revenue streams from global markets with the Liverpool brand than we could with ours. But for me, that's what needs to happen at Everton and anyone who can implement that, sustain it and making it successful over the medium to long term, is welcomed with open arms.

I think we are light years behind these two, especially Man Utd.

That's your response to the fact you have just spectacularly contradicted your own opinion and demonstrated you are full of shit? Why on earth did i take this stupid and pointless little clown off ignore.

So, to sum up, he's put a large amount of cash into Tottenham and without that cash they wouldn't have the players they do on the wages they are on.

So what has Levy done that has increased revenue at Spurs so that they can buy the players they have at the prices they have and pay a large squad their wages, without bank rolling any of those deals with his own cash?

Are you really suggesting that without Daniel Levy, Spurs would be operating in the same way they are now? Seriously? Tottenham Hotspur Turnover: £113.0m Operating profit: £18.4m Net debt: £45.9m Interest payment: £8.0m Spurs have gone into debt to build a new training ground in Enfield. The club is paying an annual interest rate of 7.29 per cent on £30m of its borrowings. But it does not have to pay this back until 2024. A planned new 56,000-seat stadium should increase match-day revenues, although it remains to be seen how much the project itself will cost, or the terms of the financing.

So every club is not a selling club. Barca wanted Imbra more than they wanted Eto, so they were prepared to let him go. With the exception of Ronaldo, who have Man Utd been force to sell?

Ok, so i have some questions. If you're club is soley relient upon your rich owners pocket (Spurs), where does that stand on the heart and soul of the club remaining in tact or being lost? Where does mediocrity start and end? What does 'Only the best will do' mean? Where does stagnation start and end? What defines ambition? As far as definition's go, surely we strive to win the league title every season and if we are not, all the above applies to our club. So taking the strategy outline by Hafnia, we have zero chance of winning the league and no plans to win it. So his plan shows a lack of ambition, stagnation, mediocrity and goes against 'Ni Statis' ! How confusing.

Who have Barcelona and Real Madrid sold without actually wanting to sell them ?

Spurs have absolutely no chance of winning the league. They will have to have their key players stay injury free and p[lay very well to have a chance at 4th and Champions League, which i don't think they will get and they are still a selling club. Modric and Bale won't be there long. If that's what you want for the club, surely you are accepting mediocrity, surely that's not good enough, surely after a few season of consistently finishing 5th and 6th that becomes stagnant etc. You cannot talk about ambition and being a big club, only the best will do on the one hand and on the other suggest a club structure where the only thing that happens is that we go up the league table a couple of places and get further in cups. It's hypercritical.

Can someone explain to me how Everton can get a new stadium, buy new players every season and pay their wages and increase revenue streams around the world without a huge injection of cash? To get to the point where we are self sufficient we need the above. We do not need the type of money being spent on the Man City squad and i'd hate to see that happen, but we need 'silly' money to get the club to self sufficient status that enables us to consistently challenge for trophies. So, in effect, without a huge cash injection from a seriously wealthy individual or group, this club can't be a self sufficient successful football club. Stagnant, standing still, no ambition, not good enough, we are a big club, Nil Statis and all that bollocks will still be evident without such an investor !

Wow, I went fishing and caught a giant sized cretin, who went on to show an incredible amount of ignorance, likes to stereotype and yet again demonstrates the ability to be beyond stupid and make things up ! That's quite a catch !!!!!!

Good player IMO and sorely missed.

The lack of recreational options in Liverpool leads to the creation of a sub-species of human beings that spend their time creating conspiracy theories and fantasy stories in the hope that someone with a brain might research their utter tripe and provide them with the evidence, facts and credibility they have failed to find ever since the board has been in charge? Dunno, just a thought

Any chance a publication that is known for decent journalism and investigative work will take the story up ?

Kaboul ? No thanks. Average player.

SSN are reporting it's us or Stoke. I actually think he's coming here !

I'm not so sure. Man City were nowhere near Champions League football. We also need to remember that they don't not own their stadium, they rent it. It totally depends on the deal that could potentially be struck for the new stadium. A 60,000 seater stadium, shared by two clubs, with a clever design that includes a roof that can be closed to form a 20,000 capacity indoor arena for concerts, show etc would probably be the best option for both clubs and the city. This is a guess as clearly i have not worked through the costs.

Does this mean we can rid ourselves of the embarrasing and destructive 'The Peoples Group' ?

Agreed.

Doesn't matter if money is spent on servicing debt if that debt is serviceable and doesn't negatively effect the business. Since the Glazers took over i see nothing that suggests the club is not fulfilling both of these. I'm not privy to detailed financial dealings of the club so i can only go on what i know, can't comment on what i don't know. Goldman Sachs? Well i work in the City, have done for 11 years and at one stage was employed by Goldman Sachs. It wouldn't surprise me if they do state the club is over leveraged and it wouldn't surprise me to find out they have something to gain by making these claims. I'm going to have to disagree with you on the oranges and apples analogy. The most complex financial structures are all created and based on simplistic theories. Anyway you don't think mortgages are part of a global market? Selling on shitty mortgage deals as sound investments is one of the main reasons the global financial meltdown occurred. I personally feel financial institutions and people who work in finance want to make it seem like the work they do is specialist, highly skilled and incredibly complex. The truth is vastly different.

May 13th 2012 will reveal all ! Care for a wager ?