pax

 

no his parent company bought the club from alan sugar and the club has made its own money from his good work.

 

im not sure where your sum up came from, because it completely contradicts what i said.

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.

 

'Nil satis' does mean no satisfaction - not an opinion - fact, so get yours right. It's must be horrible being such a know it all and leaving yourself open to such errors.

 

I hate to make you aware of this, but a club does not need a billionaire in the ilk of city or chelsea to beat the mega rich boys. Did Valencia not win La Liga in 2003-2004? beating Real and Barca, owning a stadium with a 55,000 capacity. Werder Bremen winning the german league with their 42,500 capacity stadium in the same year?

 

A carefully constructed "team" not individuals has a great chance of winning the premiership - the foundations for that team need not be a mega rich owner, but a manager who knows how to select the right player at the right price. The ego's at the level that City, Real and Chelsea operate are there for all to see. Put them against a 'team' made of talented individuals and you will see their weakness.

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.

get us up back up there with the likes of manure and chelski. I believe we're not that far off,

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

'Nil satis' alone means no satisfaction - pleb

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.

you expect me to know how he keeps a smooth running business running smooth?

if i knew that id be running multi million pound companies myself.

 

but surely a guy running companies that are doing well and turning a profit is doing a good job.

 

actually, i'll do a little google and see what i come up with.

 

I'll go with his first class honours degree in land economy from cambridge having a helping hand in the running of such companies.

ENIC being the company in question, itself owned by the tavistock group.

Levy and his business partners seem to make lots of money for each other, not an accident that he can run a company and work out good sponsorship deals and attract corporate clients too.

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.

 

that is a different question.

an in answer to it, no, they would be much worse of. mostly down to his very very good business accumen. Levy has been a massive success in business and has done a great job keeping Spurs profitable.

He isnt running the club in an Abramovic/Mansour kind of way, hes running a very good business. Not bankrolling wooden dollars from company to company.

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?

spurs dont rely on their owner, thay have a massive sponsorship deal, they sell a lot of season tickets and are over subscribed on their corp seats.

they bring in a lot of money.

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.

Real is an exception, along with City and Chelski. Barca.... good question but im not sure they wanted Eto to go.

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?

 

I know what your saying, but what i meant was that if we had a structure in place similar to spurs at the moment (Decent wages, Decent Transfer Budget combined with a chairman who is a big fan) then we could possibly be challenging for that title spot, but not loose the heart and sole of the club.

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.

Every club is a selling club.

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

Ideally i would love to be in the situation of Spurs. They have a chairman who was a fair amount of money and is a big fan of the club and yet they always spend reasonable amounts of money every window, okay not in the amounts of City and chelsea but they for me personally are a model i would love to see in place at Goodison. Never gonna happen, but one can dream

 

Edit: Basically what Hafnia says above as "Third Option"

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 !!!!!!

hardly say AJ were assets tbh

Good player IMO and sorely missed.

 

What is "the story" ?

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

I think that the media outlook on Everton is beginning to change. This is from Daily Mirror Chief Sports Writer Oliver Holt on twitter earlier:

 

"It hasn't really had enough coverage, probably cos of respect everyone has for Moyes, but what on earth is happening at Everton?"

 

He followed it up with:

 

"Instinct has always been to like Kenwright cos of local connection but aware of Evertonian dissatisfaction about him and regime"

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 !

 

This is true, I wrote as much a few pages back. However building a stadium we can ill afford in the hope it attracts a rich Arab investor is not the answer to our problems.

 

My point is that if we invested in players rather than a stadium it could push into the CL spots in the league and generate additional revenue streams. To my mind the other way around is putting the cart before the horse.

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.

http://www.evertonia...?p=181#comments

 

It seems that an electable supporters union body has been formed. I don't know anything about this other than what's in the link.

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

This, plus Economics > Business studies. Am guessing Pax done BS

Anyhoo, I don't want to get bogged down in a economics discussion, particularly one about Man Utd finances as I couldn't give a flying fuck about them. I care about one club's finances and that is ours.

Agreed.

 

The point is that money is spent on servicing debt. Goldman Sachs believe United are over leveraged, Glazer financed the purchase through hedge funds, funds that bear no relation to Bank of England base rate. So if Man U operating profits are £250million but interest payments are £200million then thats only £50million left for players etc, granted still more than we have but leaves them trailing in the wake of their oil rich neighbours

 

The bond sales they have had have been over subscribed but there is the suspicion this money is taken by the Glazers and not used to alleviate the debt burden they utilised to purchase the club.

 

All in all its an exercise in futility to compare personal mortgages with finance raised upon global markets. Its apples and oranges. Whilst your own personal experience is one of sound investment and making finance work for you, businesses work in different ways. Macroeconomics and household budgets are 2 different things

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.

 

Fact? Quotes? Evidence?

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