January Transfer Window

Good read. As you stated very Spurs based but to be expected. Few things I would say:
1) Who knows that the information posted is true. 53% of the population can make up stats.

2) Doesnt that also state that Arsenal are profitable and have lots of scope for upping wages if they desire? The only "bad" financial aspect of the Gunners is at the moment they are in debt, but tell me Spurs wouldnt be if they built a new stadium? Speculate to accumilate etc. So if you would want to be in anyones financial position (PL) it would be Arsenals? Debt - yes. Highish wages - yes. Much greater incomes than out goings - yes. So in the long run, better financial model?
 
OMG he's not claimed Arsenal are in a bad financial position. All he was saying was that Spurs are in a good financial position and if those figures are correct then they are. I'd imagine those figures are accurate too as i know for a fact that Liverpool's wage bill takes up 58% of our turnover and that we lost around £5m last year (should make around £20-30m this year though :))

Spurs aren't in the CL, don't have a huge stadium and yet are still able to spend decent money on players without going above 50% of their turnover in wages or putting themselves in debt. If thats true then they certainly are doing something right.
 
Last edited:
Goksly said:
Good read. As you stated very Spurs based but to be expected. Few things I would say:
1) Who knows that the information posted is true. 53% of the population can make up stats.

2) Doesnt that also state that Arsenal are profitable and have lots of scope for upping wages if they desire? The only "bad" financial aspect of the Gunners is at the moment they are in debt, but tell me Spurs wouldnt be if they built a new stadium? Speculate to accumilate etc. So if you would want to be in anyones financial position (PL) it would be Arsenals? Debt - yes. Highish wages - yes. Much greater incomes than out goings - yes. So in the long run, better financial model?
Click to expand...


We're doing all of the above with a 36k capacity stadium, when the new stadium is in place the figures would become more interesting to compare.

I'm sure I read that Spurs have half the cash in place for the stadium already that was back in mid 2007, so not sure what the state of play is with this and I guess we won't know until they make the stadium plan announcements later this year.
 
He said they probably have the best financial model - and I just want clarification on why theirs is better than the Gunners. Not illegal to ask for reasons behind a statement is it?

Shiner: Is the new stadium from scratch or doing one stand at a time? Also, before the stadium I'm pretty sure we werent in debt either, so we were also doing perfectly fine with a 38k capacity stadium. Wasnt aware Spurs were doing up their stadium, so as you stated - will be interesting to see how they come out the other side (stick to budget) / can fill it ;p
 
Last edited:
Goksly said:
He said they probably have the best financial model - and I just want clarification on why theirs is better than the Gunners. Not illegal to ask for reasons behind a statement is it?
Click to expand...

The top 4 make more money because of CL football and in the case of Utd and Arsenal they have much bigger stadiums. For Spurs to still be able to compete in the transfer market with these clubs and to do it without putting the club in huge debt (as Leeds and Chelsea have done in the past) is remarkable.
 
The stadium debate has been going on for a few years at Spurs, but Levy promised a decision would be made in the first half of 2008. I think 1 option is levelling WHL and rotating the pitch so we can remain at the same site but this would allow 52k+ stadium.
 
BaZ87 said:
Rafa's said in his press-conference that the Mascherano deal could be tied up in the next few days :)
Click to expand...

Looks that way, but we can sign him when the transfer window closes as he's already registered to our club because of the 3rd party ownership. Similar to how we signed Kirkland.

So if the deal isn't done by the end of Thursday, i wouldn't really worry too much we can sign him at any time and we have first option in the summer.

We DO need to keep Masch, and we DO need to get rid of the yanks.

But that's another thread!

Btw, who cares about finances, and who's the richer? Get of the transfer thread and create you're own ones! ;) :p
 
Silent-Lucidity said:
Rubbish. You watched a different game. Only one time when he was in possession did Man U get it off him. He linked up play superbly. There's no one who can keep the ball like he does, he's on a different level to most of the other spurs players though, unfortunately.

As for Lennon, if he could actually shoot he might be half decent but doesn't do enough for me. Still young though so can improve. Jenas has one great match and one poor one, needs consistency. there's other players who i'd rather have in there.
Click to expand...


No i watched the same game as everyone else, he did nothing apart from the half chance at the far post and one or two flick ons.

We have this argument every week.

Praise where praise is due.
 
Apparently on SSN just been reported that Kevin Prince Boateng off to villa for around 3 Mil. So thats 6 or so games hes played for 4 mil! Great business there. Will have to wait and see if its true.
 
Silent-Lucidity said:
Apparently on SSN just been reported that Kevin Prince Boateng off to villa for around 3 Mil. So thats 6 or so games hes played for 4 mil! Great business there. Will have to wait and see if its true.
Click to expand...

Strange one, obviously not in Ramos' plans. From what I've seen he looks a tidy, strong player.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom