Caporegime
Tottenham are not Arsenal though. Man City struggle to fill their stadium and while Spurs are old firm are they going to get 60k a week?
Mourinho Sacked! Solskjær new interim manager
- Thread starter MissChief
- Start date
- Status
Tottenham are not Arsenal though. Man City struggle to fill their stadium and while Spurs are old firm are they going to get 60k a week?
Averaged over 70k in league games last season. This season's average is down due to reduced capacity for a lot of matches and the fact that there's no season tickets for Wembley, just the option to buy if you want. So each match now is general sale really.
On the question of whether Spurs will fill 60k week in week out, they should but this season should serve as a warning to them not to bank on it. Despite what you're saying @Janesy B, attendances have barely been effected by the change in capacity - how many games have sold out for example? And while you're right about Spurs not being able to lock supporters in with season tickets, the tickets have been available if people wanted them and you're not going to have 60k season tickets when you move into your new ground.
Attendances have been down because the novelty of Wembley has worn off and supporters have or are beginning to lose patience with the stadium fiasco. Although the cause was different, the outcome is no different to when Arsenal supporters were fed up in the last couple of years under Wenger or during Hodgson's spell at Liverpool. At 60k, tickets won't be so over subscribed that they'll sell out even when things aren't entirely positive around the club.
Attendances have been down because the novelty of Wembley has worn off and supporters have or are beginning to lose patience with the stadium fiasco. Although the cause was different, the outcome is no different to when Arsenal supporters were fed up in the last couple of years under Wenger or during Hodgson's spell at Liverpool. At 60k, tickets won't be so over subscribed that they'll sell out even when things aren't entirely positive around the club.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Yes, they won't have a problem, and lets stop pretending that some how we're magically better than Spurs. You have season ticket waiting lists, etc.
The massive majority of our extra income came from outrageous seat pricing in executive sections with better seats, more boxes, more facilities, more business facilities, etc. This is something very few old stadiums put even the slightest bit of thought into accommodating and almost every modern stadium puts massive effort into. Conference centers in spaces under stands, restaurants, business offices, better facilities for treatment, etc. Spurs will be extremely unlikely to struggle to fill it, but the main thing is filling up the executive sections and giving richer fans and businesses the option to wine and dine customers by taking them for a game, meal and meet a few players kind of thing. That's where it pays for itself for Spurs and for us.
Wembley is a crappy stadium imo, it's a bad location that is a pain to get to, it's a longer trip for a lot of the more local fans and has a huge gap to the pitch, etc. Fans going less this year doesn't mean they won't go back next year. Also with season tickets coming back it means people buy season tickets to ensure they get tickets for say Spurs Utd and to be better placed to get tickets for Utd vs Spurs, most clubs give preferential buying to season tickets for higher tier games. That means fans buy season tickets again to ensure getting the games they want thus filling up the stadium so they don't miss out.
While you can't get a season ticket it's much less of an issue to go well, I just won't go to Spurs vs Cardiff, but when you have to get a season ticket and you have a ticket already for that same game so you're far less likely to skip it. Regardless they'll have paid for the ticket either way so doesn't really matter.
They aren't going to have issues and the stadium won't only pay for itself if it's at 99.999% capacity every game. For us, if we filled the executive level then we could have had 20k seats not filled every game and we'd still have made more than the debt payments are.
I believe about 40-45k will be season tickets, add 3k away fans, premium and hospitality and that leaves 10k ish tickets going out for member ballot. Either way the earnings are going to be substantially more than from WHL which was becoming a bit of a dump and the facilities weren't there.
Fans aren't 'locked in' this season with their season tickets, last year I went to all but about 3 home league games and this year I've taken the option to skip a few games and I intend on skipping more Wembley 'home' games because I hate the place.
WHL always sold out with waiting lists for season tickets, even when we were mid table in the early/mid 00's it was full.
I'm not sure I commented on the finances that the stadium will bring. My comment was purely on how likely it is that Spurs will regularly fill a 62k seater stadium. Again, as things stand they should and certainly with the novelty factor of the new stadium in the short-term, it will make that easier but you only have to look at what's happened at Wembley this season to see that Spurs don't have 60k+ supporters that will go to all games at any cost. You mention that you hate Wembley and that's a good enough reason for you to miss a number of games but equally there will be supporters that think the same if and when performances aren't so good. At 35k, tickets were always going to be massively oversubscribed meaning that it would take something drastic not to sell out, at 62k tickets are no longer gold dust.
Anyway, to get this back on track and to answer the initial question regard potential funds for Poch in the summer. I guess that's the big question and something Poch will want to know before making any decision on his future. While what DM said about Arsenal is true and the stadium was cash positive, Spurs are going to have debts of well inexcess of £500m when all things are said and done and while they'd hope that the stadium will generate enough to cover the financing costs, I'm sure Levy and co won't want to sit around with such a large debt hanging over their head and may want to eat away at it as quickly as possible.
Yeah this is what I was getting at. Would a move to Man Utd be more 'interesting' I guess for him, as he may have access to more funds? I thought Arsenal have been quiet in the transfer market due to the stadium or am I wrong?
That said, I'm pretty happy with OGS's start, the football has been extremely positive and the results are a bonus - especially yesterday.
Arsenal have a mountain of cash sitting in the bank but they're not spending it. I've speculated for some time that this could be linked to Kroenke's other financial deals. Similar to a previous deal that the Glazers had, terms of any financial arrangement Kroenke has in the States may be linked to Arsenal's balance sheet.
Re Spurs and Poch. I doubt he'll be given much if anything at all on top of what Spurs bring in through sales. I don't necessarily think that would be enough to persuade Poch that it's time to leave Spurs providing enough fringe players are shifted for him to make a couple of notable signings.
From everything I've read about Poch's career so far, he carefully considers his options and it'll be no different this summer. I don't think he's going to rush into anything and accept a job, whether that be at Utd or Real, unless the terms are right for him. If and when he leaves Spurs he'll have no shortage of offers - you could have the PSG, Bayern and Barca jobs up for grabs in the next 18 months, which he'll know. Even if Spurs can't match his expectations this summer, if he's not entirely happy with what Utd may offer him, I wouldn't bet against him sitting tight for a year and seeing what's on offer in 12 months time and history tells us that the Utd and Real jobs will probably be available again at some point in the not too distant future.
Re Spurs and Poch. I doubt he'll be given much if anything at all on top of what Spurs bring in through sales. I don't necessarily think that would be enough to persuade Poch that it's time to leave Spurs providing enough fringe players are shifted for him to make a couple of notable signings.
From everything I've read about Poch's career so far, he carefully considers his options and it'll be no different this summer. I don't think he's going to rush into anything and accept a job, whether that be at Utd or Real, unless the terms are right for him. If and when he leaves Spurs he'll have no shortage of offers - you could have the PSG, Bayern and Barca jobs up for grabs in the next 18 months, which he'll know. Even if Spurs can't match his expectations this summer, if he's not entirely happy with what Utd may offer him, I wouldn't bet against him sitting tight for a year and seeing what's on offer in 12 months time and history tells us that the Utd and Real jobs will probably be available again at some point in the not too distant future.
Caporegime
Hes a manager so at the age of 46 or whatever he is there is probably another 20+ years left in his career. His next move will undoubtably be the hardest of his career because he has set the bar very high at Spurs but at the same time he has been quite lucky IMO. Not many teams would happen upon gems like Dele, Son, Kane etc and manage to keep them and have them all be generally very fit and available most of the time. The lack of funds he has had means that anything he does poorly will have the caveat of "I haven't spent any money".
His next job he will have a lot to spend and he will be expected to win trophies. I think he is a top manager and I think he will succeed but its so hard in the modern game to guarantee trophies.
His next job he will have a lot to spend and he will be expected to win trophies. I think he is a top manager and I think he will succeed but its so hard in the modern game to guarantee trophies.
Associate
Are you a Scouser or a City fan? lol
Associate
I can't seriously see Levy giving Poch a mountain of cash to spend at the end of the season.
He is an extremely astute businessman so I expect that he will be clearing down the stadium debt ASAP.
Arsenal did the same, most Clubs would do the same....riding out time paying off interest year after year is simply dead money and not good business sense for a football club where performances on the pitch fill the stadium & increases sponsorship money.
Even if they are £30 mill a year better off, that would buy them a quality players left leg.
He is an extremely astute businessman so I expect that he will be clearing down the stadium debt ASAP.
Arsenal did the same, most Clubs would do the same....riding out time paying off interest year after year is simply dead money and not good business sense for a football club where performances on the pitch fill the stadium & increases sponsorship money.
Even if they are £30 mill a year better off, that would buy them a quality players left leg.
Soldato
Arsenal owners are a joke mate
Caporegime
That all depends on whether you affect the long term profit of the club by doing so. Tottenham have been very lucky with the players they have come across like Harry Kane. If they don't see any progress in the next 2-3 years there is every chance they will leave. If Tottenham dropped out of the CL they would lose a lot of money. Arsenal could do what they did because they were kind of in a no mans land of being unable to compete for the title or CL but also reasonably comfortably getting CL each season. They were also operating at a time when transfer fees were not insane.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2007
- Posts
- 3,443
Pochettino is in a very cushy place right now. Good team that needs money spent so any failure can be put down to overachieving and a lack of resources available. The question is does he deserve the credit for getting Spurs where they are or the blame from their failures at the final hurdles?
If he were to take the Man Utd job (if offered it) he would have the resource but it would come with a level of expectation that he doesn't have at Spurs.
Should Spurs have knocked Juve out of the CL?
Should they have beaten Man Utd after leading in the FA Cup semi final?
Should they have won the title the season Leicester did?
Are they bottlers when the pressure is on or should their manager be lauded for putting them in these positions anyway?
If he were to take the Man Utd job (if offered it) he would have the resource but it would come with a level of expectation that he doesn't have at Spurs.
Should Spurs have knocked Juve out of the CL?
Should they have beaten Man Utd after leading in the FA Cup semi final?
Should they have won the title the season Leicester did?
Are they bottlers when the pressure is on or should their manager be lauded for putting them in these positions anyway?
You can look at any manager and pick out mistakes or failures but you can't judge them by 1 game, you have to look at the big picture and what they've achieved as a whole relative to what resources they have available to them.
Spurs should have absolutely beat Juve last season but equally, they had no right to even be in that position to begin with. To criticise Poch for not beating Juve when he's massively overachieved to have even qualified for the CL is mad.
The questions you need to ask about Poch isn't whether he's had failures in the past, all managers will have, but look at the job he's done and ask whether it's transferable to Utd. For example, he hasn't had to deal with massive egos or superstars at Spurs and how he'll manage that. Look at how he dealt with Walker, Rose and Alderweireld - whenever there were question marks over these players committment they were out the side. IIRC Walker was pretty much bombed out in the 2nd half of his last season, Rose is nothing more than a bit part player since his comments to the press and Alderweireld was being left out the squad on several ocassions last season and I suspect only playing more this season due to injuries to others.
Spurs should have absolutely beat Juve last season but equally, they had no right to even be in that position to begin with. To criticise Poch for not beating Juve when he's massively overachieved to have even qualified for the CL is mad.
The questions you need to ask about Poch isn't whether he's had failures in the past, all managers will have, but look at the job he's done and ask whether it's transferable to Utd. For example, he hasn't had to deal with massive egos or superstars at Spurs and how he'll manage that. Look at how he dealt with Walker, Rose and Alderweireld - whenever there were question marks over these players committment they were out the side. IIRC Walker was pretty much bombed out in the 2nd half of his last season, Rose is nothing more than a bit part player since his comments to the press and Alderweireld was being left out the squad on several ocassions last season and I suspect only playing more this season due to injuries to others.
I'm pretty sure you said Liverpool were lucky to have sold Coutinho too. It's not luck. Kane was never the next big thing when he came through the ranks at Spurs and I can't recall even Spurs fans wanting to see him picked ahead of Soldado in his early days. Obviously Kane's had to put the work in himself but he's a player that Spurs and Poch have helped develop into the player he is today. In another post you mentioned Alli and Son too - any other club could have signed these players but they weren't prepared to take the chance on them that Spurs did. I know Liverpool were very interested in Alli but clearly not as interested as Spurs (Spurs offered him far more money which Alli's agent has said was a sign that they took him more seriously than us) and equally Son was available to absolutely everybody but clubs were scared of his national service situation. It's not lucky that Spurs have these players and they're performing at the level they are - Spurs/Poch identified them and developed them into the players they are.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2007
- Posts
- 3,443
Its not judging him by one game though, its looking at a pattern of events when the chips are down.
I agree about the resources available but if you look at the Spurs first XI it is packed with top talent whether that has been acquired through whatever means. Kane cost nothing compared to Lukaku but which is the better player? Alli or Sanchez which is the better player? etc etc. By hook or by crook Pochettino has an excellent squad and if you put that team into semi finals and winning positions and it falls short then it is just as legitimate to ask if that is as much of a failing as getting there in the first place is a success. Im not criticising him, im posing the question. Its easy to say he has lacked resources in financial terms but that doesn't mean he doesn't have a team assembled that could reasonably be expected to get over the line from winning positions.
If you then give him more resources you will obviously find out which it is but that's the crux of the whole question about him getting the job in the first place.
Poch deals with egos by getting rid of them Andros Townsend found himself out of his **** when he had an argument with the fitness coach. Adebayor, Bentaleb, Kaboul etc were all a pain and were moved on. Rose was told to either focus or he can leave, he's only had his chances limited by injury this season rather than commitment issues.
How would he be able to deal with that at Man Utd would be a different matter, would he be able to get rid of Pogba, probably not because part of Man Utd is having famous and marketable players.
Kane was a happy accident, Spurs fans didn't know what they had or what they were dealing with at the time and had Soldado been half decent, would Kane see the same chances offered to him? Probably not.
On the post above, a lot of games have been lost due to individual errors. Like in the FA Cup with Demebele losing possession for one of the goals. It's that final bit of mental concentration that's missing.
How would he be able to deal with that at Man Utd would be a different matter, would he be able to get rid of Pogba, probably not because part of Man Utd is having famous and marketable players.
Kane was a happy accident, Spurs fans didn't know what they had or what they were dealing with at the time and had Soldado been half decent, would Kane see the same chances offered to him? Probably not.
On the post above, a lot of games have been lost due to individual errors. Like in the FA Cup with Demebele losing possession for one of the goals. It's that final bit of mental concentration that's missing.
The pattern seems to be 2 games vs Utd and Juve. Lets be fair, any side with far better squads than Spurs can lose those two games.
Spurs first 11 is very good but it's not Man City levels good and as you know, it's very difficult to win things with just a first 11. Spurs don't have the strength in depth that the sides they're competing with have. Spurs don't have £50m signings on the bench to take Kane off after 70 minutes, to rest Kane at home to Brighton or to replace him when he picks up an ankle injury that should keep him out for 2 months. Instead Kane plays nearly every minute of every game and is often back from injury 2 or 3 weeks sooner than first thought. Is it a surprise that towards the end of the season Spurs come up short? I follow a few stattos on twitter and they've been saying for the past 2 months that Spurs start to the season just isn't sustainable, particularly given the amount of players they had that went far at the WC, they're going to hit a brick wall sooner or later.
Maybe had Spurs had 5 senior internation CB's or 5 senior international CM's on their books things would have been different but they don't. They're an injury or two away from having to play the likes of Foyth, Skipp and Winks - players that either just aren't good enough or at least not ready.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2007
- Posts
- 3,443
Yup I agree with all that and it is totally valid, its the reasons why he is being touted for top jobs in the first place, Im just putting the other side of the coin out there.
Its NOT just two games against Man Utd and one against Juventus though. Its the season Leicester won the league and in fact you can even look at the Wolves game last week as an example. Spurs are a great side when the pressure is off and they are just off the pace but when the potential for legitimate success comes around they seem to be slightly lacking. Maybe that's because they have a team that can only be taken so far with limited resources, in which case their manager will be a tremendous success if he has more cash to spend however maybe its because he isn't quite a top level manager when the pressure is on. Spurs would sweep teams like Wolves aside quite happily but when people start saying "win this and you have a legitimate title challenge" they seem to slip up.
Im currently reading the Diary of his season from a year or so back, its been quite an interesting read so far but Im still in the early stages, perhaps that will give me more of a feel for what he is like behind the scenes.
Caporegime
Of course they are lucky. Almost every player that is bought with the same potential and given the same treatment as Kane, Alli and Coutinho doesn't turn into one of the worlds best players. Before you come back and explain how they aren't lucky please bear in mind that luck doesn't imply a lack of work or skill. Tottenham have a thin squad, little money and lack the pull of the biggest clubs in England. They have operated on shrewd buys, developing players and being lucky with some of the players they have bought. There are probably 15 other clubs that work under similar limitations in the league who haven't "developed" the next Kane, Alli or Coutinho. Tottenham have had some luck in the same way United were lucky with the class of 92.
- Status