Daniel Levy: Spurs chairman says Premier League transfer spending unsustainable

[GreersElbow]

I believe it depends on the club.

Real Madrid probably mad their money back through shirt sales began they bought Ronaldo. These clubs have such a big global presence that spending nose bleeding sums could potentially pay off through merchandise. Clubs like us, Bournemouth et al, will likely never have that type of global market.

 

[El Presidente]

I believe it depends on the club.

Real Madrid probably mad their money back through shirt sales began they bought Ronaldo. These clubs have such a big global presence that spending nose bleeding sums could potentially pay off through merchandise. Clubs like us, Bournemouth et al, will likely never have that type of global market.

Shirt sale profits are a myth though. The manufacturers make the profits, and the club gets a small commission (part of which goes to the player for image rights).

Clubs make their money from shirts from the general licencing deal, which is regardless of individual players.

 

[El Presidente]

I think that the naming rights deal has probably already been sorted but will be announced at the appropriate time.

As for the big club issue, i suppose that is down to interpretation. People generally misconstrue 'big' for 'rich' in modern football.

I'm not saying Spurs are or are not a big club , but they are certainly not a small club such as Crystal Palace.

As for being rich, Joe Lewis is the fifth richest man in the UK, how he chooses to spend that wealth at the age of 80 is of course up to him*









*If it were me, high class hookers and coke.

 

[N17]

Shirt sale profits are a myth though. The manufacturers make the profits, and the club gets a small commission (part of which goes to the player for image rights).

Clubs make their money from shirts from the general licencing deal, which is regardless of individual players.

Very true. I think the 'shirt sales' thing is widely misunderstood in football generally - myself included until i read a report on it a few months back.

 

[Seasidesage]

Shirt sale profits are a myth though. The manufacturers make the profits, and the club gets a small commission (part of which goes to the player for image rights).

Clubs make their money from shirts from the general licencing deal, which is regardless of individual players.

I know you know far more about these things than me so if you don't mind can you answer a question for me?

Is there any commercial value for a club in signing a player then? Apart from the obvious sporting ones. Say we sign the Peruvian footballer of the year for £10m is there any way we see some or any of that money spent, returned other than if he helps keep us up?

 

[El Presidente]

I know you know far more about these things than me so if you don't mind can you answer a question for me?

Is there any commercial value for a club in signing a player then? Apart from the obvious sporting ones. Say we sign the Peruvian footballer of the year for £10m is there any way we see some or any of that money spent, returned other than if he helps keep us up?

If the player is high profile it can help in terms of negotiating commercial deals with sponsors (they like to be photographed with world known players such as Messi, Ibrahamovic, Aguerro, Chris O'Grady, Ronaldo, Beckham etc.).

It's also useful when arranging pre-season tours, as the club can charge more money for overseas matches if they have household names in the team.

For most fans, if they are going to buy a shirt, they buy it, and the name on the back is not the main driver of their decision to make a purchase.

 

[Insel affe]

I believe it depends on the club.

Real Madrid probably mad their money back through shirt sales began they bought Ronaldo. These clubs have such a big global presence that spending nose bleeding sums could potentially pay off through merchandise. Clubs like us, Bournemouth et al, will likely never have that type of global market.

I am sure I read that Real Madrid were being subsidised by the government at some point.

 

[Weststander]

Just as well United had Schmeichel, Cantona, Bruce, Pallister, Robson, McLair, Hughes, Kanchelskis and Parker then.

What about the home grown talent of Ince, Keane, Johnsen, May, Sheringham, Stam, Blomquist, Berg and Irwin? Home grown by others.

 

[Weststander]

I am sure I read that Real Madrid were being subsidised by the government at some point.

Wasn't it the city centre training complex/second stadium 'deal'? Which was mysteriously bought from RM at many many times its true market value.

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

I feel for the Tottenham fans, I really do. It must be hellish to follow a club that finished runners-up in the Premier League. How they must wish they supported free-spending Huddersfield instead.

 

[Mo Gosfield]

I think that the naming rights deal has probably already been sorted but will be announced at the appropriate time.

As for the big club issue, i suppose that is down to interpretation. People generally misconstrue 'big' for 'rich' in modern football.

Surely size of club can only really be judged by turnover, as is the case with any business.

Man Utd.....£515m
Man City....£392m
Arsenal......£354m
Chelsea.....£335m
Liverpool... £302m
Spurs.........£210m
WHU..........£142m
Leics..........£129m
Newcastle..£126m

Clearly there is a big 5, with Tottenham some way off but comfortably clear of the 7th biggest.
Soton.........£124m

 

[jakarta]

Any news about bears arborial defecation arrangements or the religious viewpoint of the Pope?

 

[N17]

Surely size of club can only really be judged by turnover, as is the case with any business.

Man Utd.....£515m
Man City....£392m
Arsenal......£354m
Chelsea.....£335m
Liverpool... £302m
Spurs.........£210m
WHU..........£142m
Leics..........£129m
Newcastle..£126m

Clearly there is a big 5, with Tottenham some way off but comfortably clear of the 7th biggest.
Soton.........£124m

Good point. Although i think our fan base is probably still better than Chelsea or City who i think would have struggled to sell 85k tickets for a Europa league game like we did last season. I don't actually know where Chelsea fans live/hide/work. I work for a very large UK firm & have done for almost 20 years & in that time among the myriad of Spurs, Woolwich, West Ham & assorted other teams, i have had ONE Chelsea supporting colleague. Where are they (apart from the Wetherspoons in Eastbourne) ?

Man U, Liverpool & Woolwich are the three biggest clubs in England by any measure.

 

[Justice]

Levy never seems to even remotely enjoy football don't think I've ever seen him smile from what I've seen on the telly box.

 

[N17]

 

[Beach Hut]

Surely size of club can only really be judged by turnover, as is the case with any business.

Man Utd.....£515m
Man City....£392m
Arsenal......£354m
Chelsea.....£335m
Liverpool... £302m
Spurs.........£210m
WHU..........£142m
Leics..........£129m
Newcastle..£126m

Clearly there is a big 5, with Tottenham some way off but comfortably clear of the 7th biggest.
Soton.........£124m

So what is you turnover x but spend more means a loss ?

 

[El Presidente]

View attachment 87588

"I get paid £2.9 million for signing Clinton N'Jie and Vincent Janssen? Thanks Joe!"

 

[Blackadder]

I was up in London yesterday. I noticed, on the tube, that they are advertising tickets for the upcoming Spurs V Chelsea game.

Prices start from £249* plus VAT.

*It may have been a slightly different figure but was in the ball park.

 

[N17]

I was up in London yesterday. I noticed, on the tube, that they are advertising tickets for the upcoming Spurs V Chelsea game.

Prices start from £249* plus VAT.

*It may have been a slightly different figure but was in the ball park.

Corporate. Normal tickets start at £35.

 

[N17]

"I get paid £2.9 million for signing Clinton N'Jie and Vincent Janssen? Thanks Joe!"

'The fans think i am going to make at least 2 signings in this window'