What's new

Spurs are lowest net spenders in the EPL

Spursidol

Well-Known Member
Sep 15, 2007
12,636
15,834
http://www.tottenhamblog.com/2015/06/05/stats-show-spendthrift-spurs-are-out-punching-their-weight/?

Stats show spendthrift Spurs are out-punching their weight

BY TOTTENHAMBLOG · JUNE 5, 2015


A statistic showing the net spend of every Premier League club clearly demonstrates that Tottenham are performing beyond expectations.

Recorded over the last five seasons, the following table reveals that Spurs have actually made a profit in the transfer market over this period, at an average of £4,370,000. This makes the club the lowest net spenders in the Premier League, despite finishing within the top six in each of these seasons.



There’s two ways to look at this information. On one hand it is proof of the club being run in a financially sound manner at a time when a new stadium needs to be paid for.

And we didn't have to pay a transfer fee for Kane. Mason and Bentaleb, all first team players last season - which other PL teams had 3 home grown players in their first team, and which other clubs had to pay big transfer fees for 3 first team players as they had no HG players of suitable quality.
 

Hoops

Well-Known Member
Mar 15, 2015
3,650
6,363
http://www.tottenhamblog.com/2015/06/05/stats-show-spendthrift-spurs-are-out-punching-their-weight/?

Stats show spendthrift Spurs are out-punching their weight

BY TOTTENHAMBLOG · JUNE 5, 2015


A statistic showing the net spend of every Premier League club clearly demonstrates that Tottenham are performing beyond expectations.

Recorded over the last five seasons, the following table reveals that Spurs have actually made a profit in the transfer market over this period, at an average of £4,370,000. This makes the club the lowest net spenders in the Premier League, despite finishing within the top six in each of these seasons.



There’s two ways to look at this information. On one hand it is proof of the club being run in a financially sound manner at a time when a new stadium needs to be paid for.
We should just buy the ref like hull city!

EDIT...jokes been done
 

Davo99

Well-Known Member
Dec 2, 2006
4,063
5,827
I think a more instructive way to look at this is to compare gross spending on players with last season's final league position:

Gross spending:

1. Chelsea
2. Manchester City
3. Manchester United
4. Liverpool
5. Arsenal
6. Tottenham

After that "top six", there's no one else even remotely close - only Southampton, a long way behind, who last summer were spending sales receipts from an exodus, as we did the summer when Bale left.

Final league position:

1. Chelsea
2. Manchester City
3. Arsenal
4. Manchester United
5. Tottenham
6. Liverpool

And, of course, guess who's 7th: Southampton.

Reputations for sensible management would cause many to anticipate that Arsenal and Tottenham would slightly out-perform their gross spending and so it has proved last season.

But what we find here is that it is gross spending that is a reliable indicator of league position, not net spending.

Net spending is only a reliable indicator of a club's ability to acquire talented young players and sell them at a profit.
But surely one stems from another?
 

SpursManChris

Well-Known Member
May 15, 2007
5,347
2,458
It perfectly demonstrates that ENIC will never be Audere Est Facere in the transfer market. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing but the bottom line is ENIC's primary concern with Spurs is the bottom line. You offered them a life time choice of breaking even every year and winning several titles or finishing 2nd every year and making record profits then they'd go for the latter every single time.
I think that most owners would go for the latter, unless they are a fan of the club. Levy is a Spurs fan but that doesn't mean jack to the other half of our ownership, so unfortunately it will always be business over pleasure.
 

Yiddosmithy

Active Member
Jun 16, 2008
98
158
I think that most owners would go for the latter, unless they are a fan of the club. Levy is a Spurs fan but that doesn't mean jack to the other half of our ownership, so unfortunately it will always be business over pleasure.

Yh i think the days of a chairman investing all his money so his team could be successful are long gone now.I do think Levy very much has the clubs best interest at heart, and is a genuine fan. I don't think he will think about selling until he has achieved something more than 1 CL appearance and a league cup
 
Last edited:

fortworthspur

Well-Known Member
Nov 12, 2007
11,244
17,536
interesting, but really only a small part of the picture since most of a clubs revenue comes from things other than player sales - TV, merchandise and ticket sales. It does suggest that if we are making a profit on player sales alone and the other revenue is gravy than we are indeed doing well.
 

spurious1

Well-Known Member
Sep 20, 2005
994
848
I think a more instructive way to look at this is to compare gross spending on players with last season's final league position:

Gross spending:

1. Chelsea
2. Manchester City
3. Manchester United
4. Liverpool
5. Arsenal
6. Tottenham

After that "top six", there's no one else even remotely close - only Southampton, a long way behind, who last summer were spending sales receipts from an exodus, as we did the summer when Bale left.

Final league position:

1. Chelsea
2. Manchester City
3. Arsenal
4. Manchester United
5. Tottenham
6. Liverpool

And, of course, guess who's 7th: Southampton.

Reputations for sensible management would cause many to anticipate that Arsenal and Tottenham would slightly out-perform their gross spending and so it has proved last season.

But what we find here is that it is gross spending that is a reliable indicator of league position, not net spending.

Net spending is only a reliable indicator of a club's ability to acquire talented young players and sell them at a profit.

The sad thing those figures remind us of, is that basically league position is just bought. They could simply auction off the title each year, and the results would be about the same as if bothering to play the games. At least playing the games gives us the pleasure of seeing Liverpool overspend, overpay, and flop again in spite of their delusions of grandeur.
 

southlondonyiddo

My eyes have seen some of the glory..
Nov 8, 2004
12,599
15,012
The sad thing those figures remind us of, is that basically league position is just bought. They could simply auction off the title each year, and the results would be about the same as if bothering to play the games. At least playing the games gives us the pleasure of seeing Liverpool overspend, overpay, and flop again in spite of their delusions of grandeur.

An Auction for each round of matches sounds good. They could show it on BBC every week after Bargain Hunt and we could have a different auctioneer each week

Much better than actually having to watch Burnley etc and less time consuming.....
 

davidmatzdorf

Front Page Gadfly
Jun 7, 2004
18,106
45,030
It perfectly demonstrates that ENIC will never be Audere Est Facere in the transfer market. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing but the bottom line is ENIC's primary concern with Spurs is the bottom line. You offered them a life time choice of breaking even every year and winning several titles or finishing 2nd every year and making record profits then they'd go for the latter every single time.

This shows a misunderstanding of ENIC's business model, which is not based on yearly profitability, except insofar as profitability affects the market value of the club.

ENIC is a long-term investment project, hence the "I" for "investment" in the company name. Their strategy for making money is to acquire an asset to which they can add value over a period of many years and then sell it at a time when the increase in value bears the best relationship to the amount of time they have owned the asset.

That's why I keep disagreeing with people who reckon they are interested in selling now - they haven't added enough value via the NDP and they are continuing to spend a great deal of money on the project, which affects the amount of debt, or short-term profitability, or both.

But, for the purposes of this discussion, the best way to add value to their asset - THFC - is surely not to make it profitable on a year-by-year basis. It is to make it competitive at the top of European football, most effectively by becoming one of a group of 5-8 English clubs that competes at least once every few years in the Champions League.

Because of the way player-trading works and is accounted for, the only way they can make THFC profitable in the shorter term and also build the NDP and also compete effectively for the Champions League is to buy less expensive young players before they become famous and also develop our own through our academy. Then these players will either help us qualify for the CL, or they will be sold at a profit if they demand to leave, or both. It took Levy & co. a while to realise this (starting in 2003/04 with Frank Arnesen) and a considerably longer while to get the academy and training facilities into shape, but that's now clearly the strategy and it is starting to work.

Nevertheless, short-term profitability is not the goal - it's just a desirable by-product of increasing the asset-value of the club for eventual sale - after we have a new stadium and, ideally, after the revenues from that have made us habituées of the Champions League.
 

fridgemagnet

Well-Known Member
Jan 18, 2009
2,410
2,864
Where the fuck did West Ham get all that money? They were in massive debt last I heard. There are not many clubs I'd love to see go to the wall, actually there are only 2. Chelsea and West Ham.

West Ham have been taking out Wonga type loans using the following seasons predicted prize money/TV Money, so basically spending what they haven't got/might not get. So last summer they spent 2015-2016 monies. This summer they'll be hedging their bets and spending 2016-2017.

I'm not sure how long they've been playing chicken like this i think for a fair chunk of big Sams' tenure at least.

I forget where i read it so i can link it.
 

MattyP

Advises to have a beer & sleep with prostitutes
May 14, 2007
14,041
2,980
The sad thing those figures remind us of, is that basically league position is just bought. They could simply auction off the title each year, and the results would be about the same as if bothering to play the games. At least playing the games gives us the pleasure of seeing Liverpool overspend, overpay, and flop again in spite of their delusions of grandeur.

Equally we have the sixth biggest wage bill, so in a way finishing above sixth is technically overachieving. But yes, ultimately the league position is bought.
 

nightgoat

Well-Known Member
Sep 12, 2005
24,604
21,898
West Ham have been taking out Wonga type loans using the following seasons predicted prize money/TV Money, so basically spending what they haven't got/might not get. So last summer they spent 2015-2016 monies. This summer they'll be hedging their bets and spending 2016-2017.

I'm not sure how long they've been playing chicken like this i think for a fair chunk of big Sams' tenure at least.

I forget where i read it so i can link it.

They're supposed to be paying off all their debt (which in their last lot of figures was at £110m) before they're allowed to move in to the Olympic Stadium.
 

Khilari

Plumber. Sort of.
Jun 19, 2008
3,461
5,287
Where the fuck did West Ham get all that money? They were in massive debt last I heard. There are not many clubs I'd love to see go to the wall, actually there are only 2. Chelsea and West Ham.

That free stadium probably loosened the fat bearded ones' (that includes Brady) belts, I guess.
 

fridgemagnet

Well-Known Member
Jan 18, 2009
2,410
2,864
They're supposed to be paying off all their debt (which in their last lot of figures was at £110m) before they're allowed to move in to the Olympic Stadium.

I can't find the link but it was that season we gave them 6 points which pretty much kept them up (2013-14?) was when it was mentioned, they weren't the only PL club doing it with these payday loans but they were the only ones doing it an 2 seasons ahead IYSWIM.

If they had gone down that season they'd have been pretty buggered but as Spurs hand out presents all the time and we did so again with them. :banghead::bag::(
 
Top