Spurs finances report 22/23 (swissramble writeup)

[SirHarryHotspur]

What I took from it is that we are a well run club BUT we are still "best of the rest", with City, Liverpool, Chelsea and ManU above us financially. Not quite sure where Arsenal stand and with owners not being able to continually pump money in though.

Chelsea might be paying higher wages than us but in the Deloitte Money League based on total revenues we lie in 8th place , Chelsea are 9th and Arsenal 10th so in financial terms above both of them.

 

[muppetman]

Chelsea might be paying higher wages than us but in the Deloitte Money League based on total revenues we lie in 8th place , Chelsea are 9th and Arsenal 10th so in financial terms above both of them.

Aye, but it's generally the wage bill that is the best indicator of success.

I think we need to see if the PL and UEFA are really genuinely committed to rules around financial sustainability. If they are, then we are in a good place but I'm still not convinced any of this stuff will have teeth for the teams that matter - City, Chelsea, PSG, Barca etc. Taking a few points off Forrest or Leicester is great but the real inequality and cheating is at the top.

If we do get some sort of wage cap to income that is enforced then we may come good. But then, I see Chelsea selling a hotel they own, to themselves, to get round the rules and I'm again cynical about it all.

 

[newbie]

Aye, but it's generally the wage bill that is the best indicator of success.

I think we need to see if the PL and UEFA are really genuinely committed to rules around financial sustainability. If they are, then we are in a good place but I'm still not convinced any of this stuff will have teeth for the teams that matter - City, Chelsea, PSG, Barca etc. Taking a few points off Forrest or Leicester is great but the real inequality and cheating is at the top.

If we do get some sort of wage cap to income that is enforced then we may come good. But then, I see Chelsea selling a hotel they own, to themselves, to get round the rules and I'm again cynical about it all.

the problem is they cheat better

if it’s off the books how can you prove it?

Not to mention chelsea are proven to be guilty and nothings happened!

if you have an oil well different rules!

 

[muppetman]

thr problem is they cheat better

if it’s off the books how can you prove it
?

Not to mention chelsea are proven to be guilty and nothings happened

Yep, it's all quite depressing really.

 

[SirHarryHotspur]

But then, I see Chelsea selling a hotel they own, to themselves, to get round the rules and I'm again cynical about it all.

There are no PL rules at the the moment that prevent transfer of property to the same ownership , they have done it to evade PSR which the PL should look in to but as yet nothing.
Spurs have done a similar thing selling property to an ENIC company but not to get around PSR and probably nowhere near £76 million, it was to clear debts so that the stadium could be financed, well that's what Spurs said.

Tottenham's new stadium: how club can cash in on development plan

Investigation reveals the full extent of Tottenham Hotspur's part in the local area's regeneration plan

www.theguardian.com

 

[spursfan77]

I did like Kieran's joke about who was most responsible for Brighton's current financial position.
As you say it was a very good interview, with him stating what we all know and that Spurs financially are a very well run club also that there has been commitment to improve the squad with wage increases and acquisitions in the transfer market whether they are the right players is open to debate.
He is correct about proof in City case, trying to prove corporate fraud is difficult but I am hoping that as the PL investigators had the evidence of the CAS ruling to examine that they have come up with a better case and maybe extra evidence.

and we have to do that just to stand still. If we want to win the league we need to start paying higher wages (even though we have already increased them considerably). I would wait if I were us though and see if PSR brings the level down. I very much doubt it though.

 

[muppetman]

There are no PL rules at the the moment that prevent transfer of property to the same ownership , they have done it to evade PSR which the PL should look in to but as yet nothing.
Spurs have done a similar thing selling property to an ENIC company but not to get around PSR and probably nowhere near £76 million, it was to clear debts so that the stadium could be financed, well that's what Spurs said.

Tottenham's new stadium: how club can cash in on development plan

Investigation reveals the full extent of Tottenham Hotspur's part in the local area's regeneration plan

www.theguardian.com

Yeah, I get that. However, the fact the PL didn't think to say that stuff like this is clearly against the spirit of the new rules doesn't give me a lot of confidence.

As I say, let's wait and see, but I suspect the big boys will continue to bend the rules and look for loopholes which will leave it all a bit toothless.

I'd certainly be very miffed if I was an Everton or Forrest fan and look at Chelsea and City basically taking the piss.

 

[Westmorlandspur]

Yeah, I get that. However, the fact the PL didn't think to say that stuff like this is clearly against the spirit of the new rules doesn't give me a lot of confidence.

As I say, let's wait and see, but I suspect the big boys will continue to bend the rules and look for loopholes which will leave it all a bit toothless.

I'd certainly be very miffed if I was an Everton or Forrest fan and look at Chelsea and City basically taking the piss.

You can only sell them once(I presume). This current financial year is just as big a problem . Let’s see who they sell before 30 June. I know we are linked with Gallagher all the time but I just don’t see it. Knowing Daniel he will do it and screw them right down, just because he can.

 

[superted4]

Can anyone tell me if we can use the money the stadium (and potentially the hotel) towards FFP?

As if the hotel gets build and the non football events get increased from 16 to 30 then that is going to more than double what we currently earn from them (seen reports of between £30m and £50m a year for the events so far taken place)

 

[Albertbarich]

It's to do with which items are cash-flow related. Companies typically look at their Operating Profit (or Loss). So, the actual money received (e.g. ticket sales, matchday sales of food and drink, merchandise, tv money, prize money and sponsorship) less the actual money spent (firstly wages on players and other employees, cost of running the stadium and other facilties like energy, cost of goods (e.g. food and merch bought then sold). After all of that you get EBITDA (earning before Interest, Tax, Depreciation and Amortisation).

So, we have a healthy operating profit.

After all of that, you then have things like depreciation - essentially large capital items (like buildings [stadium], computers, vehicles, plant and machinery) are given a lifespan and their cost is spread over that period, irrespective of when the cash is actually paid (typically up front in pure cash; sometimes funded with loans etc).
To add more complication, there is Player Trading, also treated 'below the line' - when a player signs they become an asset to the club, with their value reduced proportionally year-on-year over the duration of their contract.

On those measures we have a technical loss - a large part of which is the interest payments and depreciation allocation on the stadium.


To complicate things further, PSR and FFP look at a different measure again, with some operating expenses being allowable.

Thankyou!