Spurs new stadium | Loses NFL for 2020 but gains appearance in Gangs of London £££

thegregster said:
If he is under 50 he will have missed 95% of it.

You have won the league twice in your history.
Click to expand...

If he's under 117 years old then he'll also have missed Spurs becoming the first and only non-league football club ever to win the FA Cup.

We have a long and illustrious club history and we're building a club museum to showcase it. I would ask what's your beef with that? But then I realised .... everything that Spurs do must be criticised.

Thus: new stadium = financial ruin. Club museum = no history. And so on ...
 
GlastonSpur said:
If he's under 117 years old then he'll also have missed Spurs becoming the first and only non-league football club ever to win the FA Cup.

We have a long and illustrious club history and we're building a club museum to showcase it. I would ask what's your beef with that? But then I realised .... everything that Spurs do must be criticised.

Thus: new stadium = financial ruin. Club museum = no history. And so on ...
Click to expand...
You've got Chas and Dave and no one can ever take that away from you.
 
GlastonSpur said:
But then I realised .... everything that Spurs do must be criticised.
Click to expand...
Not to be rude, but on the caf do you not think that the hate Tottenham get is more down to... You? Than an actual dislike for the club itself.
 
RobinLFC said:
People in here arguing about the financials as if it isn't a good thing that they built a new stadium, fecking hell. They'll have a strategic and business plan in place and they wouldn't have done it if it wasn't profitable and/or sustainable in the long run.
Click to expand...

Of course they'll have a plan, that doesn't mean reality will unfold how they envisaged though. Property developers historically have quite often gone bust, build in the boom then the market collapses leaving them with huge debt they took and no way of servicing it. That is what happened to Trump after the 80s boom in the early 90s.

IMO football is at the top of it's bubble at the moment and financially it's going to be all downhill over the next 10 years or so. I could well be wrong but let's wait and see...
 
RobinLFC said:
People in here arguing about the financials as if it isn't a good thing that they built a new stadium, fecking hell. They'll have a strategic and business plan in place and they wouldn't have done it if it wasn't profitable and/or sustainable in the long run.
Click to expand...

it's good for them. By now though, it must be clear that they deceived the FA and Premier League about when it was ready in order to obtain special permission to play in two stadiums this season.

Where will they play against city?
 
GlastonSpur said:
True … probably from the roughly £100m extra per season that the new stadium complex will generate for us.
Click to expand...
Could you break that £100m down for us in realistic numbers? It’s a great headline figure and all that but where does it actually come from? Their ambitious hopes for world record naming deals yet to be secured?
 
Last edited:
If your museum is this cool, can't wait to see Nottingham Forrest's plans to re-do theirs, be far more interesting.
 
Dec9003 said:
Not to be rude, but on the caf do you not think that the hate Tottenham get is more down to... You? Than an actual dislike for the club itself.
Click to expand...

Don't know and don't care either way.
 
GlastonSpur said:
Don't know and don't care either way.
Click to expand...
Fair play mate.
When the stadium is finished are you worried about having a similar time to when West Ham moved recently, or do you think your players won't be too fussed about being in a new ground after already playing at home last season at an unfamiliar ground?
 
Tottenham has won the 5th most professional honours of any English club (United, Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea with more). Of course we can and should have a club museum.

Saying otherwise is @GlastonSpur levels of trolling.
 
acnumber9 said:
Could you break that £100m down for us in realistic numbers? It’s a great headline figure and all that but where does it actually come from? Their ambitious hopes for world record naming deals yet to be secured?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'd also like to see the maths behind us earning £100m more per year because of the new stadium.
That 20m p.a Naming Rights deal is still waiting to materialize and it would still be the biggest naming rights deal in the history of sports, so
lets just say it's not automatic for us to land that deal...


I have to say @GlastonSpur that my concerns from last spring still stands..
Since then we have invested 0 in the playing squad, our stadium is delayed and we are looking at finding another £150m or so to finance on the stadium.
 
acnumber9 said:
Could you break that £100m down for us in realistic numbers? It’s a great headline figure and all that but where does it actually come from? Their ambitious hopes for world record naming deals yet to be secured?
Click to expand...

The club have estimated an extra £60m from match-day income. That's likely to be a conservative estimate. Plus we can hold 16 non-Spurs major events each year, two of which will be NFL games. Spurs will likely get at least £2m per event for these 16 events, which equals another £32m, making £92m.

On top of this will be income from stadium naming rights, plus additional income (compared to now) from a variety of other commercial/sponsorship deals … so all in all £100m is a conservative figure.
 
Dec9003 said:
Fair play mate.
When the stadium is finished are you worried about having a similar time to when West Ham moved recently, or do you think your players won't be too fussed about being in a new ground after already playing at home last season at an unfamiliar ground?
Click to expand...

The latter.

Also, there'll be no comparison with the atmosphere in W.Ham's new stadium, because their stadium was not designed with football in mind, whilst ours has been acoustically designed to maximise the sound from fans and because the fans will be much closer to the pitch … not to mention the 17.5k single-tier stand at the south end.
 
CapitalismSucks said:
…. I have to say @GlastonSpur that my concerns from last spring still stands..
Since then we have invested 0 in the playing squad, our stadium is delayed and we are looking at finding another £150m or so to finance on the stadium.
Click to expand...

It may be zero invested in the squad in terms of signing new players (although Moura only joined us in January), but quite a lot invested in terms of new contracts issued to some players and to Pochettino … all of which has helped us to keep a good quality squad together. And we've made our best start to a season since 2009-10.

I have no information on the need to find another £150m stadium finance. Where does this come from?
 
GlastonSpur said:
The club have estimated an extra £60m from match-day income. That's likely to be a conservative estimate. Plus we can hold 16 non-Spurs major events each year, two of which will be NFL games. Spurs will likely get at least £2m per event for these 16 events, which equals another £32m, making £92m.

On top of this will be income from stadium naming rights, plus additional income (compared to now) from a variety of other commercial/sponsorship deals … so all in all £100m is a conservative figure.
Click to expand...
The club also estimated the stadium would be complete on time. What makes those figures conservative? Where does this likely £2m come from and what are these events?
 
acnumber9 said:
The club also estimated the stadium would be complete on time. What makes those figures conservative? Where does this likely £2m come from and what are these events?
Click to expand...

Delays in a major construction project like this are not unusual, particularly when a ground-breaking new design is involved. This is not really comparable to financial projections. Considering that our last match at White Hart Lane was only 15 or so months ago, it's quite remarkable that we're as close to completion as we are.

Two of other events will be NFL games, the others a variety of non-physical-sports events - e.g. rock concerts, e-sports tournaments (big e-sports events regularly attract crowds of 50,000-plus in the US, Germany, Poland and across Asia) and the like.

Spurs might realistically generate up to £2.5m from ticket sales per event, with 50,000 'normal' tickets at up to £30 and the balance sold as high-priced corporate seats. We could also generate between £500,000-£1m per event from sponsorship deals, catering and merchandise sales, plus additional commercial spin-offs.
 
acnumber9 said:
Could you break that £100m down for us in realistic numbers? It’s a great headline figure and all that but where does it actually come from? Their ambitious hopes for world record naming deals yet to be secured?
Click to expand...

It's based on increases in match day revenue of over £60m (I'd say it'll be closer to £50m), stadium naming rights which they valued at £20m annually (my view is it'll be around £75-100m over 10 years but will be front loaded to pay down their debt) plus £20m in instant commercial upgrades, of which I'd say they might get £5-10m if they're lucky.

Therefore in my view the instant £100m is more likely to be under £70m.

Almost all of that extra revenue will be taken up by interest payments and the increase in their wage bill as a result of their recent flurry of contract renewals.

In terms of big increases in annual transfer spend or further wage increases (to compete with even Arsenal for example) I don't believe Spurs will see the benefit for a decade. In the case of Arsenal the river of commercial money that they predicted never really came.

For example Arsenal's commercial revenue growth has been £69m since 2009 to £117m. United's has grown £206m to £276m without a shiny new stadium.

Considering Levy's inability to make Spurs an attractive commercial proposition until now (a pitiful growth since 2009 from £44m to £73m), I'm confused as to why people think it'll all change.
 
GlastonSpur said:
Delays in a major construction project like are not unusual, particularly when a ground-breaking new design is involved. This is not really comparable to financial projections. Considering that our last match at White Hart Lane was only 15 or so months ago, it's quite remarkable that we're as close to completion as we are.

Two of other events will be NFL games, the others a variety of non-physical-sports events - e.g. rock concerts, e-sports tournaments (big e-sports events regularly attract crowds of 50,000-plus in the US, Germany, Poland and across Asia) and the like.

Spurs might realistically generate up to £2.5m from ticket sales per event, with 50,000 'normal' tickets at up to £30 and the balance sold as high-priced corporate seats. We could also generate between £500,000-£1m per event from sponsorship deals, catering and merchandise sales, plus additional commercial spin-offs.
Click to expand...
So Spurs themselves are staging these events and taking all the profits? There’s no costs involved in staging them and the rock stars are playing for free? Where do you pluck all these figures from? Bloggers?
 
finneh said:
It's based on increases in match day revenue of over £60m (I'd say it'll be closer to £50m), stadium naming rights which they valued at £20m annually (my view is it'll be around £75-100m over 10 years but will be front loaded to pay down their debt) plus £20m in instant commercial upgrades, of which I'd say they might get £5-10m if they're lucky.

Therefore in my view the instant £100m is more likely to be under £70m.

Almost all of that extra revenue will be taken up by interest payments and the increase in their wage bill as a result of their recent flurry of contract renewals.

In terms of big increases in annual transfer spend or further wage increases (to compete with even Arsenal for example) I don't believe Spurs will see the benefit for a decade. In the case of Arsenal the river of commercial money that they predicted never really came.

For example Arsenal's commercial revenue growth has been £69m since 2009 to £117m. United's has grown £206m to £276m without a shiny new stadium.

Considering Levy's inability to make Spurs an attractive commercial proposition until now (a pitiful growth since 2009 from £44m to £73m), I'm confused as to why people think it'll all change.
Click to expand...
It’s all best case scenario stuff with no consideration of costs. And apparently Tottenham are now an entertainment promoter rather than just a potential venue.
 
acnumber9 said:
So Spurs themselves are staging these events and taking all the profits? There’s no costs involved in staging them and the rock stars are playing for free? Where do you pluck all these figures from? Bloggers?
Click to expand...

We were discussing additional income - not profit - were we not? And of course each event will involve costs.

Some of the figures come from Donna Cullen, our communications director. For example: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-4503354/Tottenham-cash-video-games.html

Of course Spurs will be involved in staging these events - it's our stadium after all - alongside the organisers of each event. The details will obviously vary according to event-type, but for all events I imagine we'll be charging a fee for stadium use and/or taking a percentage of ticket-sales, plus a cut of the sales-income for food and drink etc.
 
acnumber9 said:
It’s all best case scenario stuff with no consideration of costs. And apparently Tottenham are now an entertainment promoter rather than just a potential venue.
Click to expand...

As I said above, we were discussing extra income, not profits. And yes, Spurs will be promoting their stadium as a venue for these other types of entertainment events. The degree to which we'll be involved in promoting each individual event remains to be seen.
 
finneh said:
It's based on increases in match day revenue of over £60m (I'd say it'll be closer to £50m), stadium naming rights which they valued at £20m annually (my view is it'll be around £75-100m over 10 years but will be front loaded to pay down their debt) plus £20m in instant commercial upgrades, of which I'd say they might get £5-10m if they're lucky.

Therefore in my view the instant £100m is more likely to be under £70m.

… .
Click to expand...

Even if we take your estimates as correct (a big IF), you've ignored everything I've said about the other, non-football events at the stadium. It's been designed as multi-purpose stadium for a reason ...
 
GlastonSpur said:
We were discussing additional income - not profit - were we not? And of course each event will involve costs.

Some of the figures come from Donna Cullen, our communications director. For example: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-4503354/Tottenham-cash-video-games.html

Of course Spurs will be involved in staging these events - it's our stadium after all - alongside the organisers of each event. The details will obviously vary according to event-type, but for all events I imagine we'll be charging a fee for stadium use and/or taking a percentage of ticket-sales, plus a cut of the sales-income for food and drink etc.
Click to expand...
The figures don’t come from Donna Cullen, they come from the speculative article discussing an unproven U.K. market predicating on hopes. The figures don’t seem to take into account any expenses or the fact that the people actually running or involved in the e-sports event will likely be taking the lions share of ticket sales. Venues tend to take most of their money from the associated sales in drinks and food.

Additional income is great and all but it’s not really seeing the bigger picture is it? Having an extra £100m income isn’t all that if much of it is swallowed up in extra expenses. On its own it is not an important number.
 
Rouge McDuck said:
Extra over WHL? That would make your match day income the highest in the land?

That’s quite something.
Click to expand...

If true, would that be so surprising? For starters we'll have 2nd highest capacity in the Prem. Then the ticket prices have been bumped up a lot compared to WHL. Plus the corporate facilities will be top-notch. And finally it's been designed to attract fans for a day-out experience, rather than just turning up shortly before kick-off and leaving soon after.
 
GlastonSpur said:
As I said above, we were discussing extra income, not profits. And yes, Spurs will be promoting their stadium as a venue for these other types of entertainment events. The degree to which we'll be involved in promoting each individual event remains to be seen.
Click to expand...
It does remain to be seen. Which is why continually spouting £100m in increased revenue as fact is pretty stupid. Especially when a few months ago you were stating as fact that the stadium would not be delayed.
 
acnumber9 said:
The figures don’t come from Donna Cullen, they come from the speculative article discussing an unproven U.K. market predicating on hopes. The figures don’t seem to take into account any expenses or the fact that the people actually running or involved in the e-sports event will likely be taking the lions share of ticket sales. Venues tend to take most of their money from the associated sales in drinks and food.

Additional income is great and all but it’s not really seeing the bigger picture is it? Having an extra £100m income isn’t all that if much of it is swallowed up in extra expenses. On its own it is not an important number.
Click to expand...

Well, the article cites an address by Donna Cullen to a business sports conference, so we can assume that she provided some facts and figures can we not?

And yes, of course an extra £100m income is not an extra £100m profit, far from it. But it was income that we were discussing.

A discussion of profits is a different discussion. But considering that Spurs are already one of the most profitable clubs in the Prem, it's hardly a stretch to imagine that with an extra £100m income our profits will continue to be healthy.
 
GlastonSpur said:
Even if we take your estimates as correct (a big IF), you've ignored everything I've said about the other, non-football events at the stadium. It's been designed as multi-purpose stadium for a reason ...
Click to expand...

That was included in my £5-10m figure:
of which I'd say they might get £5-10m if they're lucky.
Click to expand...
 
acnumber9 said:
It does remain to be seen. Which is why continually spouting £100m in increased revenue as fact is pretty stupid. Especially when a few months ago you were stating as fact that the stadium would not be delayed.
Click to expand...

I was asked to provide figures to back up the £100m claim. I've done that … and IMO shown that £100m is a conservative estimate.

As for the stadium delay, that has no bearing on projected annual income once it opens, and, moreover, neither I nor anyone else can forsee in advance a feck-up from one of the sub-contactors concerning the wiring for the fire-safety system.
 
GlastonSpur said:
Well, the article cites an address by Donna Cullen to a business sports conference, so we can assume that she provided some facts and figures can we not?

And yes, of course an extra £100m income is not an extra £100m profit, far from it. But it was income that we were discussing.

A discussion of profits is a different discussion. But considering that Spurs are already one of the most profitable clubs in the Prem, it's hardly a stretch to imagine that with an extra £100m income our profits will continue to be healthy.
Click to expand...
Strange they quoted her but didn’t quote any figure from her then. It’s just another maybe that you’re talking of as fact.

You’re the one who bums and blows about net spend but for some reason net profit isn’t important when spouting this £100m income. It means nothing on its own.
 
GlastonSpur said:
I was asked to provide figures to back up the £100m claim. I've done that … and IMO shown that £100m is a conservative estimate.

As for the stadium delay, that has no bearing on projected annual income once it opens, and, moreover, neither I nor anyone else can forsee in advance a feck-up from one of the sub-contactors concerning the wiring for the fire-safety system.
Click to expand...
You’ve provided speculation from the Daily Mail that hosting e-sports is going to gain £3m per event. One, Spurs haven no agreement to host e-sports yet and two, the figures are hugely optimistic and based on Spurs themselves being the primary profiters from these event and three, they’re getting all the tickets sales. Forgive me if I won’t take that as gospel. Venue’s get a fee for hosting. They don’t get all the ticket sales or anything close to it.

It has a bearing on how reliable you are with things you state as fact. All things that portray Spurs in the best light and your incredible bias is easy to poke holes in. You swallow anything the club tells you.
 
GlastonSpur said:
£5-10m income from 16 big events? A maximum of £625k income per event? Righty-ho.
Click to expand...

Let me guess it'll be millions per event?

The millions that are leading all other clubs to renovate their stadiums in order to hold these incredibly lucrative but strangely untapped pots of gold?
 
VeevaVee said:
I've not been following this so don't know what's known but my mate works for ADT and is cracking up that they've wired the entire stadium wrong.
Click to expand...
Have heard the same thing....
 
acnumber9 said:
Strange they quoted her but didn’t quote any figure from her then. It’s just another maybe that you’re talking of as fact.

You’re the one who bums and blows about net spend but but for some reason net profit isn’t important when spouting this £100m income. It means nothing on its own.
Click to expand...

I agree that £100m extra income means nothing on its own. And nor have I said that net profit isn't important - that's your invention.

But for the nth time, we were actually discussing income and not profit. If you now want to switch ground onto profits - and then predict dire times ahead for Spurs on this front, then good luck to you.

As for e-sports events - Google itself yourself if you like. You'll discover that they are big and likely to get even bigger.

As I've said before, some people don't realise how ground-breaking and unique our new stadium is going to be as far as club football stadiums in the UK are concerned. And so some people have not yet twigged what a game-changer it's going to be for Spurs financially.
 
Last edited:
finneh said:
Let me guess it'll be millions per event?

The millions that are leading all other clubs to renovate their stadiums in order to hold these incredibly lucrative but strangely untapped pots of gold?
Click to expand...

I've already given some figures.

As for the rest, they would if they could, but they can't, because it'd go far beyond mere 'renovation'. The other stadiums are simply not designed to be multi-use and multi-purpose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.