Eller også kaldet "Hvorfor bruger vi ikke flere penge på transfers og lønninger?".
Jeg kan personlig ikke sige det bedre end denne fyr på FB:
What is net spend, when did it become important and why is it now a negative. 5 years ago it was never mentioned. 2 years ago it was a positive. Now it's a negative.
Everyone who talks about Spurs - fans, media, opposition - all talk about the improvements at Spurs in recent years. Something seems to have clicked and its put down to Poch but evidence was there before. We were the also rans for years, that team who might have a chance at destabilising the top 4 if they could put a run together and big players perform.
Then we stuck our elbow out and forced our way in amongst the big boys and EVERYONE loved it. We were playing amazing football and we weren't doing it with oil money. Media were tripling over themselves to laud praise on us for 'doing it the right way' and showing football hadn't quite sold it's soul yet. It was about finding good, young, hungry players who loved the game and all had the right attitude - not about buying players so that no one else could. Players who didn't make the grade were moved on for good money because of Levy.
I remember when Pogba moved and there was talk of how you could buy a whole Spurs 1st 11 for that money and these clubs should work harder rather than just throw money at a problem.
But then media got bored. We finished 2nd to Chelsea (although above the other money teams) and they decided to ignore all facts about turnover, transfer spend, player sales, off pitch investment and most importantly profit. All of a sudden we finished 2nd because of NET SPEND. All the stories were about wage caps and budgets. All those things that had us pinned as doing it the right way were now flipped 180 to be negative.
In 5 years we've got the 2nd lowest net spend behind Swansea
Players at West Ham/Everton/Newcastle earn more than our players.
It apparently doesn't matter that we have the 6th highest turnover over that 5 year period and the 5th highest transfer spend
Or that we have the 6th highest wage spend.
The media simply look through the figures, pick out the ones they like the look of and ignore the rest - and our own fans lap it up.
Yes other teams pay higher wages but other teams have much larger revenue streams if you have a look through available figures Man U bring in nearly 5x as much per season. Liverpool and Arsenal bring in double. So when we're interested in a player buy he earns 40% more elsewhere it's not overly surprising. Agents are what we offer tell other clubs who simply offer more because the agent doesn't want what's best for his player, he wants the biggest deal.
I'm not a levy fan-boy. I couldn't give a shit about the bloke. I don't know him. What I do know is that he runs my club very well, the improvements we've made are huge and for the mistakes he has made he has got a lot right. I support him for the work he's doing at my club and will do as long as I feel he's doing a good job.
Next season will be the one. We've been told that the stadium won't affect transfers. We've been told new budgets are in place relative to the new turnover. If we start selling our best players and not reinvesting, if were still talking about leading prem players earning £50k a week then we can ask questions but in the last 5 years when turnover has increased he has increased wages and reinvested in the club.
Tv money and everything else is unimportant. Look at the figures. ENIC do not draw funds on their investment. It all goes back into the club. We aren't sitting on a huge nest egg, we've paid off loads of debt, invested in infrastructure that will help increase turnover because THEN you can go out and get the big players and pay the big wages.
Fint inspark som bliver komisk når skribenten skriver således:
"Tv money and everything else is unimportant"
Selvfølgelig tjener ENIC penge på klubben, mit bud er de tjener rigtig meget. At de investere mange penge i alt det rundt om 1 holdet er super fantastisk og det skal vi være glade for.
Der er mange faktorer når vi debattere økonomi, men at sige tv penge ikke er en faktor er jo decideret løgn. Det er også en faktor at vi har solgt spillere for ufattelig mange penge.
Det er også en faktor at vi har hentet den ene uduelige spiller efter den anden. Det er årsagen til vi kun kan levere hvis de 11-12 bedste spiller hver eneste kamp.
Jeg er bestemt ikke tilfreds med at Poch i pressen melder ud at vores unge spillere ikke kan få chancen fordi 1 holdet er ih åh så fantastisk og vi kan ikke hente spillere fordi det praktisk talt er umuligt og "det må vi jo forstå". Jeg spurgte i forside boksen, men ingen har kunne (ville) svare. Det ville være interessant at hører hvorfor det hænger sammen på den måde og det ville være interessant at hører hvorfor at det øjensyndligt intet betyder, for nogen fans, at Net spend er så lav som den er.
Kim