Spurs £175mil Covid loan

Status
Not open for further replies.
Arcland said:
The treasury has the power to set the terms of the lending, that is true. However, that does not mean that the treasury are "funding" the lending.

It is a joint "scheme" as in the BoE funds it all and the Treasury acts in an advisory/management capacity - this still does not mean that the Treasury are "funding" anything. Having a legal oversight over a "fund" does not mean that you have "funded" it. So your description of it as a "joint fund" seems to make you believe the Treasury is funding it in some way.

People tend to think of the term "public funds" as monies raised through taxation held by the treasury.

When the bank of England raises these funds (to lend), they do not pay them to the treasury, the treasury does not hold them, even if they were temporarily paid to the Treasury they still cannot be thought of as public funds as they were not raised through taxation. The Treasury simply has control, not possession over these funds. It is good governance that the treasury has control but not possession. It's like the process of independent auditors auditing SAFC's accounts.

The only way that an arrangement like this could affect the taxpayer would be tax revenues needing to rise in the future to pay the interest on the Gilts. However, that does not apply in this case.
Click to expand...
You’re being deliberately obtuse I’m afraid. Maybe my use of the word “taxpayer” was too broad, or are you really saying that this isn’t state funding?

Because you can’t really disassociate the state from the people that contribute to it.

Or we could just solve all of our issues, get the BOE to issue infinite debt.
HeroHurley said:
I thought City got done for the Sponsors (which was basically the owners) pumping money in? On what basis can the owners of THS transfer the money onto Spurs books? Surely the upkeep/financing the debt on the stadium is directly the responsibility of THS (the company). It has no need to go onto Spurs books. Unless I'm understanding the whole thing wrong which I quite easily could be.
Click to expand...
You’re correct on City, but it’s the same principle. I’m saying that FFP, both companies would be looked at
 
Last edited:


Row 3 said:
Banks would be mental to lend money to third tier clubs without knowing when spectators will be allowed back.
Click to expand...
That would be similar to paying for something that you couldn’t guarantee receiving, who would be daft enough to do that?
 
chunkylover53 said:
You’re being deliberately obtuse I’m afraid. Maybe my use of the word “taxpayer” was too broad, or are you really saying that this isn’t state funding?

Because you can’t really disassociate the state from the people that contribute to it.

Or we could just solve all of our issues, get the BOE to issue infinite debt.

You’re correct on City, but it’s the same principle. I’m saying that FFP, both companies would be looked at
Click to expand...

I understand the bit on City being investigated for the Sponsors pumping money in and they'll obviously be ruled on that but in the case of Spurs, the money shouldn't really be going near the club accounts so if investigated then it would surely be a much bigger breach of financial rules?
 
chunkylover53 said:
You’re being deliberately obtuse I’m afraid. Maybe my use of the word “taxpayer” was too broad, or are you really saying that this isn’t state funding?

Because you can’t really disassociate the state from the people that contribute to it.

Or we could just solve all of our issues, get the BOE to issue infinite debt.

Of course it is state funding as it is borrowing by the state on behalf of the people, but it is not taxpayer funded.

"Because you can’t really disassociate the state from the people that contribute to it". I am not as in this instance the people are not contributing to it. Just because the state raises finance does not automatically equal the taxpayer is contributing.

It may have slipped your notice but the BoE has been issuing loads of debt and as real interest rates are currently negative, we can actually just keep issuing more.
Click to expand...
 
chunkylover53 said:
Will be to finance the debt on the stadium, they will have put it in that entity

the FFP angle is interesting, but there is some sort of look through (hence City getting done)
Click to expand...

Stadium or infrastructure spending doesn’t count towards FFP, and if some of that money is going to be used towards paying off the stadium loan then it would obviously then release money that could then be spent on wages and transfers from the clubs annual revenue streams, Daniel Levy and Joe Lewis aren’t silly and they won’t usually miss a trick where finances are concerned.

I can vouch for that fact, when my family normally have to pay out for 5 season tickets around this time of the year, the fact that Spurs charge more than any other club in the world for their season tickets says all you need to know regarding our owners financial greed, and taking full advantage of the supply and demand for our tickets.

Oh and I can assure you that Spurs owners are not stupid enough to break any current FFP rules with this loan.
 
Last edited:
EssexYid said:
Stadium or infrastructure spending doesn’t count towards FFP, and if some of that money is going to be used towards paying off the stadium loan then it would obviously then release money that could then be spent on wages and transfers from the clubs annual revenue streams, Daniel Levy and Joe Lewis aren’t silly and they won’t usually miss a trick where finances are concerned.

I can vouch for that fact, when my family normally have to pay out for 5 season tickets around this time of the year, the fact that Spurs charge more than any other club in the world for their season tickets says all you need to know regarding our owners financial greed, and taking full advantage of the supply and demand for our tickets.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. I wasn’t implying there was anything remotely odd about that anyway
 
chunkylover53 said:
Fair enough. I wasn’t implying there was anything remotely odd about that anyway
Click to expand...

No but some others on this thread clearly were inferring that might be the case, Spurs owners are anything but stupid and as a club they have always been 100% in agreement with FFP, as it allows Spurs to hang on to the bigger richer clubs coat tails until they are fully up and running financially speaking, Spurs have already overtaken Chelsea and Arsenal regarding annual revenue and are one of the worlds most valuable clubs, and growing year on year.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Tottenham named Premier League's most valuable football club

Tottenham have been named the most valuable football club in the Premier League, according to an in-depth university study.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk
 
Arcland said:
...
To keep the maths simple, lets assume that all of the £300 billion in gilts are bought by one bank. That bank transfers £300 billion into the Bank of England and the Bank of England issues to them a Gilt certificate (usually irredeemable - meaning it never has to be paid back). The bank that bought it then receives an annual amount of interest each year at say 2% and this is paid by the bank of England each year unless it chooses to pay back the £300 billion, which it does not have to do.

So none of it comes from the taxpayer nor from the treasury, so I don't see how you think it is from public funds
Click to expand...
Where does the BoE get the extra 2% from to pay the interest?
 
EssexYid said:
No but some others on this thread clearly were inferring that might be the case, Spurs owners are anything but stupid and as a club they have always been 100% in agreement with FFP, as it allows Spurs to hang on to the bigger richer clubs coat tails until they are fully up and running financially speaking, Spurs have already overtaken Chelsea and Arsenal regarding annual revenue and are one of the worlds most valuable clubs, and growing year on year.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Tottenham named Premier League's most valuable football club

Tottenham have been named the most valuable football club in the Premier League, according to an in-depth university study.
www.dailymail.co.uk www.dailymail.co.uk
Click to expand...

I was genuinely not inferring that Spurs had done anything wrong and I repeat that now.

I was genuienly interested in the situation and if what I had laid out was the case. Apologies if I've offended.
 
EssexYid said:
Spurs have borrowed that money directly from the Bank of England, and will be paying it back at an interest rate of 0.5% it clearly isn’t costing the tax payer anything is it, Daniel Levy is simply borrowing that money because the interest rate is incredibly low and he will have seen it as an opportunity that was just too good to turn down.

Daniel Levy is fanatical and ruthless regarding finances and growing Spurs annual revenue year on year, and up until this point Spurs will have had no tangible problems with their finances taking into account their low interest long term stadium loan and the fact that their wage bill only accounts for 39% of their annual revenue which would have gone up to around £550m for this year under normal circumstances, but will now probably be around £500m or so now that they have lost income from the current coronavirus events.

Daniel Levy is simply safeguarding Spurs financial well being in the long term, in case fans are denied access to the stadium for an extended length of time, which if the case would eventually start to bite Spurs financially, just as it would any other club.
Click to expand...
Actually it does cost the taxpayers. If that loan would have been made in more stable times the interest rate would have been a more traditional one not the free money rate. As a multi million dollar business he should be thinking of the mom and pop shops underneath. There’s some real grassroots businesses that are going to fail and he and the likes of him will be ok because they have a permanent seat at the table. He can afford the going rate.
Loaf under each arm and crying for help. wtf
 
Oh come on, spurs are owened by Joe Lewis who lives in a tax haven and is worth over £1 billion pounds.

Anyone can see why they have needed to take the loan out......
 
HeroHurley said:
I was genuinely not inferring that Spurs had done anything wrong and I repeat that now.

I was genuienly interested in the situation and if what I had laid out was the case. Apologies if I've offended.
Click to expand...

No problem mate, I was only stating what I think might be the case, and believe me I am confident in saying that Spurs won’t be needing that money for wages or for the day to day running of the club anytime soon, maybe they are just future proofing their financial future in case the stadium has to stay empty for a much longer time than can currently be envisaged only the owners will know the truth of the matter.

The 0.5% interest rate alone will have instantly attracted Levy and Lewis like a fly around a cows arse hole :lol:
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top