Unexpected Transfer Talk

Unexpected Transfer Talk

Tottenham Hotspur Blog News (THBN) brings you something different every now and then apart from the sensible analysis of transfer stories, be they press fabricated, inaccurately reported or simply lazy journalism.

That probably why I have now amassed over 23m article views so you may want to return regularly and use whatever method you use to inform you when a new article has been posted.

Journalist know jack about tactics and the mental side of the game. They know about writing, football is the hobby they are writing about that's all.

Quite frankly, neither do most fans who have learned from the park on a Saturday afternoon or Sunday morning, that couldn't be further from the reality of professional sport.

During the early part of the build, I regularly brought news from Skyscraper City, a construction forum and news of events surrounding our groundsman and his purchases, such as lawn mowers.

It all alleviated the tensions around when you could take a light-hearted look at something different, something everyone wasn't trying to be the first to bring you, as opposed to bringing something to you accurately and with though as to how it related to our business and policies at that stage of our evolution.


I think that has been forgotten by many who can still only see in black and white and are stuck in the past.

The club had to grow, it had to be built because an owner can not pay for players and wages under Financial Fair Play, it would result in a European ban. AC Milan, Manchester City and PSG could all be looking at bans at some point, but they won't be severe enough in my view.

When you have built the business to a point where you can sustain players wages, then you have an opportunity to invest in the team.

Now, Spurs, and that includes Pochettino, chose not to buy when we couldn't get the players we wanted last summer and the January window isn't a time clubs release players so you are never going to buy more than one notable player, if that.

Spurs could have bought lesser players, but that may well have prevented the club buying better players this summer. It could well have cut our nose to spite our face.

By keeping our powder dry, we are in a far stronger position this window to go for players of a higher quality than we have before. We are looking a top young talent around the world and not accepting make do players.

We do not have to sell to buy.
We have non-homegrown places available.
We have a larger transfer budget.
We have a greater wages budget.

We can only have 17 in a Premier League squad, any others can't play in the Premier League unless they are 21 or under on January 1st.

Transfer fees are paid annually in set amounts over the term of an initial contract generally. You subtract what you pay out in fee from what you receive in fees and that goes a long way to determining what you have left annually to spend on transfers, thus, Spurs not spending for a season obviously improves that equation and puts us in a healthy position.

A fans and journalists way of looking at things, a club pays £X for a player and sells him for less thus makes a loss, isn't how clubs and accountants do their sums. A player costs a club a set amount per year and his value decreases with each year he runs down his contract.

If he improves or the market changes, as it has done over the last 3 years then his transfer (asset) value may rise, but if a player is sold after a few years where his value hasn't increased then Daniel Levy, like all chairmen, try to get back, at least what he would cost the club if they kept him.

Let's look at the scenario in a rudimentary way.

Vincent Janssen
Costs
£17m over a 4-year term divided by 4 = £4.25m
£35,000-a-week wages = £1.82m annually
Very roughly then, Janssen costs Spurs £6.07m annually

Income
Fenerbache loan fee was £2.25m plus they pay his wages for a season so he only cost the club £2m that season. We won't get into depreciation.

He has one year left on his contract so will cost Tottenham £6.07m and Daniel Levy is asking for between £7.14m and £8.03m for him, which covers our costs for another year.

Don't forget, if we sell him, the remainder of his wages for the length of his contract are down to us, he is fully entitled to them as it is not the player who has decided to leave. We may well have to pay him that years wages when he departs.

Very basically, that is why we can't just sell him for anything. If you kept doing that all the time and kept overpaying for players or paying vast wages without income, you'd soon get yourself in a pickle and that would affect our future transfer business, which you would then all bleat about again.

Well, that wasn't going to be the topic of this post, I was going to send you a link to read about Tottenham Hotspur's Smart Pitch Management System, well I did say you get something different!

It morphed as I was writing into an unexpected transfer talk on fees.

Tottenham's Smart Pitch Management System

---

---