Communication is a factor raised by Spurs fans.However,a lot of owners/chairmen don't speak either.Eg MU Liverpool Chelsea (under Abramovich) Arsenal
When it's combined with a lack of success it's exacerbated. It's easier to put the fact the owners or chairman rarely communicate with the fans when silverware is coming through the door, hence why it's not really been an issue for Liverpool or Chelsea under the Oligarch, or even United early in the ownership of the Glazers. Combine it with a dusty trophy cabinet and things are different.
# I think engagement might be the better word, rather than communication as such. I don't think anyone thinks chairman have to come out and do an open Q and A with fans but I think there are times when it's beneficial for there to be dialogue between the club and fans for the two to have a good relationship. https://thstofficial.com/trust-statement-on-the-departure-of-daniel-levy/ The supporters trust mentioned it in their statement today but sometimes you avoid a backlash to things such as the Super League or furloughing staff by actually engaging with the fans prior to making those decisions. They were two accepted mistakes by the club that they reversed based on feedback from the supporters. If you have a good relationship with your fans then you avoid even making those mistakes to begin with. I can't speak for all of those clubs but @Pagnell rightly makes the point that results do large dictate some of the feeling towards the club, it's why the relationship between fan and club was better during the Pochettino years. Either side of Pochettino there's been a lot of ill-feeling towards ENIC which has peaked in the past 12 months. Returning to those clubs you mention - from the outside Liverpool appear to have decent dialogue with supporter groups such as 'Spirit of Shankly' or whoever. That doesn't mean the fans are always in agreement but my perception is there is good dialogue between Liverpool and their fans that maintains a good relationship there. When that relationship has broken down Liverpool have also protested against their ownership such as during the Hicks/Gillett years. Chelsea's supporters trust are currently lobbying the Premier League to take action against their current owner because of the ticket-tout scandal he's involved in. Manchester United have repeatedly protested against their ownership and Arsenal's relationship has been up-and-down until recent years where again results have largely been positive. None of those are really great examples to argue Levy shouldn't have had better communication / engagement with the fans.
None of those are really great examples to argue Levy shouldn't have had better communication / engagement with the fans. I wasn't arguing for that at all.I agree that he should have engaged more.
as I was opening the thread to see "the latest on..." occurs to me the saying "be careful what you wish for", no saying the next man will be an improvement, I'm unconvinced he was the problem, think spuds are what they always have been and maybe always will be, good team that's never been elite for a sustained period and just profited (if that's the best wording) from an era where the haves (money) sat up the top end and the have nots didn't and they were the back of the pack and a bit behind the haves and more consistent, at times, than the rest I mean who expected them to win league titles or cups all the time? (outside of their own fanbase, and even then some not all) Who outside of the rest of the "big six" had or spent the money or had the players to be more consistent than them? A lot of the clubs in the league came up, some settled and stayed for periods, we're on a rotation of sorts but in the past haven't Sunderland, Bolton, Charlatans, boro, and others come up and stayed a while.....? not hard for spuds to be a biggish fish under those conditions
Spurs had a net spend on transfers in the top 5 I believe in the past 5 years.The issue for them is that they don't pay high wages compared to others.At one point salaries were 40% odd of revenue which is low compared to other sides. Yep some teams had decent stints in the PL like the clubs you have mentioned.Some have even stayed like Brentford.
Vinai’s a good egg but he was a part of a group effort at the rebuilding of Arsenal, not the sole guy. He’ll need good people round him.
If you look at the money. 2. Man city (dodgy) 4. Man utd (despite it all) 7. Arsenal 8. Lfc. 9. Spurs 10. Chelsea. (Losses due to no Europe) 15.Newcastle (over half that of spurs,60%) 17. West ham. 18. Villa. 21. Brighton (less than half that of spurs~40%) For contect Brighton made more than napoli. Spurs are one of the 10 richest clubs on the planet. In that context they are massively under performing but they are competing with 5 of the top 10.other richest clubs The difference is some of those 5 try to win every comp. Spurs have simply not looked interested in the cups and that can no longer wash (imo)
Statement regarding media speculation | Tottenham Hotspur I think Tottenham are set to enter a very destabalising and turbulent time. For all the things Levy did or didn't do, the one thing he was was stability. ENIC can say no sale all they want.....no smoke without fire and all that. The Kroenkes went through this with Daniel Ek and they just knuckled down and focused on making the club more valuable. Let's see if ENIC do the same. That said, I can't recall a statement ever being released by Arsenal.
If a bottom feeder like Staveley is sniffing round you.really could be in a mess in 2 years time. Every "project" she has touched has been poor as its done to get someone with zero football interest into ownership without any football structures. She is a pure link person with zero interest in success after thst link is made.
Spurs are a publicly listed company, so they have to issue a statement in order to comply with the UK's Takeover Code (hence all the references to rule 2.6, 2.7 etc.). I could be wrong but Arsenal weren't publicly listed when Daniel Ek was sniffing round them so there was no requirement to issue a similar statement.
