So.............?

[baldbloke]

[/quote]

It's very frustrating when someone won't listen to sense, and has an argument based on what he would like to happen, rather than strategic application.
[/quote]

Yes accepting that others do not agree with your viewpoint can be frustrating. Particularly, when for you it all seems so clear. But you have to remember that A-another will also be feeling the same way. Telling someone what to think does not work. Putting your views out there in a way that is less forthright will allow others the chance to acknowledge what you have said and then decide if they agree with it or not.

Unfortunately some will still try and create opposition to it or are so introverted and closed, that whenever someone else suggests something outside of their own world view, they put up defences to block it out, even when faced with truth.

To give an example outside of football. Look at racism - it is a stupid idea, we are all the same and there is no reason why one human being should be considered better than another based on something as ridiculous as the pigment contained in someone's skin. Yet, talk to someone from a nazi belief system and you could argue all day but I doubt that anyone would have much luck changing their perceptions. Even if you kept saying the same things to them, which were considered to be the truth, it would not impact on the way they thought.

If you want to go deeper still, everything that we discuss on here is through the use of our conscious minds. Which is great for having a discussion and using ideas and evidence etc. Our conscious minds think about the past and the future and works using our short term memory. But our belief systems are based in our sub-conscious minds which cannot be accessed easily in this way. It is based on the present moment but also uses our long term memory.

Which is why most people on here keep putting their views across to all that will hear them. But look through and find some examples when someone has actually changed their views. I would invite the opportunity for more of this to take place but it would require us to suspend our usual habits and to try and think differently around certain issues.
[/quote]

Well done. You just managed to post a really long statement, and I don't think I agreed with any of it.

[pieboy]

Yes buildings a new stadium in itself does not bring success , and whether not it brings in enough revenue to negate the cost of building one is more of an issue then ever as cost are ever increasing ( especially given the cost of land in London)

But simply to win titles you need money. Gate receipts is a major revenue stream, and we don't increase revenue it be difficult to compete with the rest.

The easy answer to this is to bring in a sugar daddy. The question then will be is who is in for that?

[baldbloke]

Yes buildings a new stadium in itself does not bring success , and whether not it brings in enough revenue to negate the cost of building one is more of an issue then ever as cost are ever increasing ( especially given the cost of land in London)

But simply to win titles you need money. Gate receipts is a major revenue stream, and we don't increase revenue it be difficult to compete with the rest.

The easy answer to this is to bring in a sugar daddy. The question then will be is who is in for that?

This is difficult. Firstly, I agree that we need cash to move forward, however my argument is that we will have less cash after a new stadium, rather than more. I also believe  that for the majority of games we will NOT fill it, and in some cases will be embarrassed by the turn out. Secondly, whilst a sugar daddy seams a good idea, do you really want Spurs to turn out to be another Chelsea or Man City, I don't. A chairman that is prepared to take a bit of a risk from time to time would do me nicely though !!

[dimexi]

This is difficult. Firstly, I agree that we need cash to move forward, however my argument is that we will have less cash after a new stadium, rather than more. I also believe  that for the majority of games we will NOT fill it, and in some cases will be embarrassed by the turn out. Secondly, whilst a sugar daddy seams a good idea, do you really want Spurs to turn out to be another Chelsea or Man City, I don't. A chairman that is prepared to take a bit of a risk from time to time would do me nicely though !!

I am not sure about the actual figures behind this one. As a businessman, Levy and the owners will not do anything that is bad economically for the club. However, the methods for obtaining that finance is debatable.

With regards to filling the stadium, I guess that would depend on current demand. You say that we do not always fill the stadium now, which may be true (i have not looked into the figures for this), but if it is true is it that there are not enough fans wanting to go to the game, or are the ticket prices costing them out of going. In the current climate spending £40 per week is a hell of a lot of money so many may only go once a month at the most. If this is the case, then having a new stadium with ticket prices the same, or more would mean empty seats.

Although it could work that the better seats are sold at the prices now, with a reduction for the other areas, meaning those that could not previously afford a ticket, will be willing to part with the cash. I am not sure on how the outcome will go with this. I just hope that whatever happens it is what is best for the team and the fans. If doing this also lines Levy and Co's pockets then I won't care, but if they look like they are robbing the fans blind and not putting the new revenue back into the club sufficiently then I will.

[Glenn R]

For God's sake, same story in every thread? Is it really necessary?

It's very frustrating when someone won't listen to sense, and has an argument based on what he would like to happen, rather than strategic application.

But what about you not listening to sense?

[baldbloke]

It's very frustrating when someone won't listen to sense, and has an argument based on what he would like to happen, rather than strategic application.
[/quote]

But what about you not listening to sense?
[/quote]

No mate, all my arguments are based on logic and sense, as I do not let emotiveness blur the discussion. If you could be bothered to read my posts regarding the stadium, you would see this. Your pro argument for the new stadium is based purely on bragging rights, because financially without a new owner, the entire prospect of a new stadium is barmy.

[spursjoolz]

No mate, all my arguments are based on logic and sense, as I do not let emotiveness blur the discussion. If you could be bothered to read my posts regarding the stadium, you would see this. Your pro argument for the new stadium is based purely on bragging rights, because financially without a new owner, the entire prospect of a new stadium is barmy.

I will disagree with you on many points but not this one.

The new stadium will cost an absolute fortune and without the guarantee of mega funds, it would cause long term financial damage which would effect players wages and consequently bringing in new players. Yet, we need it to move forward!

I can't see the board going ahead with this until every aspect is well covered.

[Glenn R]

It's very frustrating when someone won't listen to sense, and has an argument based on what he would like to happen, rather than strategic application.

But what about you not listening to sense?
[/quote]

No mate, all my arguments are based on logic and sense, as I do not let emotiveness blur the discussion. If you could be bothered to read my posts regarding the stadium, you would see this. Your pro argument for the new stadium is based purely on bragging rights, because financially without a new owner, the entire prospect of a new stadium is barmy.
[/quote]

I disagree. Your arguments are not based on "logic" and "sense" but based on hostility towards AJB and Levy; which clouds your judgment.

[Glenn R]

No mate, all my arguments are based on logic and sense, as I do not let emotiveness blur the discussion. If you could be bothered to read my posts regarding the stadium, you would see this. Your pro argument for the new stadium is based purely on bragging rights, because financially without a new owner, the entire prospect of a new stadium is barmy.

I will disagree with you on many points but not this one.

The new stadium will cost an absolute fortune and without the guarantee of mega funds, it would cause long term financial damage which would effect players wages and consequently bringing in new players. Yet, we need it to move forward!

I can't see the board going ahead with this until every aspect is well covered.

According to Levy all that has been covered. Whatever way you look at it I believe we need a new ground. A ground fit for the 21st century. Even though White Hart Lane has been modified it isn't fit for purpose.

[baldbloke]

I'm glad you trust Levy, because I would rather trust Tony Blair

[Glenn R]

I'm glad you trust Levy, because I would rather trust Tony Blair

It is not just a case of trusting him but all we have got and all we will have for some time. I agree that Levy has made some mistakes when appointing managers and cautious in the transfer market but he has stabilised the club and I also believe he wants what the fans want. At the same time we haven't got the cash that City, United or Chelsea have. That is another reason why we need a new club; to generate more cash.