 |
| “Are Tottenham more valuable when we don’t win trophies?” — A provocative question posed by Tottenham Hotspur Blog News on the true value of success. |
A post for the toxics to bask in.
This is the real question behind everything going on.
Let’s answer it directly, then explore the logic in layers.
Tottenham Hotspur have just won the UEFA Europa League.
Seventeen years without silverware — and now, finally, a trophy.
But 2 weeks later, the man who delivered it — Ange Postecoglou — has gone.
No thank you to Daniel Levy.
No mention of the board.
Just a short farewell to the fans… and silence where the gratitude usually goes.
If you missed it, here’s yesterday’s deep dive into why Ange Postecoglou’s sacking might say more about Spurs’ long-term direction than it does about results.
Now reports suggest Spurs are turning to Thomas Frank — a respected manager, yes, but not one associated with silverware.
So what’s really going on?
Because this isn’t just about football anymore.
It’s about money, strategy, and the value of perception.
Is Tottenham Hotspur actually a better investment when we don’t win trophies or when we do?
And could the business model under Daniel Levy be designed to keep the club forever close… but never quite there?
Read on.
🔥 Is Tottenham Hotspur a better investment if it does not win trophies regularly?
Yes — potentially.
From a pure investment perspective, not winning trophies but always having the potential to can be more attractive to certain types of buyers and investors than regularly winning.
💼 Why?
Here’s the business logic:
1. Expectation Sells Better Than Satisfaction
-
If Spurs regularly win, then they have “arrived” — the growth curve flattens.
-
A buyer comes in asking: “What’s left to improve and grow?”
-
But if Spurs almost win, or get close every year…
-
A buyer can pitch themselves as the missing link.
-
This inflates the sense of potential upside without having to sustain the costs of winning.
-
Daniel Levy may be unintentionally (or strategically) keeping the club in a permanent state of “nearly” — because it maintains hunger, excitement, and resale potential.
2. Trophies Cost Money
-
Consistently winning trophies usually means:
-
Paying higher wages
-
Hiring elite managers
-
Bigger transfer budgets
-
Accepting higher risk (financial and sporting)
-
-
Investors prefer lower-risk assets with controlled costs and predictable revenues.
-
Spurs under Levy has been a masterclass in cost control, wage efficiency, and brand growth — all without the expense of trophies.
3. Global Brand Growth Isn’t Dependent on Trophies
-
Spurs are in London.
-
They have a world-class stadium.
-
They’re in the Premier League (which prints money).
-
They’ve had stars (Kane, Son), and a progressive playing style.
Many global fans support clubs that don’t win — because they’re exciting, historic, or promising. Spurs fit that perfectly.
4. Scarcity Value of the First Trophy
-
The longer you wait, the more hype builds around “ending the drought.”
-
That moment — like winning the Premier League for the first time — becomes priceless.
-
But if Spurs win a League Cup every 2 years, the mystique fades.
-
From an investment perspective, scarcity increases narrative value.
 |
| “So is Daniel Levy avoiding trophies?” — A bold question from Tottenham Hotspur Blog News, probing the deeper motives behind Spurs’ business strategy. |
🧠 So is Daniel Levy avoiding trophies?
Not necessarily deliberately… but:
-
He may prioritise sustainable financial growth and control over the higher-risk, high-cost trophy chase.
-
His model has created a high-value club without the instability that comes with hiring/firing superstar managers and buying 30-year-old winners.
-
“The goal for Thomas Frank is to qualify for the Top Four in the Premier League and make it to the R16 in the UEFA Champions League (UCL).” This is what you get when you protest to get a serial winner with a winning mentality out of your club because you want more points first and foremost. So don’t complain, it’s what you toxics asked for.
🤔 But what if Tottenham Hotspur did win regularly?
It wouldn’t be bad — but the business would change:
-
Costs go up.
-
Fan expectations rise permanently.
-
Every failure becomes a crisis (see Man United).
-
The club moves from “asset with potential” to “mature business with pressure.”
In short:
-
Winning clubs become harder to run.
-
Non-winning clubs with potential are easier to sell.
🧨 Final Verdict
| Scenario | Investor Appeal |
|---|---|
| ⚽️ Wins Regularly | Prestige, global status, but higher costs/expectations |
| ⌛ Doesn’t Win, Always Close | More flexible, cheaper to run, massive potential upside for the next buyer |
Tottenham Hotspur, right now, is the golden goose — not laying trophies, but still laying profits and dreams.
COYS
Disclaimer: This is a debate piece that does not necessarily reflect my personal views
Coming up tomorrow: Takeover Talk Part 2: Is Tottenham Hotspur built to win trophies… or built to be sold at peak perception value?
