Since Daniel Levy was appointed Tottenham chairman – initially on an interim basis – in 2000, football has changed beyond all recognition tactically, financially and culturally.
The longest-serving executive in the Premier League, the 63-year-old former investment banker has dragged Spurs into this new era. In fact, he is arguably one of the architects of the new paradigm, wherein clubs like Tottenham are seen increasingly as global entertainment brands.
Some things never change, however. One of the North London club’s former owners, Alan Sugar, once said that the money earned by Premier League clubs was like prune juice: in one end, out of the other. For every pound coin a club earns, it spends more on wages, transfer fees and other overheads.
For most clubs in 2025, that is still the case. Yet, at the Tottenham Hotspur Stadium – where revenue has almost doubled since the last season at White Hart Lane and will probably reach £650m in 2025-26 – business has been good and, crucially, self-sufficient. For the most part, at least.
Scarcely have Levy and ENIC put their own money into the club, instead investing countless man hours into scaling Spurs commercially in order to create the resources necessary to compete at the top end in English football and in Europe. Incidentally, it’s hard to overstate the influence of Son Heung-min, who is set to leave N17 for LAFC after a decade’s service, in that process. His superstardom in East Asia is emblematic of the club’s rise from domestic to international heavyweight status.
But many of the Spurs fans reading this might have noticed the absence of one crucial detail: football.
Last season’s miraculous Europa League triumph was the exception that proved the rule. Relative to their expenditure, Levy’s team has not won nearly enough on the pitch. Time will tell whether Thomas Frank, who will take charge of his first competitive match against Paris Saint-Germain in the UEFA Super Cup in a week’s time, is the man to banish their always-the-bridesmaid culture.
Yes, Spurs do have the Premier League’s lowest wages-to-turnover ratio. And yes, Levy’s occasionally miserly negotiating style has sometimes led to the club missing out on their biggest transfer targets. But the numbers don’t lie. A cursory look at their accounts reflects a club who, in gross and net terms, have spent more than almost anyone. And currently, Spurs are searching for external investment to be able to spend more, outpace the challenger clubs who are rapidly catching up, and rein in the rest of the so-called ‘Big Six’.
So, as a football man, it’s a D− for Levy’s leadership. But as a businessperson? It can only be an A*.
Perhaps that is why Spurs’ chairman is indignant about the impending independent regulator for English football. As far as he’s concerned, he doesn’t need any guidance or reprisals from a government-appointed body on how to run a commercially successful, sustainable institution.
The independent football regulator was one of the main discussion topics in Gary Neville’s recent interview with Levy for The Overlap.
“We’re going through a period of change. We’re now going to have some government regulation, which personally I’m not in favour of, but it’s coming, so we have to accept it and embrace it,” he told Neville.
“I’m not in favour of government regulation. I think there is another way of solving the problem. Actually, a lot of things that the Premier League have put in place – the owners’ and directors’ test, various fan charters – is covering a lot the issues that [independent] regulation is going to cover.”
The body is slated to be launched either in late 2025 or early 2026 and its self-stated remit is to safeguard the interests of fans and ensure financial stability across English football’s top five divisions.
The regulator will have backstop powers to implement a new financial distribution mechanism between the Premier League and EFL, as well as assess the suitability of new owners.
So, when Tottenham do eventually either change hands or sell a significant stake to a third party, it will be the regulator that will adjudicate on the fitness of the buyer to run the club.
The institution was dreamt up in direct response to the European Super League plot in 2021, which Levy helped co-design.
Among the arguments against the regulator that have been brainstormed at Premier League shareholder meetings is its cost. TBR Football has learned that the Department for Culture, Media and Sport has revised its estimation and now forecasts that the regulator will cost between £103m and £149m over the first decade. Initially, that expense will be borne by the taxpayer, then passed onto the clubs.
Compliance costs – that’s the costs of training staff, producing reports, and upgrading systems – meanwhile are understood to be projected to cost clubs between £29m and £46m over the same period.
“Let’s come back here in 10 years’ time and see if that’s really the cost. It will be very interesting,” was another line from Levy in the interview with Neville.
The costs will not be spread evenly throughout the pyramid. Instead, those with broader shoulders – and Tottenham certainly qualify here – will be expected to contribute more financially.
There is almost universal support for the regulator among football finance academics and fan groups, including in the Spurs ecosphere.
The current plight of clubs like Morecambe and previously Bury and Macclesfield meanwhile has increased the strength of feeling among fans, with polling data to back it up.
As has been well publicised, Levy also discussed the dangers of the multi-club model. Incidentally, he used to run a multi-club network back in ENIC’s PLC days, though the firm sold its interest in other clubs in the early 2000s.
Another talking point was related-party transactions. In layman’s terms, that’s commercial deals – and sometimes player transfers – between two entities controlled or linked to the same ownership body.
“One of the biggest threats is related party sponsorship,” he answered when quizzed by Neville about what he would change in football if he was in the regulator’s position. “I think that has to be controlled.”
“Otherwise you have clubs that are owned by states – and I have no issue with that at all, in principle – but they can do deals with themselves which gives them a competitive advantage compared to everyone else.
“I think that is an area that needs to be controlled. There could be more [state-owned] clubs in the future. It’s not just in the UK, it’s across Europe. There should be more detailed control across related-party transactions.”
While Levy was presumably referencing Newcastle United and Manchester City’s ownership groups, who have funnelled millions into their clubs via sponsorship, it is also worth noting that Spurs have been heavily linked with investment from Qatari sovereign wealth.
Levy has previously been something of a hawk when it comes to state ownership and its distorting impact on competition in the Premier League. And while his latest comments can hardly be seen as a reversal of that stance given his argument for a crackdown on related-party deals, it is interesting to hear the executive says he has no issues – in principle – with sovereign wealth in football.
Levy has met several times with Nasser Al-Khelaifi, president of Paris Saint-Germain ownership group Qatar Sports Investments. Presumably, they will parlay again when Spurs meet PSG in the Super Cup final next Wednesday. Who knows whether a part-takeover by QSI or another vehicle could be on the cards, but Gulf state influence on football is doubtless the defining issue of the modern game.