Thomas Frank’s start to life at Tottenham has been good but not flawless, but seems to have done more than enough to convince the club’s owners to pump a nine-figure sum of fresh money into the club.
Spurs sit third in the Premier League with just one defeat from their first seven games and the second-best defensive record in the division.
That’s a far cry from finishing 17th under Ange Postecoglou last term, conceding 65 goals in 38 games along the way… and, of course, scooping the Europa League trophy that earned them their Champions League place this season.
ENIC’s £100m cash injection into Spurs sends three-way message
Tottenham’s owners have stuck an extra £100m into the club (Image credit: Getty Images)
There’s still plenty for Frank to work on at Tottenham, especially after his side needed late comebacks to rescue points against bottom side Wolves in the league and unfancied Bodo/Glimt in the Champions League.
But the announcement that the club’s owners ENIC have injected £100m of new capital into the club is not just an implicit statement of trust in the manager; they have actually explicitly spelt it out.
Thomas Frank took charge of Tottenham this summer (Image credit: Copyright (c) 2025 Shutterstock Editorial. No use without permission.)
In a club statement, non-executive chairman Peter Charrington said: “As I stated a few weeks ago, our focus is on stability and empowering the management team to deliver on the club’s ambitions.
“I know the Lewis family are also ambitious for the future. Today’s capital commitment reflects that ambition and I would like to thank them for their ongoing support.
“We will continue to do all we can to ensure that Vinai and his team are supported in the best way possible to take this club forward.”
That’s a nice little boost for Frank this early in his tenure – but the timing of the move does come at an extremely PR-friendly time for ENIC.
Daniel Levy left Tottenham in September (Image credit: Getty Images)
ENIC passed from businessman Joe Lewis to his family via the Lewis Family Trust in 2022.
The younger members of the Lewis Family have had a busy few months re-organising things behind the scenes, including the dismissal of Postecoglou and, most notably, the departure of long-serving chairman Daniel Levy, who left the role last month.
That led to a flurry of speculation that the Lewis family were planning an exit from the club, and there have been three expressions of interest in buying the club over the past few weeks. However, ENIC are said to have been clear in their stance that the club is not for sale.
Ploughing £100m of their own money into the club feels a bit like that old Mitchell and Webb sketch where their version of the producers of the Apprentice decide on £100,000 as the salary for the winning contestant because it’s ‘the smallest large amount of money’.
In Premier League ownership terms, £100m feels like exactly the kind of number you might come up with if you wanted to send several messages at the same time. First, there’s that little bit of public backing for Frank after an overall positive start as gaffer.
Second, it says to potential investors sniffing around “we’re actually alright for money thanks – look, here we are just chucking £100m into the club like it’s nothing. Just think how much we value the club at when that’s the case. If we were interested in selling. Which we’re not. So go away.”
Finally: it sends another signal to the fans that they really are serious about their intentions of staying in control – and that they want to put to bed the accusations of financial over-caution that were often levelled at Levy.
Spurs and ENIC are now talking in terms of focusing on delivering results on the pitch as well as on the balance sheet – and sticking another £100m into the club feels like them showing they will put their money where their mouth is.
Disclaimer: This news has been automatically collected from the source link above. Our website does not create, edit, or publish the content. All information, statements, and opinions expressed belong solely to the original publisher. We are not responsible or liable for the accuracy, reliability, or completeness of any news, nor for any statements, views, or claims made in the content. All rights remain with the respective source.