Inter's Financial Situation

[crzdcolombian]

Skiniar was 33 million? Thought he was like 10 million + youth players? Same thing was Ninja thought it was Santon +youth players + cash

 

[CafeCordoba]

They are always bought with cash. Then we just sell kids or other players with cash so all the money isn't going to one direction, only portion of it. However the value of the player (asset) in our books is still the full value we agreed. In cash we paid like less than 15m for Skriniar because we included Caprari to the deal worth 15m€. So we got good profit for Caprari.

Edit. Actually I'm not good at maths apparently. If it was only Caprari for 15m€, then we paid 18m€ in cash. But don't remember if there was some kid also going to Samp.

 

[.h.]

They are always bought with cash. Then we just sell kids or other players with cash so all the money isn't going to one direction, only portion of it. However the value of the player (asset) in our books is still the full value we agreed. In cash we paid like less than 15m for Skriniar because we included Caprari to the deal worth 15m€. So we got good profit for Caprari.

ya this

same way baastoni was in principle 31m but aactually a large part of that was youth players i think bettela and another?

 

[CafeCordoba]

Swiss Ramble made some summaries of top clubs' finances pre-Covid.

https://twitter.com/swissramble/status/1291634210525138946?s=21

I don't quite understand how it goes for Inter. It shows operating loss of 24m€ in 2018 and 51m€ in 2019. That will be the monitoring period for FFP as they will exclude year 2020 from the 3 year monitoring period in 2021. It will be include as bundled with 2021 year in 2022 monitoring period.

However, how can we cope with those kind of losses regarding FFP? I don't quite get it. FFP forces to get have only -30m€ for the monitoring period and 25m€ of that has to be covered by the owner.

Also I don't quite get this debt turned to equity thing Swiss Ramble talks about in the tweet. Suning just turns the debt given to Inter by him to equity, meaning he basically gives money to Inter because he already owns all the shares?

Edit. At least our main rival Juve seems to be even more fucked.

 

[.h.]

dont forget FFP excludes things like spending on youth and stadium, that probably helps.. I think our youth set up costs like 10 mil a year flat anyway, so that takes a substantial amount off of the time period.

Debt2Equity - exactly. If, say, I hold £100k in Inter bonds, and Inter decides to offer a debt to equity conversion, they'll offer me typically a 'generous' rate - so if our share price now is £1, they might offer me say £0.8 or £0.9 to do a debt to equity conversion, so I in principle get 'more value' out of shares than the debt.

of course that's irrelevant if you own 100% of the shares, but in principle you dilute other share holders who dont participate


whats interesting though is you see how fucked Barca are - 83m loss, heavily driven by amortisation. That's why they cant afford Lautaro atm. Real Madrid are in a similar boat, that's why they're so desperate to get rid of Bale and need to offload James, for example. They took 46m of impairment on player valuations, wonder who that was on.

Juevntus are also losing a lot of money at the moment, their amortisation is huge. Wages grew 27%. Of course the fiddled sponsorship money will go a long way for them, too. I do wonder if they fucked up with building such a small stadium, they should have targetted 55-60k seater I think.

Milan red as fuck. They really need to see some revenue growth to even consider getting OK again.

By way of comparison with Milan, Juve, Real, Barca, we actually look pretty healthy tbh! We need to get our sponsorship deals sorted, though, and we really need to get some of the shit players we have costing like 80 mil a year in wages+amortisation off the books.

Roma, as expected, really struggling. Not being in the CL this season is gonna hurt them.

PSG is in a really good position, actually. Of course that's because of their ridiculous sponsorship deals - 200m from Qatar - but without that they'd be pretty fucked.


Our Match day revenue really needs to grow, as does our commercial revenue. Need to get rid of the shit on the books to free up cashflow, as well.

If we had Juve's stadium, we'd be doing probably 50% more on matchday revenue alone, and that's ignoring sponsorship etc opportunities it would give us. Though, arguably, for the cost of a stadium, it's not worth the RoI

 

[CafeCordoba]

Ah yeah, though I doubt we can cover the 50m€ loss with youth sector investments. Stadium thing helps Juve for sure.

 

[.h.]

I dont know what period the books relate to, that's the only thing. I THINK it's the 17-18 and 18-19 seasons, so there's a lot of Inter spending coming without much plusvalenza for 19-20, and then 20-21 will have quite a bit of plusvalenza e.g. Icardi

 

[.h.]

Damn, Friedkin bought Roma for a total of 73 million euros (for the equity), and they're assuming the 413mil euros debt.

that's really low equity value.

 

[CafeCordoba]

Covid affected monitoring periods:

https://twitter.com/swissramble/status/1274957290735624193?s=21

 

[.h.]

itll be interesting to see what the impact is on us because we didnt offload Icardi properly - the amortisation could be a challenge on Lukaku without the plusvalenza

Esp given we've had sponsorship decrease lately... though arguably you'd hope some of the revenue increase from CL + 2nd place could sort that out. It certainly feels like we've had less emphasis on plusvalenza youth so far, but its hard to know if its because of the disruption in schedule, or something else

 

[Harpsabu]

Is FFP not being eased this year though because every club is in the same position?

 

[Forzanerazzurri]

Juve is on a downhill trajectory. They are at the end of an era and their growth is going to stall. The next 10 years will be about Inter. One key concern with Inter though is that our current spending has alot of assumptions for the continuation of future growth. If this club continues to be managed in the way it has been over the last couple of years, we would be a top 5 club in Europe both financially and performance wise by the middle of the decade.

 

[.h.]

ffp is still a thing, its just changed the reporting/monitoring years - see Cafe's post above.

Basically, whatever happens this year because of COVId, we will need to offset with revenues or plusvalenza next year. Say COVID impacts us -50m this year, we'll need an extra 50m next year.

 

[Forzanerazzurri]

ffp is still a thing, its just changed the reporting/monitoring years - see Cafe's post above.

Basically, whatever happens this year because of COVId, we will need to offset with revenues or plusvalenza next year. Say COVID impacts us -50m this year, we'll need an extra 50m next year.

We can always cheat like everyone else.

 

[Palatiga]

Juve is on a downhill trajectory. They are at the end of an era and their growth is going to stall. The next 10 years will be about Inter. One key concern with Inter though is that our current spending has alot of assumptions for the continuation of future growth. If this club continues to be managed in the way it has been over the last couple of years, we would be a top 5 club in Europe both financially and performance wise by the middle of the decade.

they should be on rebuild mode since last year,
but they choose CR, while it's a good branding/marketing wise, it set them back few years off them

 

[CafeCordoba]

itll be interesting to see what the impact is on us because we didnt offload Icardi properly - the amortisation could be a challenge on Lukaku without the plusvalenza

What do you mean? We got +50m€ for past fiscal year (2019/2020). Lukaku's amortization is 15m€ per season.

 

[.h.]

What do you mean? We got +50m€ for past fiscal year (2019/2020). Lukaku's amortization is 15m€ per season.

making some assumptionds here but if you look at our 18-19 results as a baseline, we didnt get loads of plusvalenza - radu, vanheusden, pusvas were pretty much the main. Gabigol is a null impact, and Icardi should register in the next window so not 18-19 I believe.

It's not gonna offset all the spending we did this summer, thats rthe problem. If we actually sold Icardi last season, we'd be in a better position



as far as I'm aware.


I suppose I've ignored Pinamonti and Karamoh which is some more plusvalenza

 

[CafeCordoba]

Yeah I understood we sold Pinamonti for 18m€ and were able to record that to 18/19 year, despite it being loan with obligation to buy. Dunno about Karamoh, wasn't that a loan to Parma? Or some activated obligation to buy also? What a failed player there too, he looked so good in those few games he played for Spalletti, TWO seasons ago.

 

[pier]

Here's some rough assumption I made on our capital gains.
At least there is positive around €117m from 2018 to 2020 season.
I think it doesn't matter which season the plusvalenza should goes, since the monitoring goes for the period of 3 season (cmiiw) and most likely will extended and softened due to the pandemic.

Note:
- Notice that for Miranda, that transfer to Suning cost us minus on capital gain just by letting him go for €0 while he still has net value on us. This same thing will do even harder for Man Utd on Sanchez deal, not only minus on capital gain they also had to paid the mutual termination cost.
This is why we cannot let players like Radja, Vecino etc go below their current net value otherwise it will hit us minus on capital gain.

 

[CafeCordoba]

Yeah. That's always important to notice when thinking sales. Usually football fans do not understand the net value of an asset in club's balance sheet so they just calculate if you buy player for 50m€ and sell him for 40m€ after 3 years, you are selling on a loss while in reality you are making a profit because the net value in balance sheet is below 40m€ after 3 years.

Radja's value in our books is 19m€ with my basic math (38m€ fee / 4 years and half of that has gone so half of the fee left in the books.