Inter's Financial Situation

[Forzanerazzurri]

As brehme says its the price of land thats the problem. Wembley and the new spurs stadium are circa 1 billion GBP each too. Its the cost of development in a major city.

One of the problems is that, unlike the premiership, we dont have the sell out crowds to push our stadium capacity upwards - so by building a new stadium (and, typically, making more seats) you would immediately increase revenues from that alone. Correct me if I'm wrong, but our tickes are typically much much cheaper than the Premiership as well? Not to mention season tickets and corporate boxes.

We had the 5th highest average attendance in European Football prior to the CCP Virus. Tickets are cheaper but the attendance numbers were there. That said, a new stadium is not going to be built any time soon. Its a complete pipe dream as I have been saying for years.

 

[.h.]

Yep, but all the english stadia basically always sell out, so if they expand, they know the demand is there. there's a reason why stadia in the UK keep expanding - Tottenham went 36k to 63k. We're realistically going to downsize to 65k. ticket prices really compensate, too.

Man utd - 99m euros in stadia revenue, liverpool (small stadium) 83m, city 48m (55k seats), tottenham 108m.

Juve? 42m. Arsenal? 90m. Inter? 57m.

 

[andrei]

Yep, but all the english stadia basically always sell out, so if they expand, they know the demand is there. there's a reason why stadia in the UK keep expanding - Tottenham went 36k to 63k. We're realistically going to downsize to 65k. ticket prices really compensate, too.

Man utd - 99m euros in stadia revenue, liverpool (small stadium) 83m, city 48m (55k seats), tottenham 108m.

Juve? 42m. Arsenal? 90m. Inter? 57m.

Yes, this is the crux of things. We have the 5th highest average attendance. But we don't sell out, except big derbies. The ticket prices, sponsorship and other shit must overweight the price. 400m+ which we need to borrow - if you need to pay it in 20years - that's more than 20m/y.

 

[.h.]

indeed. And in business, who would pay 400mil to generate a 20mil a year cashflow? Not many people I think...

 

[andrei]

indeed. And in business, who would pay 400mil to generate a 20mil a year cashflow? Not many people I think...

If your numbers are correct, I tend to think you are absolutely right!

I will try to make a small calculus. It may not be correct, but still...
If we and Milan make a credit for 800mil+ to build a new stadium, with 1% interest rate for 20y, we will need to pay 24m/year for 20 years. If we make 57m/y revenue from Meazza - that' meant the new one needs to bring at least 81m/y to equilibrate the things. If we want to make more money (this is the reason to build an own stadium), like 20m more - the new stadium must bring 100m revenue. More than United or Arsenal.
And don't forget, we share the stadium with Milan, that means all the sponsorship we need to share with them.

Is this feasable? Italy is not England economically and Milan is not London. We don't sell out, so no extra attendance. Even lower because the new stadium will be smaller. I throw another name here. Wanda Metropolitano cost 240m euros. And has a capacity over 60k. And Madrid is a metropole.

 

[.h.]

The thing is, the justification for the business is that (over a short/medium term) a stadium isnt an amortising asse, so while it costs a lot of money to generate the cashflow, tha cashflow is (almost) in perpetuity - if you have to amortise it over 50 years, for example, thats 8m a year cost for Inter and Milan. To generate 20m cashflow that isnt so bad. Also, you amortise the construction cost, but the land will only go up...


Thing is, 400mil is like 10% of the Zhang wealth right now. I struggle to see it happening. The only option is by raising debt.

 

[Candreva Crosses]

Pirelli gave us €10.5m. Anything less than that and this club is officially a dumpster fire.

Damn, so we almost doubled that amount? Who fucking cares about the shirts then, its not like we get good money from selling shirts.

 

[.h.]

Base yes. I think it went yo to like 20 with bonuses but I assume onr of those bonuses include winning the CL.

 

[CafeCordoba]

Tell me guys, why loaning out Nainggolan makes a difference rather than terminating his contract? Loaning means we have the last amortization tranche in our books to cover, terminating contract we book capital losses? What difference does it make, we need to have that same 10m€ in our books anyway?

 

[.h.]

No idea. It might actually be a cashflow thing? If we terminate the severance we probably have to pay immediately, whereas this way we can pay his salary on schedule like any other player (and if they are subject to cuts, etc, that would benefit from being a player rather than terminated)?

Clutching at straws a little, the gains there are minimal at best, but maybe it is that desperate

 

[CafeCordoba]

Yeah. Makes sense to me.

 

[.h.]

to throw it out there - looks like key barca stars are deferring up to 50% of their salary for the next few seasons to help the club get through COVID.

If only our players were as sellfless. We'd possibly have kept Hakimi.

 

[CafeCordoba]

Probably wouldn't have kept but you have a point.

 

[.h.]

TBH practically speaking - of course Barca are just kicking their debt down the road, and realistically for us, that wouldnt make a huge difference, its the basic P&L we're struggling on rather than the cashflow for immediate financing (e.g. their salary cap). At the same time, a 20% cut = 40m saving gross, 50% deferral = almost 100m savings for the year. 15-20% salary reduction & 80m positive versus expectation might be hard to achieve, but with some good sales (no evidence of this so far of course) we might have managed it

 

[Mr-Intermilan]

inter is headed to monaco route, if lukaku selloff confirmed.

 

[brakbrak]

to throw it out there - looks like key barca stars are deferring up to 50% of their salary for the next few seasons to help the club get through COVID.

If only our players were as sellfless. We'd possibly have kept Hakimi.

If only Lukaku's offer had come first, we probably wouldn't have sold Hakimi.

 

[brehme1989]

If only Lukaku's offer had come first, we probably wouldn't have sold Hakimi.

If Inter/Conte didn't leak that we have to raise 80m we probably wouldn't have sold him and we would have been smart enough to expect an offer for Lukaku.

 

[.h.]

I have to wonder if part of the reason of now loooking at selling Lukaku is that we've not got the money we expected for JM/Nainggolan/Vecino/Lazaro/Dalbert?

 

[king_elnino]

we are really good to keep deadwood

 

[CafeCordoba]

I have to wonder if part of the reason of now loooking at selling Lukaku is that we've not got the money we expected for JM/Nainggolan/Vecino/Lazaro/Dalbert?

I don't know what money they really expecting from those players. I didn't expect a lot, like for example you did.