Page 18 of our financial statements for 21-22:
Total interest owed to parent company (Great Horizon is the loanee, so re-loans the money to Inter) for 21-22 was 4.8 million euros, for 20-21 it was 5.5million euros.
22-23, it was 6.3million euros of interest
So on a loan of 275m (?) which is 415mil repayable, only so far about 15million euros is actually being bore by Inter. That's without a 23-24 statement, though, obviously.
In 22-23, Zhangs converted 127million euros of debt to equity (paragraph 3, first page) -
https://www.inter.it/media/downloads/2023/2023_10_27_13_57_35FC Inter Group_Consolidated Annual Financial Statements_FY ended 30 June 2023.pdf
In 21-22, that figure was I think 15 million (paragraph 3 page 1 -
https://www.inter.it/media/downloads/2022/2022_10_28_12_32_40FC Inter Group_Consolidated Annual Financial Statements_FY ended 30 June 2022.pdf)
And in 20-21, 132million euros converted -
https://www.inter.it/media/pdf/Inter-management-report-30.06.2021b.pdf
As I said, its fuck all impact on Inter. It's impact on Zhang and Great Horizons, but none of us need to give a shit about that. Likely less than 10% of the interest of the Oaktree Loan is being paid for by Inter.
I know no one will believe me, so look for yourself.
Page 18
https://www.inter.it/media/pdf/Inter-management-report-30.06.2021b.pdf
Great Horizons loaned the club 75mil - 'Shareholder loans', we were then paying 8% interest (paragraph 3 page 1) on that loan - which was also converted to equity during the course of the season.
Inter is not, and has never been, liable for the Oaktree/Great Horizons loan. That sits entirely on the Great Horizons book. Some of that money has been loaned on to Inter, at interest rates *LOWER* than the Oaktree/Great Horizons loan, which has incured SOME cost from Inter, but over a few years you're not talking a huge amount (e.g. maybe 10-15% TOTAL of the interest the Great Horizons loan incurs)
What functionally happened is Zhang probably borrowed too much money, didnt expect to get as much as he did with plusvalenza on Lukaku/Hakimi, stadia recovered faster than expected, and then had a great run to the CL final which all helped to boost revenues, so we didnt need as much money as he expected us to need.
For example, in the last three years, just the interest on the loan has cost the club tens of millions of euros, which it doesn't have anyway. Secondly, others have rightly pointed out that in addition to the owner's debt, there are also bonds in the amount of 400 million euros that the club has to pay back in 2027. That is, in the scenario where Zhang does obtain a loan of €400 million until 2027, this means that the total debt of the club and the owner is €800 million, excluding current deficit.
Now explain to me how for you it is financially healthy to behave like this? How is a business of this size supposed to remain competitive without a strong financial back? It's a conduct that is bound to crash and the only reason it hasn't crashed so far is the players, Inzaghi, Marota and the rest of the team.
By the way, in general, you have listed incorrect things here. If the club moves to Oaktree and is sold, Sonning gets back the value of the loan, not the value of the club minus the loan.
Its total 15 million euros of interest in the last 3 years my bro. We've spent more on taxes probably.
Also, wtf are you talking about, Suning get back the value of the loan? That's nonsense, its like suggesting if you default on your house with a 1mil mortgage, the bank gives you 1mil after selling the house. They dont. They give you the difference between sale price, and the 1mil you owe them.
Best Forum Newcomer
Forum Supporter
10 years of FIF
Best Football Poster
Best Overall Poster
Nostradamus
Most Passionate Member
