The Financial Situation (100 Viewers)

[Valerio.]

Mainly due to the additional 30 million from players registration rights (Vidal's sale). But our recurrent revenues are growing at a pretty healthy pace. Revenues from sponsorships, advertising, and sale of products went up by 15 million. Surprised by the lack of growth in television (4 million), didn't Serie A sign a new broadcasting contract for this season which increased our share from 95 million to 125 million (for the entire season)?

ok the money from Vidal but we spent a lot this summer
Dybala 32
Alex Sandro 26
Zaza 18
Hernanes 11
Mandzukic 19
Pereyra 14m
Mandragora 6m
Cuadrado 1,8m for the loan

and still we're in +30. NOT TOO SHABBY! NOT TOO SHABBY! cit

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[j0ker]

I'd assume the amount would be paid (or at least accrued in the financial statements) throughout the season.

How do they know if we are going to finish 1st which would get us 125mln or 14th?

 

[Vlad]

How do they know if we are going to finish 1st which would get us 125mln or 14th?

It's determined at the beginning of the season as far as I recall, the amount I mean. Then during the season we get proportional amount after every played game. At least that is how we account it for.



- - - Updated - - -

Mainly due to the additional 30 million from players registration rights (Vidal's sale). But our recurrent revenues are growing at a pretty healthy pace. Revenues from sponsorships, advertising, and sale of products went up by 15 million.

Already at 35m, while last year we earned 53m in total.

Also another good thing from that report is that we converted large portion of our short term debt into long term one.

Surprised by the lack of growth in television (4 million), didn't Serie A sign a new broadcasting contract for this season which increased our share from 95 million to 125 million (for the entire season)?

I don't think those 95m are only from Serie A. CL? At least first part should be in there. At the end of season I believe with both CL and Serie A we'll be around 200m mark.

 

[Paid-off-Ref]

How do they know if we are going to finish 1st which would get us 125mln or 14th?

I think last season's ranking determines what you get the following season.

 

[Ocelot]

I think last season's ranking determines what you get the following season.

That and a few other (mostly constant) factors, the whole formula is quite complicated.

 

[j0ker]

I think last season's ranking determines what you get the following season.

Really?

I thought you get the money at the end of current season.

 

[Klin]

Really?

I thought you get the money at the end of current season.

What the fuck do you know, eh?

 

[Bianconero_Aus]

Shut up, Klin.

 

[Vlad]

Really?

I thought you get the money at the end of current season.

In this case there wouldn't have any income from broadcasting till the end of year, which isn't the case if you look at their periodic reports.

 

[j0ker]

What the fuck do you know, eh?

Maltese, please

 

[Klin]

Maltese, please

j0ker financial experd

 

[j0ker]

j0ker financial experd

Better than being potato experd

 

[Klin]

Better than being potato experd

 

[Xperd]

Juventus Football Club has chosen Shanghai as the location for its first Juventus Academy in China. @DiMarzio

 

[swag]

The price is falling fast

 

[Alex-444]

 

[italiacalcio10]

I was thinking about how poor the construction of Serie A is...

Ultimately, you need 4-5 strong teams to make a league that makes money. And honestly, trickle-down economics as a theory is controversial, but in world football it is proven. 4-5 good teams make the other EPL teams richer, while 2 teams make La Liga successful.

The top cities are too saturated...Milan/Inter, Roma/Lazio, Juve/Torino...
There should only be one team in these markets given the current state of Italy.

The same thing applies to Genoa, and Verona. In business, when companies aren't making money, they consolidate, but irrational fan-bases would never let that happen.


Ultimately, what would be good for Serie A (that wouldn't ever happen do to archaic rivalries) would be to have these teams competing each year (of which all own their own stadia)
-Roma
-Milan
-Torino (Juve)
-Fiorentina
-Verona
-Genoa
-Palermo
-Napoli

Why would this be good?
- The smallest teams obtain the majority of money from TV, so for these teams attendance is much less important.
- Having a more top heavy league allows for the larger teams to be more competitive internationally, and generate more revenue for the league.
- The bottom teams are smaller, but ultimately, even in attendance is a little lower/ smaller stadiums, the increase in TV revenue would offset this.

Look at Serie A's revenue situation:

Assuming simple consolidation:
You get a few pretty big teams:
Roma: 225 million euro
Milan: 421 million euro
Torino/Juve: 330 million euro
Genoa: 110 million euro
Verona: 85 million euro
Napoli: 167 million euro
Fiorentina: 87.7 million euro

If these teams actually build stadiums, we could probably compete again internationally.
And I realize it would never happen, but I'm simply pointing out that the very construction of Serie A is extremely inefficient. Italy is 8th in GDP, and therefore should still be able to easily operate a competitive league if constructed properly. I think one of the biggest culprits in combination with corruption, and aging infrastructure is too much saturation in the top markets. Genoa is a perfect example: Instead of being a consistent europa performer, two teams share a stadium and split the market, making both irrelevant. We're ultimately the most fortunate, considering Torino is a mini-club, so we would likely would be the least impacted by a consolidation. However, the prospect of a combined Roma and Milan make the competitiveness of Italy much more convincing internationally. Too bad it will never happen.

 

[Ronn]

Interesting analyis. A couple of points:
1- London seems to have a million teams in EPL. Liverpool has 2 and Manchester has 2. That seems to be a very bad structure as well. What's their recipe then?
2- Your revenue data is from 2013/14 season. I believe Milan's situation is way worse now than then, and Roma's should be better.
3- Mergers are not going to happen, as you pointed out, due to irrational fan base. So the only way for this to happen is for one team in Roma/Milan/Verona/Genoa/Turin to go bankrupt?

 

[dolph]

I was thinking about how poor the construction of Serie A is...

Ultimately, you need 4-5 strong teams to make a league that makes money. And honestly, trickle-down economics as a theory is controversial, but in world football it is proven. 4-5 good teams make the other EPL teams richer, while 2 teams make La Liga successful.

The top cities are too saturated...Milan/Inter, Roma/Lazio, Juve/Torino...
There should only be one team in these markets given the current state of Italy.

The same thing applies to Genoa, and Verona. In business, when companies aren't making money, they consolidate, but irrational fan-bases would never let that happen.


Ultimately, what would be good for Serie A (that wouldn't ever happen do to archaic rivalries) would be to have these teams competing each year (of which all own their own stadia)
-Roma
-Milan
-Torino (Juve)
-Fiorentina
-Verona
-Genoa
-Palermo
-Napoli

Why would this be good?
- The smallest teams obtain the majority of money from TV, so for these teams attendance is much less important.
- Having a more top heavy league allows for the larger teams to be more competitive internationally, and generate more revenue for the league.
- The bottom teams are smaller, but ultimately, even in attendance is a little lower/ smaller stadiums, the increase in TV revenue would offset this.

Look at Serie A's revenue situation:

Assuming simple consolidation:
You get a few pretty big teams:
Roma: 225 million euro
Milan: 421 million euro
Torino/Juve: 330 million euro
Genoa: 110 million euro
Verona: 85 million euro
Napoli: 167 million euro
Fiorentina: 87.7 million euro

If these teams actually build stadiums, we could probably compete again internationally.
And I realize it would never happen, but I'm simply pointing out that the very construction of Serie A is extremely inefficient. Italy is 8th in GDP, and therefore should still be able to easily operate a competitive league if constructed properly. I think one of the biggest culprits in combination with corruption, and aging infrastructure is too much saturation in the top markets. Genoa is a perfect example: Instead of being a consistent europa performer, two teams share a stadium and split the market, making both irrelevant. We're ultimately the most fortunate, considering Torino is a mini-club, so we would likely would be the least impacted by a consolidation. However, the prospect of a combined Roma and Milan make the competitiveness of Italy much more convincing internationally. Too bad it will never happen.

You cant just multiply revenue. A large part of revenue cames from marketpool tv rights so unless Seria A gets reduced to 12 teams and you still have the same marketpool you wouldent get revenues like that. The same goes for sponsordeals and matchday revenue.

 

[Quetzalcoatl]

The league could definitely do with a reduction in the number of teams.