The Financial Situation (6 Viewers)

PiN7uRiCCHi0

Senior Member
Aug 18, 2010
926
I started mapping out a financial model of Juventus. Some people here follow sponsorship deal etc closely. I was curious if any of the more financially literate/ business literate members would be interested in created a collaborative juventus financial model through an shared google sheets. I already have a blue print with wage related stuff, cash flow, balance sheet, income statement...I could upload it and it could be something that would actually give us insight into what our management is thinking each window. It's rough right now, but if we start building more detailed components, it could be something impressive.

So if there are like 4-5 people who know/ are interested in:
-accounting/finance (on a basic level)
-have an understanding of forecasting components like match-day revenues (ie: season tickets x price + regular ticket price x average attendance x # of games)
-Follow the sponsorship situation closely and would have a sense of what step-ups are coming up

We could arrange a google sheet and I could upload it.
Nice initiative! How's it progressing? I may also be able to chip in a couple of hours over the coming weeks.
 

s4tch

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Contributor
Mar 23, 2015
9,993
not that bad considering some experts predicted a ~50m loss a couple of months ago.

but as the previous financial year's net income was -19,2m, this ~40m loss means that for this ongoing financial year closing at the end of next june the club has to record a ~30m profit to comply with the ffp regulations. expect a rough, rough mercato next summer.
 
Last edited:

juve123

Senior Member
Aug 10, 2017
4,433
not that bad considering some experts predicted a ~50m loss a couple of months ago.

but as the previous financial year's net income was -19,2m, this ~40m loss means that for this ongoing financial year closing at the end of next june the club has to record a ~30m profit to comply with the ffp regulations. expect a rough, rough mercato next summer.
Adidas new deal kicks in this season hopefully jeep renew their contract with more money
 

kappa96

Senior Member
Jun 20, 2018
1,188
not that bad considering some experts predicted a ~50m loss a couple of months ago.

but as the previous financial year's net income was -19,2m, this ~40m loss means that for this ongoing financial year closing at the end of next june the club has to record a ~30m profit to comply with the ffp regulations. expect a rough, rough mercato next summer.
Isn't ffp calculated based on a 3 year old plan? I think the gist of it is that we don't have to incur a net loss of more than 30 million in a 3 year period.
I guess we are kinda obliged to not incur a loss this season. According to reports our transfer balance is positive for 12 million.
Don't know if true.
 

Tomate

Junior Member
Jul 19, 2014
437
Thankfully this season we make 30m more from Adidas compared to last year. Plus we have lots of growth potential in regards to the money we make from our shirt sponsor, pretty sure that bad contract is running out soon.
 

s4tch

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Contributor
Mar 23, 2015
9,993
Isn't ffp calculated based on a 3 year old plan?...
According to reports our transfer balance is positive for 12 million.
yes, that's what i considered too. ffp allows a combined loss of 30m for a 3-year rolling period. next summer, we'll have to consider the following 3 years:
- 2017/18: -19,2m
- 2018/19: -40m according to the previsions
- 2019/20: we don't know yet obviously

these two first years' combined balance is ~60m in the red, so in order to make our 3-year balance compliant with the ffp regulations, a +30m financial year is required.

any summer's so called "transfer balance" is completely irrelevant when it comes to ffp. uefa wouldn't observe it separately at all.

also, you shouldn't bother with any summer transfer balance just because it simply doesn't make sense from an accounting point of view. sales affect the books immediately, while costs/purchases are spread over the contract period.

for example, when we sold spinazzola, the sale value (29,5m) immediately raised the club's revenue, while his (useless) replacement's cost (22m) will be spread over the contract period, which is 4 years in pellegrini's case. so when it comes to the books, that 29,5m (minus the remaining book value, which was close to zero in spina's case) raised the revenue for the financial year 2018/19, while the quarter of pellegrini's price, 5,5m will be the cost assigned to pellegrini in last year's book, and also in the books for the next 3 years, too - unless he's sold permanently, of course. so that swap deal meant an immediate +24m effect on the books, and a -5,5m effect for the next 3 years. it's not like 29,5m-22m=7,5m for last season. that's why stuff like "summer's transfer balance" or "net spent" are meaningless.
 

Ronn

#TeamPestoFlies
May 3, 2012
9,761
yes, that's what i considered too. ffp allows a combined loss of 30m for a 3-year rolling period. next summer, we'll have to consider the following 3 years:
- 2017/18: -19,2m
- 2018/19: -40m according to the previsions
- 2019/20: we don't know yet obviously

these two first years' combined balance is ~60m in the red, so in order to make our 3-year balance compliant with the ffp regulations, a +30m financial year is required.

any summer's so called "transfer balance" is completely irrelevant when it comes to ffp. uefa wouldn't observe it separately at all.

also, you shouldn't bother with any summer transfer balance just because it simply doesn't make sense from an accounting point of view. sales affect the books immediately, while costs/purchases are spread over the contract period.

for example, when we sold spinazzola, the sale value (29,5m) immediately raised the club's revenue, while his (useless) replacement's cost (22m) will be spread over the contract period, which is 4 years in pellegrini's case. so when it comes to the books, that 29,5m (minus the remaining book value, which was close to zero in spina's case) raised the revenue for the financial year 2018/19, while the quarter of pellegrini's price, 5,5m will be the cost assigned to pellegrini in last year's book, and also in the books for the next 3 years, too - unless he's sold permanently, of course. so that swap deal meant an immediate +24m effect on the books, and a -5,5m effect for the next 3 years. it's not like 29,5m-22m=7,5m for last season. that's why stuff like "summer's transfer balance" or "net spent" are meaningless.
There are some costs that are exempt from ffp calculations. @italiacalcio10 had an excellent post about it a while ago.
 

duranfj

Senior Member
Jul 30, 2015
5,848
Yep, if we follow for their sheet it says:
17/18 +5.7m
18/19 -7.8m

The only problem is 19/20 forecast is -126m :panic:

The reason is a very low income for players sales and we know for sure that ain't gonna happen
 

italiacalcio10

Senior Member
Mar 3, 2014
3,422
yes, that's what i considered too. ffp allows a combined loss of 30m for a 3-year rolling period. next summer, we'll have to consider the following 3 years:
- 2017/18: -19,2m
- 2018/19: -40m according to the previsions
- 2019/20: we don't know yet obviously

these two first years' combined balance is ~60m in the red, so in order to make our 3-year balance compliant with the ffp regulations, a +30m financial year is required.

any summer's so called "transfer balance" is completely irrelevant when it comes to ffp. uefa wouldn't observe it separately at all.

also, you shouldn't bother with any summer transfer balance just because it simply doesn't make sense from an accounting point of view. sales affect the books immediately, while costs/purchases are spread over the contract period.

for example, when we sold spinazzola, the sale value (29,5m) immediately raised the club's revenue, while his (useless) replacement's cost (22m) will be spread over the contract period, which is 4 years in pellegrini's case. so when it comes to the books, that 29,5m (minus the remaining book value, which was close to zero in spina's case) raised the revenue for the financial year 2018/19, while the quarter of pellegrini's price, 5,5m will be the cost assigned to pellegrini in last year's book, and also in the books for the next 3 years, too - unless he's sold permanently, of course. so that swap deal meant an immediate +24m effect on the books, and a -5,5m effect for the next 3 years. it's not like 29,5m-22m=7,5m for last season. that's why stuff like "summer's transfer balance" or "net spent" are meaningless.
FFP break even is an adjusted number & add-backs are material. There is also a 35M allowance with 30 needing to be funded by equity. FFPP = FFP Profit...
FFPP T-0 + FFPP T-1 + FFPP T-2 must therefore equal -35M. Given my assumptions for FFP profit, I believe we can lose ~25M in 2019/2020 and remain compliant.


Also side note: I projected -35.3M in losses in the spreadsheet I posted earlier in this thread, and it came in at -40M. So a little worse than expected, but still reasonable.
 

italiacalcio10

Senior Member
Mar 3, 2014
3,422
thanks for the corrections.


you mean equity participants, right?
Yeah - Exor could make it up directly - issue itself more shares for cash, or it could issue more stock to the public. Preferred stock could work too. Not sure how UEFA looks at at preferred stock, but that could be a loopwhole. The last time it was done was in 2011/2022 where it issued 118M.
 

juve123

Senior Member
Aug 10, 2017
4,433
FFP break even is an adjusted number & add-backs are material. There is also a 35M allowance with 30 needing to be funded by equity. FFPP = FFP Profit...
FFPP T-0 + FFPP T-1 + FFPP T-2 must therefore equal -35M. Given my assumptions for FFP profit, I believe we can lose ~25M in 2019/2020 and remain compliant.


Also side note: I projected -35.3M in losses in the spreadsheet I posted earlier in this thread, and it came in at -40M. So a little worse than expected, but still reasonable.
Do you think our commercial revenue is not increasing as much as was estimated when Ronaldo was signed?
 

italiacalcio10

Senior Member
Mar 3, 2014
3,422
Do you think our commercial revenue is not increasing as much as was estimated when Ronaldo was signed?
Don’t know. But a large reason for the anticipated deficit next year is because we continue to add wage despite the fact that the previous years’ profit was due to capital gains. We’ve had some nice gains in ticket revenue, and sponsorship dollars but we can’t expect to generate €150M worth of capital gains every year. You know what would help more than anything? If Jeep were to increase its sponsorship deal up to market levels. That would be like 50M in incremental profit. Also Serie A needs to do well in the Champions League. I know it kills some people here to think of Inter doing well but Serie A needs to bring in more stars and go further in international tournaments because that will bring in more league revenue. It’s crucial because if things continue at this rate, the only relevant league in 10 years will be the EPL. I do think a European super league would then happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 5)