The Financial Situation (10 Viewers)

jukazem

jukazem

Senior Member
#9,061
Feb 10, 2007
4,758
#9,061
Ronn said:
If we go out tomorrow, considering CR7 cost us a lot, we can expect a loss at the end of this year as well. However, we signed a new Adidas deal that will probably offset some of that, and we still don't know how much of the CR7 wage is being paid by Exor. We should wait for this year's statement, but it's true that we cannot run big losses for 3 year in a row.
Click to expand...
Lol Juve isn't ManCity. Exor paying CR7's wages would be illegal!

Like every other year the break-even is set at CL semi-finals so there will be a manageable loss if Juve don't reach atleast semifinals. For a rough estimate, it would be like €40m loss in case of Ro16 exit, €20m if QF, it's how Juve budgets every year. With CR7 though, Juve's underlying sustainable revenue (revenue excluding plusvalenza) went up a lot, like €80m (my revised estimate after HF accounts) which is same as his annual cost for wages and amortisation.
 

Buy on AliExpress.com
Last edited:
Hydde

Hydde

Minimiliano Tristelli
#9,062
Mar 6, 2003
38,710
#9,062
Buck Fuddy said:
Really?
You don't see how this possible?,

Actually, scratch that, it's not only possible, it was to be expected.
Click to expand...
No, because unlike the sheiks or other teams penalized for ffp... i see juve having a responsible administration.

Lets see what happens on this. If juve is indeed breaking the rules, i leaves a lot to be asked to the board
 
Vlad

Vlad

In Allegri We Trust
#9,069
May 23, 2011
22,606
#9,069
Cerval said:
What the F is this? Eurosport can't stop posting articles saying FFP is closing down on us and that we'll sell players if we don't pass the round of 16

@Mark
Click to expand...
We are doing well, not really rolling in cash but we are in no danger of breaking FFP. Everything seems to be done by the books. Our reports are audited every year as it should be and reviews are made public. Our current deals are according to market value. Uefa's governing body can investigate this easily. If there is big discrepancy between first 2-3 offers, it is indicating shady deals,like owners making indirect payments which is the case with PSG, City... They should writte about them instead.
 
Ronn

Ronn

#TeamPestoFlies
#9,070
May 3, 2012
19,563
#9,070
Vlad said:
We are doing well, not really rolling in cash but we are in no danger of breaking FFP. Everything seems to be done by the books. Our reports are audited every year as it should be and reviews are made public. Our current deals are according to market value. Uefa's governing body can investigate this easily. If there is big discrepancy between first 2-3 offers, it is indicating shady deals,like owners making indirect payments which is the case with PSG, City... They should writte about them instead.
Click to expand...
He's not worried about the cover up, which PSG and City allegedly did, but violating the actual FFP i.e. posting a loss of more than 30m over a 3 year period. We already posted a loss of 19m last year, so if we post another loss this year we'd need to balance the books the year after. That would mean limits spending, if we don't see an increased revenue.
 
-=DJANGO=-

-=DJANGO=-

On crack
#9,071
Apr 29, 2006
3,158
#9,071
Vlad said:
We are doing well, not really rolling in cash but we are in no danger of breaking FFP. Everything seems to be done by the books. Our reports are audited every year as it should be and reviews are made public. Our current deals are according to market value. Uefa's governing body can investigate this easily. If there is big discrepancy between first 2-3 offers, it is indicating shady deals,like owners making indirect payments which is the case with PSG, City... They should writte about them instead.
Click to expand...
Agreed with you on some points. But:
- 'Big discrepancy between offers' is an absolute no go for so many reasons
- UEFA creating a sustainable environment is akin to a public servant not using his position for personal gains. The cop that busted his own son, ya know... Nice story.
- Dislike oil despots in general, especially Arabian peninsula, but: They've been 'sharing' quite a lot. Quite a lot more, in fact, than the usual suspects. Take Berlusconi (for instance) I didn't see Fininvest/MediaSet/Etc. on half the teams' shirts in Europe, so he can have the dance floor to himself... Yeah, he paid the bucks to Agnellis and so forth, but in a reasonable, 'respectable' (mob style,lol) manner. Royal Madrid, sponsored even by beaten catalans...

In short someone is a bit jealous of the arabs and becoming unreasonable. Now the game is 'rigged', cause the usual fair winners don't like it.
 
Post Ironic

Post Ironic

Senior Member
#9,077
Feb 9, 2013
41,845
#9,077
jukazem said:
Lol Juve isn't ManCity. Exor paying CR7's wages would be illegal!

Like every other year the break-up is set at CL semi-finals so there will be a manageable loss if Juve don't reach atleast semifinals. For a rough estimate, it would be like €40m loss in case of Ro16 exit, €20m if QF, it's how Juve budgets every year. With CR7 though, Juve's underlying sustainable revenue (revenue excluding plusvalenza) went up a lot, like €80m (my revised estimate after HF accounts) which is same as his annual cost for wages and amortisation.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure Agnelli and our management have said many times that our European goal is to be CL QFs or better every season. So I would assume we set our financial planning around reaching last 8 every year, not around reaching last 4 to avoid a loss. Planning to be in CL Semis or better every single year so as to avoid a 20m+ loss would be ridiculous and not a good long-term financial strategy.

I'd suggest it's more likely we plan to play CL QFs to maintain the 3 year - 30m maximum loss guidelines for FFP. And then anything beyond that is a bonus, financially speaking.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 8)