some say it's sustainable below 60%. we're definitely on the edge when it comes to wages.
Buy on AliExpress.com
The Financial Situation (79 Viewers)
- Thread starter ReBeL
- Start date
Buy on AliExpress.com
Ronaldo raised our sponsorship deals with Adidas and Jeep and increased our commercial revenue and brand value and a lot of this will translate into a higher turnover.
If we also exceed last year’s results in the champions league it will help a lot as they raised the prize money.
Moreover, by getting rid of the salaries of Khedira, Pjaca, Perin and Can (without losing any value on the pitch) in addition to Mandzukic and maybe Matuidi if we can secure a better B2B player in the summer, and, finally, by saving a lot on the salaries of Danilo, Demiral, MDL, Rabiot and Ramsey starting this month thanks to the new tax law, this percentage will fall considerably.
If we also exceed last year’s results in the champions league it will help a lot as they raised the prize money.
Moreover, by getting rid of the salaries of Khedira, Pjaca, Perin and Can (without losing any value on the pitch) in addition to Mandzukic and maybe Matuidi if we can secure a better B2B player in the summer, and, finally, by saving a lot on the salaries of Danilo, Demiral, MDL, Rabiot and Ramsey starting this month thanks to the new tax law, this percentage will fall considerably.
We are going for rapid growth right now. We invested a lot in Ronaldo as a marketing/player package. When he goes away in a few years the percentage will go down. I think all the numbers are off right now because we decided to make a push to the next level.
The flip side to this is not try to punch above our weight which financially is 10th in the world. No one wants us a slow growth track. We have built a strong base. Improved our stadium and financial status over the last 10 years. No we have made the next step in buying players to bring in commercial revenue as well.
While it could backfire. I dont see that happening because we have one big chunk that will leave in 2-3 years and after that we will see where we stand financially and on the field. Hopefully we have the resources built up before then both in revenue and players to cope.Also wages being high doesnt take into count the transfer fees. PSG are invested almost 300 mil in two players plus salaries that are through the roof.
Lets enjoy the ride and hope we are going according to plan and not burning from the inside out.
The flip side to this is not try to punch above our weight which financially is 10th in the world. No one wants us a slow growth track. We have built a strong base. Improved our stadium and financial status over the last 10 years. No we have made the next step in buying players to bring in commercial revenue as well.
While it could backfire. I dont see that happening because we have one big chunk that will leave in 2-3 years and after that we will see where we stand financially and on the field. Hopefully we have the resources built up before then both in revenue and players to cope.Also wages being high doesnt take into count the transfer fees. PSG are invested almost 300 mil in two players plus salaries that are through the roof.
Lets enjoy the ride and hope we are going according to plan and not burning from the inside out.
Without the salaries of the unwanted players we couldn't sell, that 70% probably comes down to that acceptable 60% ratio.
That's been addressed by not buying anyone else in summer (we about broke even in terms of buys and sells), giving Mandzukic the treatment, and selling Spina might have had something to do with it.
So, financially we're fine when it comes to Paratici's budget (player salaries+transfer fees). It just meant we couldn't buy a midfielder and currently still don't have one who's WC.
That's been addressed by not buying anyone else in summer (we about broke even in terms of buys and sells), giving Mandzukic the treatment, and selling Spina might have had something to do with it.
So, financially we're fine when it comes to Paratici's budget (player salaries+transfer fees). It just meant we couldn't buy a midfielder and currently still don't have one who's WC.
https://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/Tech/uefaorg/General/02/56/20/15/2562015_DOWNLOAD.pdf
the only mention of this 70% is at the end of art 62, on page 43:
no mention of a potential sanction. uefa might ask for the break-even information at any time regardless of the wage bill, so clubs should be ready to submit that information regardless. it looks like an administration issue, not a financial one. correct me if i'm wrong @italiacalcio10
the only mention of this 70% is at the end of art 62, on page 43:
no mention of a potential sanction. uefa might ask for the break-even information at any time regardless of the wage bill, so clubs should be ready to submit that information regardless. it looks like an administration issue, not a financial one. correct me if i'm wrong @italiacalcio10
You're right. 70% is nothing more than an indicator of a potential breach.
The main measure for a sanction is based on adjusted break even, which has a whole bunch of add-backs. I do think Juventus is probably flirting w/ FFP limits, but I think there is some flexibility. If you are in violation, you may demonstrate that it will be corrected in the following financial year, which happens to be when a bunch of our sponsorship agreements kick-in.
The main measure for a sanction is based on adjusted break even, which has a whole bunch of add-backs. I do think Juventus is probably flirting w/ FFP limits, but I think there is some flexibility. If you are in violation, you may demonstrate that it will be corrected in the following financial year, which happens to be when a bunch of our sponsorship agreements kick-in.