Oaktree Capital Management

To whom they will sell the team?

  • Saudi Ownership

    Votes: 26 41.3%
  • UAE Ownership

    Votes: 4 6.3%
  • Finish Ownership

    Votes: 2 3.2%
  • American Ownership

    Votes: 13 20.6%
  • Italian Ownership

    Votes: 9 14.3%
  • Canadian Ownership,

    Votes: 3 4.8%
  • Others.

    Votes: 5 7.9%
  • Finnish Ownership

    Votes: 1 1.6%
  • Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund please

    Votes: 9 14.3%
  • Oaktree Ownership

    Votes: 2 3.2%

  • Total voters
    63

.h.

Part time Lazarus
La Grande Inter
Joined
Jun 8, 2005
Messages
29,600
Likes
7,807
Favorite Player
Inter1-0Wanda
Old username
browha
Forum Supporter
10 years of FIF
The point is that amortization has no effect on cash flow, thus not requiring any outflow in the way that for example a wage bill does.
Not really. If you use amortization as a proxy for our payment schedules on transfers you won't be far off the truth. Amortization is, ultimately, all cash flow anyway just in a different timing, so aggregated over several years it amounts to the exact same thing.

You have to remember everything we amortise was paid for in cash in the first place...
 

Adriano@10

Allenatore
Allenatore
Joined
May 22, 2004
Messages
9,665
Likes
2,624
Favorite Player
Oba
10 years of FIF
Not really. If you use amortization as a proxy for our payment schedules on transfers you won't be far off the truth. Amortization is, ultimately, all cash flow anyway just in a different timing, so aggregated over several years it amounts to the exact same thing.

You have to remember everything we amortise was paid for in cash in the first place...
What? We amortize our players for way loner then the payment shedules....
I d argue it s a rather bad proxy for transfer CFs
 

.h.

Part time Lazarus
La Grande Inter
Joined
Jun 8, 2005
Messages
29,600
Likes
7,807
Favorite Player
Inter1-0Wanda
Old username
browha
Forum Supporter
10 years of FIF
What? We amortize our players for way loner then the payment shedules....
I d argue it s a rather bad proxy for transfer CFs
As a really rough ballpark it's not terrible. And as stated it doesn't really matters over a few years it'll average out anyways so calling it non cash is just not representative
 

William

Allenatore
Allenatore
Joined
Jun 18, 2010
Messages
5,418
Likes
955
Favorite Player
Zanetti
Forum Supporter
10 years of FIF
Preach.

You can "modernize" the logo without butchering the club.

One idea I'm not supporting, but just saying would have been better is this. At least it keeps the FCIM and it's not a Transformers or whatever cartoon or motorcycle company inspired the new one.
images


Our colors and nickname are Black & Blue. Our logo is Blue and White. At least get the basics right...

I doubt the Americans will do any changes now. Let's see if they even intend to keep the club rather than just broker a deal with someone else which appears the most likely scenario now
Our old logo on the left just releases all the good chemicals in my brain 🤣😍 just bring it back!
 

bubba zanetti

Allenatore
Allenatore
Joined
Sep 8, 2020
Messages
9,259
Likes
10,002
Favorite Player
Chino Recoba
Reading on facebook, there is collective euforia from beelan and rube fans. They say we are finished and doomed, we will sell all our starters, primavera will play for us next season etc etc lol what a bunch of frustrated clowns
 

PHM1605

Allenatore
Allenatore
Joined
Feb 25, 2013
Messages
5,374
Likes
2,985
10 years of FIF
Reading on facebook, there is collective euforia from beelan and rube fans. They say we are finished and doomed, we will sell all our starters, primavera will play for us next season etc etc lol what a bunch of frustrated clowns
If only you could read VNese group pages, they can't even distinguish change ownership and bankruptcy :lol: Dancing on some shitty news like Oaktree is not interested in soccer and going to grow mold on their 1 billions assets.

Jesus Christ as if 1 billion dollars is VNDs. Even so money aren't leaves.
 

varmin

Allenatore
Allenatore
Joined
Dec 23, 2014
Messages
9,622
Likes
9,256
Forum Supporter
Most Improved Member
Reading on facebook, there is collective euforia from beelan and rube fans. They say we are finished and doomed, we will sell all our starters, primavera will play for us next season etc etc lol what a bunch of frustrated clowns
I don't know why? I've read that Oaktree will delegate everything to Marotta for now. This doesn't look like a plan to destroy Inter.
 

IL Fenomeno

Primavera
Primavera
Joined
Aug 14, 2023
Messages
313
Likes
420
This is a positive for Inter. It is what I was hoping for. We weren't going anywhere significant under the previous ownership, to whom I still tip my cap for their achievements. But to compete on the biggest stage requires investment, and we simply have not had enough of it.

So join me in tipping back some high quality scotch, pulling on that foul fuckin cigar, and appreciating the moment. Personally I am hoping to see Saudi ownership, a significant influx of capital to club operations, and a robust future for the black 'n blue. Here's to a bright future.

🍺 :cool:
i would like to have your optimism man
 

.h.

Part time Lazarus
La Grande Inter
Joined
Jun 8, 2005
Messages
29,600
Likes
7,807
Favorite Player
Inter1-0Wanda
Old username
browha
Forum Supporter
10 years of FIF
What? We amortize our players for way loner then the payment shedules....
I d argue it s a rather bad proxy for transfer CFs
hey

sorry, I'm on a PC now, let me go into a bit more detail


So I think the 'amortisation isnt cashflow' argument doesnt really stack up. Like, yes, amortisation is separate fromcashflow. That's inherently true. But our amortisation is driven by cashflow anyway. The values we amortise for our players are based on how much we paid for them. Not 'theoretical' player values.


In a big company, they might (say) buy some land/a factory/a building for 100m euros, and because of a big boom, it goes from 100m euros to 1 billion euros in land valuation. Then that'll impact how they amortise it, but in that case, its non-cashflow, because the 900mil capital appreciation wasnt cash flow (in or out) in the first place.

Every 1 euro on our book of player amortisation is 1 euro of money that has, or will, flow out of Inter, so to say its non-cashflow is a bit of a misnomer. If every season we sat down, re-valued our players, and said - hey, Barella appreciated +20m this year, that's great, we can put that on the books, or, hey, Mkhi is getting closer to retirement, we write him down from 8m to 2m, that's -6m on the books then its a different story. But that's not what happens. In that world, EBITDA would be a far more meaningful measure for the club because A would be nothing to do with cashflow in that case



Take another example

page 13 on our 22-23 financial report:


Now, I'm not an accountant so PLEASE tell me if I've misunderstood this, but

Section D, Payables
Sub-section 15 - To Specific Sector Institutions

You can see there's 100m of outstanding payments associated with the club - that's 50m within 12 months, and another 50m beyond 12 months, and excludes agents fees (which are noted as Trade Payables) - as a very rough proxy its not a million miles off of our annual amortisation bill which is 112m a year.
 

Neroazzurr4

Primavera
Primavera
Joined
Mar 5, 2017
Messages
443
Likes
598
Favorite Player
NotCuntrado
IMO, American owners don't give a damn about soccer. We would be better off to stay away from American ownership.
Totally agree.
American ownership is bad for European football. They don't have a knowledge how to run club with succses and they don't give a f#ck about it.
 

Adriano@10

Allenatore
Allenatore
Joined
May 22, 2004
Messages
9,665
Likes
2,624
Favorite Player
Oba
10 years of FIF
hey

sorry, I'm on a PC now, let me go into a bit more detail


So I think the 'amortisation isnt cashflow' argument doesnt really stack up. Like, yes, amortisation is separate fromcashflow. That's inherently true. But our amortisation is driven by cashflow anyway. The values we amortise for our players are based on how much we paid for them. Not 'theoretical' player values.


In a big company, they might (say) buy some land/a factory/a building for 100m euros, and because of a big boom, it goes from 100m euros to 1 billion euros in land valuation. Then that'll impact how they amortise it, but in that case, its non-cashflow, because the 900mil capital appreciation wasnt cash flow (in or out) in the first place.

Every 1 euro on our book of player amortisation is 1 euro of money that has, or will, flow out of Inter, so to say its non-cashflow is a bit of a misnomer. If every season we sat down, re-valued our players, and said - hey, Barella appreciated +20m this year, that's great, we can put that on the books, or, hey, Mkhi is getting closer to retirement, we write him down from 8m to 2m, that's -6m on the books then its a different story. But that's not what happens. In that world, EBITDA would be a far more meaningful measure for the club because A would be nothing to do with cashflow in that case
No disagreement here. You are ignoring the fact that for some players especially if bought from serie A we ve included some primavera players which is also no CF relevant.
Take another example

page 13 on our 22-23 financial report:


Now, I'm not an accountant so PLEASE tell me if I've misunderstood this, but

Section D, Payables
Sub-section 15 - To Specific Sector Institutions

You can see there's 100m of outstanding payments associated with the club - that's 50m within 12 months, and another 50m beyond 12 months, and excludes agents fees (which are noted as Trade Payables) - as a very rough proxy its not a million miles off of our annual amortisation bill which is 112m a year.
I guess our disagreement is on what a good proxy is. In your example with the 50 mio in 12months and 50 mio beyond 12 months that thing would still be off by 100% or 50% depending on how you look at it compared to our annual amortization now i would not call that a good proxy.
 

.h.

Part time Lazarus
La Grande Inter
Joined
Jun 8, 2005
Messages
29,600
Likes
7,807
Favorite Player
Inter1-0Wanda
Old username
browha
Forum Supporter
10 years of FIF
No disagreement here. You are ignoring the fact that for some players especially if bought from serie A we ve included some primavera players which is also no CF relevant.

I guess our disagreement is on what a good proxy is. In your example with the 50 mio in 12months and 50 mio beyond 12 months that thing would still be off by 100% or 50% depending on how you look at it compared to our annual amortization now i would not call that a good proxy.

Sure

But my big point is - talking about a football club being EBITDA positive is just ridiculous because there's so much in the A part of EBITDA. Claiming that its 'non-cash' is just a misnomer because every euro of A we take, is 1 euro of hard cash that has left the club. You're of course correct in the primavera swap point, but that has been a relatively small part of our transfer books in the last few years really
 

Zeila

Primavera
Primavera
Joined
Apr 23, 2010
Messages
399
Likes
80
Favorite Player
Chivu Cuchu JZ
Their first order should be removing Socios from the partners list on the main page.
 

Nero Indigo

Capitano
Capitano
Joined
May 21, 2009
Messages
4,720
Likes
652
Favorite Player
Vieri*
Forum Supporter
10 years of FIF
I hope this means that we can get better sponsors on our jerseys now? Both visually and financially please.
 

Damageplan

Capitano
Capitano
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
1,046
Likes
1,228
Totally agree.
American ownership is bad for European football. They don't have a knowledge how to run club with succses and they don't give a f#ck about it.

As opposed to chinese ownership ? I still cant understand this argument. They got someone like Marotta and gave him full power with the known budget limitations. What exactly do you guys expect from whoever owns Inter ? Do you actually expect a lifelong filthy rich Inter fan that is hands on and micromanaging shit ? We had Moratti and older fans know how that went (I am fond of Moratti but also criticized him fiercely many times).
 

Neroazzurr4

Primavera
Primavera
Joined
Mar 5, 2017
Messages
443
Likes
598
Favorite Player
NotCuntrado
I'm talking in general about the relationship between American owners and the European clubs that own them. It is known that they have a completely different way of thinking about football, which is why they call it soccer and not football in the first place.

A good current example is the new owner of Chelsea. Team full of talents, zero chemistry.
 

.h.

Part time Lazarus
La Grande Inter
Joined
Jun 8, 2005
Messages
29,600
Likes
7,807
Favorite Player
Inter1-0Wanda
Old username
browha
Forum Supporter
10 years of FIF
I'm talking in general about the relationship between American owners and the European clubs that own them. It is known that they have a completely different way of thinking about football, which is why they call it soccer and not football in the first place.

A good current example is the new owner of Chelsea. Team full of talents, zero chemistry.
but thats one example

Arsenal is american owned, and doing really well (finally)
Aston Villa is american owned and they've just made the CL
Liverpool is American owned and won the premiership for the first time in their history

I think you're blaming Americans for a thing when its just good vs bad owners.
 

brehme1989

La Grande Inter
La Grande Inter
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
34,968
Likes
18,024
10 years of FIF
Nostradamus
Most Passionate Member
but thats one example

Arsenal is american owned, and doing really well (finally)
Aston Villa is american owned and they've just made the CL
Liverpool is American owned and won the premiership for the first time in their history

I think you're blaming Americans for a thing when its just good vs bad owners.
What % of PL clubs aren't owned by Americans? :lol:

Aston Villa btw is owned by an Egyptian.
 
Top