The Suning Commerce Group

[.h.]

Care to elaborate how teams like e.g. PSG dont spend more than they make?

They do, but they have an owner who is willing to cover all of their losses. Note that with the FFP changes coming up, things will get sticky for them - FFP regulations are moving to costs (amortisation+wages) being a % of your revenue, but this is well established anyway (and part of the reason why they were trying to sell Mbappe for shitloads)


this year, they will have pretty much fully amortised Neymar, so the 90mil or so fee they got for him will take things a long way, too.


We need to cut our costs (or, obviously increase our revenues) so that we're FFP compliant. And I just dont think its practical to imagine someone spending 1 billion to buy the club, 400-500mil to clear our debts, another 800mil on a stadium, and then pumping in 100mil a season before they actually invest in any improvement in the club

premiership is probably the only league in the world moving to more losses, rather than fewer. Spain, Italy, even PSG, in general are trying to cut costs and get more sustainable.

 

[Forzanerazzurri]

They do, but they have an owner who is willing to cover all of their losses. Note that with the FFP changes coming up, things will get sticky for them - FFP regulations are moving to costs (amortisation+wages) being a % of your revenue, but this is well established anyway (and part of the reason why they were trying to sell Mbappe for shitloads)


this year, they will have pretty much fully amortised Neymar, so the 90mil or so fee they got for him will take things a long way, too.


We need to cut our costs (or, obviously increase our revenues) so that we're FFP compliant. And I just dont think its practical to imagine someone spending 1 billion to buy the club, 400-500mil to clear our debts, another 800mil on a stadium, and then pumping in 100mil a season before they actually invest in any improvement in the club

premiership is probably the only league in the world moving to more losses, rather than fewer. Spain, Italy, even PSG, in general are trying to cut costs and get more sustainable.

It's a bit more complicated than that. Capital injections from owners are only up to a certain limit, and that contribution limit isn't that high. I think it's 30 million euro for the current 3 year period (it used to be 45).

I am not well versed in PSGs books but they still don't make sense to me without tons of shenanigans going on.

 

[.h.]

It's a bit more complicated than that. Capital injections from owners are only up to a certain limit, and that contribution limit isn't that high. I think it's 30 million euro for the current 3 year period (it used to be 45).

I am not well versed in PSGs books but they still don't make sense to me without tons of shenanigans going on.

FFP rules are changing soon - maybe even this season? Costs (eg wage+amo) are a % of revenue. I think it starts at 110 or 90% and tapers down to 70% within a few years.

 

[Forzanerazzurri]

FFP rules are changing soon - maybe even this season? Costs (eg wage+amo) are a % of revenue. I think it starts at 110 or 90% and tapers down to 70% within a few years.

That's interesting. I didn't know that. The old rules clearly don't work (or at least aren't adequately enforceable for certain teams) so we will see how this goes.

 

[CafeCordoba]

Sadly I dont think that's at all feasible. You'd need something like 100-150mil a year in sponsorship + immediate pay off of all bonds and loans to Inter, on a 1 billion transaction price you're probably looking at circa 1.5billion cost, +50-100mil a year in additional sponsorship (the real variability is how you bet on CL progress every season. If we can assume CL QFs, things are a bit rosier)

The fundamental problem is that we spend more than we make.

Last year we spent very little on the market, had to generate plusvalenza (sale of Casadei, Brozovic as examples) and get to the CL final, we still recorded, what was it, like an 80m loss?

Small note, we didn't get plusvalenza for the past season from this summer's sales (Brozovic, Onana and so on). Only casadeis, pinamontis etc are counted for the past season. And actually not totally sure if Pinamonti is counted either (as it was loan + obligation), we gonna find that out in November.

 

[.h.]

Small note, we didn't get plusvalenza for the past season from this summer's sales (Brozovic, Onana and so on). Only casadeis, pinamontis etc are counted for the past season. And actually not totally sure if Pinamonti is counted either (as it was loan + obligation), we gonna find that out in November.

Onana for sure not, but I thought (incorrectly - just checked) that Broz was sold before July.


Anyway, we'll have to see - but the point is even an -80mil loss (in which, for balance, the majority of the loss will be financing costs) was only partially offset by a number of exceptionals such as plusvalenza, a CL final run, etc. Situation would be improved this year with a sponsor who actually pays us, for example.

I'll see when the actual accounts are posted

 

[CafeCordoba]

Okay might be. It was announced 3rd of July but could be it was sneaked into past season's books.

Yeah sponsorships should give us extra 30m this year. Onana plusvalenza is grande for our books also. If we have a decent CL run, I think it will allow us to not panic sell next June in terms of books. Owners probably want to get to that breakeven position.

 

[.h.]

Okay might be. It was announced 3rd of July but could be it was sneaked into past season's books.

Yeah sponsorships should give us extra 30m this year. Onana plusvalenza is grande for our books also. If we have a decent CL run, I think it will allow us to not panic sell next June in terms of books. Owners probably want to get to that breakeven position.

Yes - I agree with this position, its quite possible we dont panic sell next july, but we do need to keep bringing in 'exceptionals' on the revenue

Once the books are out we'll be able to calculate our % cost as a function of income, and then take a few reasonable guesses on what that looks like for this coming year too

Suspect that, for a while, we'll need some degree of plusvalenza to help us balance, but its a bit less important if a lot of our losses are in terms of write downs and financing rather than player costs

 

[CafeCordoba]

Yes - I agree with this position, its quite possible we dont panic sell next july, but we do need to keep bringing in 'exceptionals' on the revenue

Once the books are out we'll be able to calculate our % cost as a function of income, and then take a few reasonable guesses on what that looks like for this coming year too

Suspect that, for a while, we'll need some degree of plusvalenza to help us balance, but its a bit less important if a lot of our losses are in terms of write downs and financing rather than player costs

I want to be precise. June is the time for panic selling. July is the next season so there's no panic anymore.

 

[.h.]

I want to be precise. June is the time for panic selling. July is the next season so there's no panic anymore.

Yeah, sure. I agree. Hopefully no panic selling this season.

 

[CafeCordoba]

It's gonna be interesting to see how we're going to handle this thing with the new FFP when we need to hand these renewals (payraises) to several players. Dimarco and Dumfries are first in line, then comes Barella and Lautaro. Dimarco's salary will be doubled, Dumfries almost doubled. Barella and Lautaro gets smaller bumps to their already big salaries.

Free agents will be hot commodity in Inter HQ plans, that's why Mkhitaryan will get his renewal aswell (and nothing wrong with that as he's a key player).

 

[brehme1989]

It's more likely we sell Dumfries than keep him and double his salary

 

[ADRossi]

It's more likely we sell Dumfries than keep him and double his salary

When we have to sell players next summer, I'd imagine Dumfries will be the prime candidate.

 

[CoolMan44]

Dumfries will have one year left on his contract which lowers his value. It's not like giving an extension would stop us from selling (see Brozovic).

 

[CafeCordoba]

It's more likely we sell Dumfries than keep him and double his salary

I wouldn't oppose that, we just need to make sure we have at least one RWB lined up before we sell. Le's hope Dumfries will have a dynamite season so we can rack some nice plusvalenza from him aswell in that case we sell.

 

[.h.]

growth decree just got removed for this year, so Thuram and Pavard we now pay full tax on. The contracts likely guarantee their net salary, so the cost to employer has just increased significantly.

 

[CafeCordoba]

Any source for this "growth decree got removed" thing? Haven't seen that anywhere.

If true, it's serious game-changer though I'd assume directors have acknowledged that beforehand. Still questioning this claim.

 

[.h.]

GdS - Addio al Decreto Crescita: tolte le agevolazioni già per gli acquisti estivi, cosa cambia per l'Inter

Importante novità in arrivo dal Governo. L'esecutivo, a seguito dell'ultimo Consiglio dei Ministri, ha annunciato che nella Finanziaria per il 2024 non ci saranno più...

www.fcinternews.it

 

[CafeCordoba]

Goddamn! That's a MASSIVE hit to us.

Thuram and Pavard just become much more expensive for the club. Odds for Thuram getting sold next summer if he has a good/great season just got higher.

 

[.h.]

Goddamn! That's a MASSIVE hit to us.

Thuram and Pavard just become much more expensive for the club. Odds for Thuram getting sold next summer if he has a good/great season just got higher.

I guess its probably only a few mil right? What was Thuram, like 8m post tax? So its probably 3-4mil increased salary

I think Pavard was like 6m, so its probably another 2-3mil in tax.

Maybe about 7mil on the top level for us

Obviously thats a lot of money and we will need to find that money from elsewhere, but it could be worse