Record profit of 40 million euros

http://www.fcbarcelona.com/club/det...ason-with-a-record-profit-of-40-million-euros

Sandro Rosell announced that the Club has closed out the fiscal year with a historic surplus. The funds will be allocated to paying down the Club's debt

The Club's outstanding debt stands at 340 million euros

FC Barcelona have closed out the 2011/12 season with a positive balance of 40 million euros. “It’s extraordinary news,” President Sandro Rosell said in his overview of the season during this afternoon’s press conference. This year’s surplus of 40 million euros surpassed the projected net profits of 21 million euros set at the beginning of the season.

Of the 40 million, only 12 million comes from the bonuses not given to players and managers for not winning the Liga and the Champions League, according to the president.

Rosell stated that this year’s surplus will be allocated to paying down the Club’s debt. The president said that when the current Board of Directors started to manage the Club, the outstanding debt stood at 420 million euros. Two years later, the debt has been reduced to 320 million euros.

A rational and sustainable model

The president also stated that the decision to reduce the debt “will not affect the day-to-day business of the Club,” seeing that debt reduction actions have to do with investing in equity and that the acquisition of players “has been included in the Club’s working budget.” The “rational approach and the sustainability of the model,” according to Rosell, are the main reasons the Club closed out the year in the black after two consecutive years of losses.

Lastly, the president confirmed that in the next General Assembly, vice president Javier Faus will present FC Barcelona’s strategic economic plan to Club members.

Thanx for the news.

Good news about the debt. Not sure though if the shrewdness of the board had much to do with it.
I'd wager that selling the shirt and saving on bonuses did all tricks and that's not exactly down to much financial acumen.

Enough to sign Hummels?

Alba for 15 leaves us 25 for Hummels. Slim chance Dortmund would accept.

Bojan said:

Not sure though if the shrewdness of the board had much to do with it.

Click to expand...

That's the most frustating part though.We can't take in account player bonuses as profit.Winning LaLiga or CL would also had an impact on income.If this isn't the deal and winning titles proves to be ineffective to lower the debt then maybe we are in real trouble..
Or just Rossel tries to lower the transfer badget so other teams won't rip us apart..

Well in order to have a clear conclusion we might need to look deeper into the financial statements. 12 million € savings from bonuses not paid due to La Liga and CL losses, however, winning the CL and La Liga leads to extra money. So it's not clear how much the CL and La Liga wins would have affected the financial statements. Anyone aware of the price money for La Liga and CL trophies?

The Qatar Foundation sponsorship clearly had an effect.

The number 38 is floating around in my head. 38 mil for winning the CL, but I'm not sure. It seems too much.

mitkoa7x said:

The number 38 is floating around in my head. 38 mil for winning the CL, but I'm not sure. It seems too much.

Click to expand...

The CL money has a different algorithm...

Part I: Money for getting into the league anyway (every team the same amount)
Part II: TV money according to the countries allocation
Part III: Getting into the next round (1/16, 1/8 etc. till the final)

Then there is around 800'000 € for winning a game, 400'000 € for a draw etc.

All in all, you can indeed win a 38 M € by winning the CL. However, I don't exactly know the difference in money between loosing in the semi-finals and the final. Must be around some million €

So here it is:



So the winner gets an extra 9 M €.

Correct me if I'm wrong but Barca won every game in the CL Group stage but the first 2-2 against Milan, right?

So 6 matches, 5 wins, 1 draw = 5x0.8 + 0.4 = 4.4 M € already in the group stage
+ 7.2 M € for being already in the CL
+ 3.0 + 3.3 + 4.2 for getting into the semi-finals.

Wins against Leverkusen, a draw against Milan and again a win = 3x0.8 + 0.4 = 2.8 M €

Lost against Chelsea, draw at home = 0.4 M €

All in all = 4.4 M € + 7.2 M € + 3.0 + 3.3 + 4.2 + 2.8 + 0.4 = 25.3 M € (TV allocation not included)

30 milion euros from QF + 12 million euros saved from bonuses for LL&CL + 6 milion euros from tickets for the Spanish Supercup(they were free before for socios) + a reduced budget with 5% at the other proffesional sections => 40 million euros profit => Rosell is a genius

I also found out that Rosell delayed Yaya's sale so that he could use the money as income for his first season, not for Laporta's last and that at the club's museum he eliminated Joan from the picture of the 6 trophies from 2009 and introduced himself instead. Like I said, Sandro is a genius.

Maria said:

30 milion euros from QF + 12 million euros saved from bonuses for LL&CL + 6 milion euros from tickets for the Spanish Supercup(they were free before for socios) + a reduced budget with 5% at the other proffesional sections => 40 million euros profit => Rosell is a genius

I also found out that Rosell delayed Yaya's sale so that he could use the money as income for his first season, not for Laporta's last and that at the club's museum he eliminated Joan from the picture of the 6 trophies from 2009 and introduced himself instead. Like I said, Sandro is a genius.

Click to expand...

Nothing ingenious about it though Guess you're post is ironic.

Don't exactly know why Rossel is not so popular. The Cruijff problem was surely not a booster, however I think he was in the team with Laporta at the beginning of the Rijkaard period, and they "revolutionized" a lot together. Laporta could have been a charismatic leader, yet he had his flaws too.

JackaL said:

Don't exactly know why Rossel is not so popular. The Cruijff problem was surely not a booster, however I think he was in the team with Laporta at the beginning of the Rijkaard period, and they "revolutionized" a lot together. Laporta could have been a charismatic leader, yet he had his flaws too.

Click to expand...

I don't understand why someone who criticize Rosell has to be a Laporta fan. I'm a cule and I want what's best for Barca, no matter who is the president.

Maria said:

I don't understand why someone who criticize Rosell has to be a Laporta fan. I'm a cule and I want what's best for Barca, no matter who is the president.

Click to expand...

How did you read that between the lines? I was just naming Laporta, as I was reading positive posts on him in general. Nobody has to be for Rossel neither for Laporta.

JackaL said:

How did you read that between the lines? I was just naming Laporta, as I was reading positive posts on him in general. Nobody has to be for Rossel neither for Laporta.

Click to expand...

I might have been confused by the fact that you answered to a post of mine about Rosell with "Laporta has his flaws too". Well, at this moment I don't care about Laporta, just as I don't care about Nunez or Gaspart. I only care about Rosell and his hypocrisy.

psychotsek said:

That's the most frustating part though.We can't take in account player bonuses as profit.Winning LaLiga or CL would also had an impact on income.If this isn't the deal and winning titles proves to be ineffective to lower the debt then maybe we are in real trouble..

Click to expand...

It's a more sustainable model. If teams have to win to do well financially then when they don't succeed they will struggle. Look at what happened to Leeds and Depor. They overstretched and when success on the pitch stopped the finances deteriorated. With Barca financial success is more independent of on the field success. Barca don't win they do well financially so can invest in the future. If they do well, they directly lose out because of paying out bonuses, but they get intangible benefits of being the winning team and thus gaining more supporters/publicity.

Rosell isn't a genius, neither is the board overly shrewd. What they have been though is very efficient with the finances. The big thing they have done well with though is that the transfer spending has been under control, especially when you look at some of the deals we've done in the past pre-Rosell(Saviola, Ibra, Keirrison, Christanval etc)

oz187 said:

It's a more sustainable model. If teams have to win to do well financially then when they don't succeed they will struggle. Look at what happened to Leeds and Depor. They overstretched and when success on the pitch stopped the finances deteriorated. With Barca financial success is more independent of on the field success. Barca don't win they do well financially so can invest in the future. If they do well, they directly lose out because of paying out bonuses, but they get intangible benefits of being the winning team and thus gaining more supporters/publicity.

Rosell isn't a genius, neither is the board overly shrewd. What they have been though is very efficient with the finances. The big thing they have done well with though is that the transfer spending has been under control, especially when you look at some of the deals we've done in the past pre-Rosell(Saviola, Ibra, Keirrison, Christanval etc)

Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more. And it's going to pay dividends. If they continue to climb out of the red faster than Real Madrid, that will give a huge long-term financial advantage both in the transfer market and from an overall organizational standpoint going forward.