FC Barcelona Finances

What I don't get is why somehow some basketball (our game vs. CSKA for example) and handball games which are played indoor were allowed to have audience in some locations in Europe (France, Russia etc.) whereas football, being played in open air stadiums, does not allow any audience. Anybody knows why?

The UK is rolling out a lot of first vaccines quickly in comparison to majority of other countries that will also have the larger outdoor stadiums.

Estimated here that all adults will have first vaccination by September at latest as it stands.. unless issues with receiving the vaccine from abroad.

Likes of Spain have are going to be months behind but would guess what happens here will happen in Spain a few months after. Need to see how the deaths and hospitalisation numbers start to look in second half of February to assess the impact of the vaccinations but would think if all goes to plan fans will be back in stadium in some capacity by May surely.

@1993Kaan1993

I stand corrected. We are not even making 40m-50m a year from non-football sections, we are making much less than that so your theory of Barca ahead of PSG only because of non-football sections holds even less water. Last season we made a paltry 16m from all of those sections combined and we incurred a loss of 45m. Really worrying that we might even consider discontinuing or drastically reduce investment in those sections.

As deep as the situation is & knowing we are not real madrid which will work some magic by selling things they don't even own ...

An external investor is the most secure solution, as correcting the commercial portion of our revenue & adapting to the Corona era with more digital content outside matchs ...etc is way too late.

This or sell every "star" player we have.

Mind boggling we are still owed to pay an extra 10mil euro for griez before end of financial year.

not only that but we pretty much didn't pay any previous club stemming for transfert like Gremio ..etc

And yet this is the best plan they can come up with ?

"Barca were hoping to be able to rely on the return of fans this season, with ticket sales expected to be a big part of the club's financial bounce-back.

The return of fans was expected to make the club ?56m (?50m/$68m) this campaign, with the club expecting a capacity of 25% in February and 50% from May onwards."

Barto math ...

The socio only finance model is ancient and obsolete.

Have to have all revenue streams to compete with PSG and the English clubs.

FCMessi said:

The socio only finance model is ancient and obsolete.

Have to have all revenue streams to compete with PSG and the English clubs.

Click to expand...

True. Not sure how much longer Barca can keep going like this.

FCMessi said:

The socio only finance model is ancient and obsolete.

Have to have all revenue streams to compete with PSG and the English clubs.

Click to expand...

Not obsolete at all. If you want rich owner(s) to hijack the club and do whatever they want without the members having a say at all, that is the way to go. Gladly nobody at the club wants that.

Real Madrid is handling its finances well, being a club owned by its members.

Luftstalag14 said:

Not obsolete at all. If you want rich owner(s) to hijack the club and do whatever they want without the members having a say at all, that is the way to go. Gladly nobody at the club wants that.

Real Madrid is handling its finances well, being a club owned by its members.

Click to expand...

Coutinho, Griezmann, Dembele, Malcom, Arthur, Vidal, etc ALL happened when Barca was owned by members only.

Currently Barca has a debt of 1.173 B euros with 730m euros due in the short term. Almost on the verge of bankruptcy.

PSG and top English clubs with rich owners are certainly doing much worse financially than Barca.

Even before the pandemic, Barca could rarely hope to win a bidding war in transfer battles against the rich clubs. Many transfers battles were won because of the Messi factor and the climate.

FCMessi said:

Coutinho, Griezmann, Dembele, Malcom, Arthur, Vidal, etc ALL happened when Barca was owned by members only.

Currently Barca has a debt of 1.173 B euros with 730m euros due in the short term. Almost on the verge of bankruptcy.

PSG and top English clubs with rich owners are certainly doing much worse financially than Barca.

Even before the pandemic, Barca could rarely hope to win a bidding war in transfer battles against the rich clubs. Many transfers battles were won because of the Messi factor and the climate.

Click to expand...

I am not sure if you meant that as sarcasm but yes, some clubs with rich owners are indeed worse than us financially, for example Hotspurs and Manchester United. Not trying to make excuses for how Bartomeu & Co. handled our finances, including those transfer blunders, just saying changing the model and have rich owner(s) owning the club is no guarantee for financial and sporting success.

I assume most of the Spurs debt is from the new stadium.

Bayern Munichs finances impress me time and time again.

Madrid are doing pretty well.

FinBarcelonafan said:

I assume most of the Spurs debt is from the new stadium.

Click to expand...

Correct.

The problem isn't debt, it's short term debt

The debt Spurs have because of their stadium is long term and those debt obligations will be fulfilled as they will extend far beyond the pandemic.

Barcelona are idiots and owe a ton of short-term debt over the next few years. They don't have the revenues to pay it off during a global pandemic.

This club was living on a knife's edge financially.

Devils said:

The problem isn't debt, it's short term debt

The debt Spurs have because of their stadium is long term and those debt obligations will be fulfilled as they will extend far beyond the pandemic.

Barcelona are idiots and owe a ton of short-term debt over the next few years. They don't have the revenues to pay it off during a global pandemic.

This club was living on a knife's edge financially.

Click to expand...

Right, but the point was changing the ownership model (and putting the club in the hands of rich owners and groups etc.) doesn't mean the financial situation will be better. Without enough business acumen and prudent planning and execution clubs will be in trouble regardless of what the model is or who owns the club.

The only advantage those clubs have is they can look to their owners for help whereas we can't. And I am arguing the cons pale in front of the pros of not being owned by some rich owners. They buy clubs or shares of clubs for all different purposes, some of which are not exactly for sporting purposes and might even be against the interest of the club in the long run. For example when Ryan Reynolds teamed up with Rob McElhenney and bought Wrexham AFC for $2.5m last year, they didn't care what would happen to the club, they were not interested in injecting money into the club to beef it up and go up the ladder into higher divisions, they were simply trying to sell the content rights of any media production based on the club which can easily go over their purchase price.