Barcelona will have 100m to sign players.

Well, I read somewhere that no Spanish bank would dare to bankrupt Barca or Real as it would annoy their biggest customers big time, so I guess the clubs can get away with much more than any normal customers.

That is irrelevant for Barcelona considering their assets that are not reflected in the Balance sheet. Even a conservative estimate of these assets will put the equity into positive territory.

kiranr wrote:That is irrelevant for Barcelona considering their assets that are not reflected in the Balance sheet. Even a conservative estimate of these assets will put the equity into positive territory.

Are you talking about player values?

I saw Swiss Rambler's note but I think they are inaccurate, he needs to discount the prices off transfermarket at atleast 30% and in additions the valuation should be done as sum of parts as every player should be considered as his own subsidiary (both real assets and management)

Yuri Yukuv wrote:

kiranr wrote:That is irrelevant for Barcelona considering their assets that are not reflected in the Balance sheet. Even a conservative estimate of these assets will put the equity into positive territory.

Are you talking about player values?

I saw Swiss Rambler's note but I think they are inaccurate, he needs to discount the prices off transfermarket at atleast 30% and in additions the valuation should be done as sum of parts as every player should be considered as his own subsidiary (both real assets and management)

Player values, land values, stadium values. All of these might be listed at historical cost and must be underestimating the fair value. Although, i do not have access to their accounts, which i would so love to have.

Any revaluation of these assets even conservatively should make the net worth positive.

kiranr wrote:

Yuri Yukuv wrote:

kiranr wrote:That is irrelevant for Barcelona considering their assets that are not reflected in the Balance sheet. Even a conservative estimate of these assets will put the equity into positive territory.

Are you talking about player values?

I saw Swiss Rambler's note but I think they are inaccurate, he needs to discount the prices off transfermarket at atleast 30% and in additions the valuation should be done as sum of parts as every player should be considered as his own subsidiary (both real assets and management)

Player values, land values, stadium values. All of these might be listed at historical cost and must be underestimating the fair value. Although, i do not have access to their accounts, which i would so love to have.

Any revaluation of these assets even conservatively should make the net worth positive.

Pretty sure IFRS already uses fair value accounting for assets...

BhritanniaBhlue wrote:

kiranr wrote:

Yuri Yukuv wrote:

kiranr wrote:That is irrelevant for Barcelona considering their assets that are not reflected in the Balance sheet. Even a conservative estimate of these assets will put the equity into positive territory.

Are you talking about player values?

I saw Swiss Rambler's note but I think they are inaccurate, he needs to discount the prices off transfermarket at atleast 30% and in additions the valuation should be done as sum of parts as every player should be considered as his own subsidiary (both real assets and management)

Player values, land values, stadium values. All of these might be listed at historical cost and must be underestimating the fair value. Although, i do not have access to their accounts, which i would so love to have.

Any revaluation of these assets even conservatively should make the net worth positive.

Pretty sure IFRS already uses fair value accounting for assets...

Cant really say how Staduim and Land are valued as I still cant find their financial statements.

Does anyone care to link them here?

Yeah, for land and property, i guess you are right.

Manchester united seems to be the most interesting from all the top clubs financially though, they should be doing an IPO at the singapore stock exchange in the near future.

Yuri Yukuv wrote:Manchester united seems to be the most interesting from all the top clubs financially though, they should be doing an IPO at the singapore stock exchange in the near future.

They have 420 million in goodwill Yuri. A bit dodgy i must say. Although for a football club, it does hold some water, but 420 million is almost half its net worth.

kiranr wrote:

Yuri Yukuv wrote:Manchester united seems to be the most interesting from all the top clubs financially though, they should be doing an IPO at the singapore stock exchange in the near future.

They have 420 million in goodwill Yuri. A bit dodgy i must say. Although for a football club, it does hold some water, but 420 million is almost half its net worth.

If I didn't know anything about soccer I'd certainly say it was bizarre...but when you take a look at Man Utd's brand, commercial weight, and unparalleled league success in what is the most lucrative league in the world, I suppose its not that surprising (although I am no apprasier and I dont know how impairment of goodwill works under IFRS)

I think, it is tested every year for significant damages to value. Although, i am highly interested in knowing how they measured it without making any acquisitions.

united have a relatively recent takeover to assign value to the goodwill, if you have a recent transaction that massive, it's not exactly rocket science

also don't ifrs standards require very strict use of past book value? that's what i was taught... you then get all kinds of different provisions to accommodate actual value but past, actually realised, cost is what has to be reported

Sushi Master wrote:Why so much money, wasn't the point to try forming the team straight from La Masia?

They're catalans not basque.

Bilbao

kiranr wrote:
I think, it is tested every year for significant damages to value. Although, i am highly interested in how they measured it without making any acquisitions.

Isnt this the goodwill which the Glazers had for their leveraged buy-out? I can imagine when they added the leverage to the balance so did they the goodwill.

Anyways to me it seems that most of the goodwill and income is highly concentrated as it is dependent on Fergie's contract

che wrote:united have a relatively recent takeover to assign value to the goodwill, if you have a recent transaction that massive, it's not exactly rocket science

also don't ifrs standards require very strict use of past book value? that's what i was taught... you then get all kinds of different provisions to accommodate actual value but past, actually realised, cost is what has to be reported

aah, then it makes sense about United.

Regarding IFRS, yes, they are initially reported at cost, but it also offers a revaluation model, where the entity can revalue their assets. Looked it up right now.

Yuri Yukuv wrote:

Isnt this the goodwill which the Glazers had for their leveraged buy-out? I can imagine when they added the leverage to the balance so did they the goodwill.

Anyways to me it seems that most of the goodwill and income is highly concentrated as it is dependent on Fergie's contract

Yes, the goodwill makes sense considering the takeover. Did not take it into account.

About their future, it depends on who they hire after Fergie and how successful he is.

che wrote:united have a relatively recent takeover to assign value to the goodwill, if you have a recent transaction that massive, it's not exactly rocket science

also don't ifrs standards require very strict use of past book value? that's what i was taught... you then get all kinds of different provisions to accommodate actual value but past, actually realised, cost is what has to be reported

IFRS allows 2 models.Most firms follow the cost model(historical cost minus accumulated depreciation) but revaluation model is also allowed.
Regarding United's goodwill,the way their brand keeps growing (believe its the number 1 sports brand in the world),there is zero probability of their goodwill being impaired.
Regarding Barca I would really like to see our cash flow statement.

Ok I found something

Here is the 08/09 Financial statements for barca (In English!)

http://arxiu.fcbarcelona.cat/web/downloads/sala_premsa/memoria/2009/memoria_barca_economica_eng.pdf

Here is a deloitte report on the football industry in general

http://www.deloitte.com/assets/Dcom-Ecuador/Local%20Assets/Documents/Estudios%20generales/Football%20Money%20League.pdf

Here is real madrid's financial statement for 08/09 (Spanish)

http://www.realmadrid.com/StaticFiles/RealMadrid/img/pdf/InformeRmEconomica08_09_doblePAG.pdf

LOL, I remember about a month ago people were yelling and screaming about how far in debt Barca were and how they were in so much trouble etc etc

And I asked them OK what are the effects of this enormous crippling debt we have? What is it holding us back from doing? No one could answer 1 thing and then everyone just ignored the question.

Not to mention everyone also ignored that most high profile teams are in debt, it's normal. Every year or so we get some Madrid fan on here or Madrid fan who's a writer for a paper telling us how bad our debt is and how we are in such trouble and can't believe the state of Barca but then they never tell us how this effects us on a day to day basis or even 10 years from now, it's hilarious because it doesn't.

It's also the main reason I hate Rosell because he likes to point this out every chance he gets because Laporta was so successful it's the only thing he can say and then he goes and buys players any way and ignores what he was saying. Not to mention I believe Rosell is a big reason Pep is leaving.

dnmac4 wrote:LOL, I remember about a month ago people were yelling and screaming about how far in debt Barca were and how they were in so much trouble etc etc

And I asked them OK what are the effects of this enormous crippling debt we have? What is it holding us back from doing? No one could answer 1 thing and then everyone just ignored the question.

Not to mention everyone also ignored that most high profile teams are in debt, it's normal. Every year or so we get some Madrid fan on here or Madrid fan who's a writer for a paper telling us how bad our debt is and how we are in such trouble and can't believe the state of Barca but then they never tell us how this effects us on a day to day basis or even 10 years from now, it's hilarious because it doesn't.

It's also the main reason I hate Rosell because he likes to point this out every chance he gets because Laporta was so successful it's the only thing he can say and then he goes and buys players any way and ignores what he was saying. Not to mention I believe Rosell is a big reason Pep is leaving.

Without Messi and Guardiola popping out of no where back in 08/09 FC Barcelona would have been in big trouble. I could imagine that atleast Xavi or Iniesta would have been forced to be sold off.

Honestly I'd rather get Neymar or whatever good forward for as much as Llorente would cost + Drogba on a free than Llorente.

What I also find hilarious and so hypocritical are the people saying, "I thought Barca gets players from LA Masia and doesn't need to spend money."

First of all what ground do any of you have to stand on and make those accusations?

Is there any other team that plays as many players from there youth academy? No team can compete for top honors with all youth team players. Barca got as close as you can get in starting 7or 8 out of 11 in a CL final.

Isn't that enough for you people? How far do you need them to go to prove they rely more heavily on there youth system then any team in the world? They have to field a team of over 20 players, not 11. You can't expect one youth academy to produce you 20 near world class players every single year.

Here was there starting lineup last game against Madrid.

Valdes, Alves, Puyol, Mascherano, Adriano, Busquets, Xavi, Thiago, Tello, Iniesta, Messi

That's 8/11 players against one of the best teams in the world and with world class Pique sitting on the bench not to mention Pedro as well.

I mean some of you really need to give Barca a break now and again. I understand some of you hate them but at least hate them for the right reasons.

Yes they will spend money just like every other team, so what. When your team has the balls to step on the field in a big game with 80% of your starting 11 from the youth academy then stand up and discredit them all you want.

Barca says they create world class players and don't need to buy them that is true to a point but you can't hold them to totally unreasonable standards you would never dream of holding anyone else to.

Most games there going to start 70-80% of there players from there academy, is that not enough?

dnmac4 wrote:

Is there any other team that plays as many players from there youth academy?

How far do you need them to go to prove they rely more heavily on there youth system then any team in the world?

Chivas

Yuri Yukuv wrote:

dnmac4 wrote:LOL, I remember about a month ago people were yelling and screaming about how far in debt Barca were and how they were in so much trouble etc etc

And I asked them OK what are the effects of this enormous crippling debt we have? What is it holding us back from doing? No one could answer 1 thing and then everyone just ignored the question.

Not to mention everyone also ignored that most high profile teams are in debt, it's normal. Every year or so we get some Madrid fan on here or Madrid fan who's a writer for a paper telling us how bad our debt is and how we are in such trouble and can't believe the state of Barca but then they never tell us how this effects us on a day to day basis or even 10 years from now, it's hilarious because it doesn't.

It's also the main reason I hate Rosell because he likes to point this out every chance he gets because Laporta was so successful it's the only thing he can say and then he goes and buys players any way and ignores what he was saying. Not to mention I believe Rosell is a big reason Pep is leaving.

Without Messi and Guardiola popping out of no where back in 08/09 FC Barcelona would have been in big trouble. I could imagine that atleast Xavi or Iniesta would have been forced to be sold off.

OK, take away 2 of the smartest moves any club has made and they wouldn't be in the shape there in.

The fact is they were smart enough to make those moves and a lot of the spending was done while Messi was there's. He's been there since he was 12 and they have known for the pas 8-10 years he was going to be a superstar.

I mean that is a really weak argument. When you make good moves it gives you the leverage to run there system the way they do. And now that they run it this way people yell and scream for no reason.

That's like saying, "Well if Madrid didn't buy Ronaldo and Mou" they would have never caught up to Barca.

Well no shit. But they did and now that gives them the freedom to build a team around one of the greatest players in the world.

And Pep and Messi didn't exactly just "Pop out of nowhere" like you said. They made a decision to concentrate on there youth system and promoting from with-in a long time ago. That SMART decision is just giving them the freedom to run the club how they choose.

It's not luck that they have a conveyor belt of talent coming through La Masia every couple years at a rate not matched by any other team in the world, there just not "poping up" out of nowhere like some of you would have us believe. It's a long term strategy that paid off.

AS for spending 100 Mill, I really don't think we need to go that far. And any transfer policy that has anything to do with getting rid of Dani Alves or Villa I'm totally against.

For Villa, I would really like to see what kind of form he's in after being 100% recovered from his injury. He is 30 so he's no spring chicken anymore but if he takes care of himself and every indication is that he does then he will have a solid 2-3 years left in him playing at a near world class level.

When he did struggle for us in patches I didn't think it was because his level of play was declining I thought it was more of him being played a little out of position on the wing.

Of course I would love to have Llorente but if we have to sell Villa to do it then still spend a ton on Llorente I don't know how great that would be.

What we need is defense , to me Llorente seems more of a luxury if we don't get our defense in order and BTW I do really like a lot of our youth team defenders.

I heard its 70m + 30m from selling players

Keita seems likely to go to Milan.

I could also see Tello Afellay Adriano and maybe even Villa or Alves leaving as well. Not saying they are but just saying that they are the most likely in the squad to be sold.