Well , well , well

Discussion in 'AS Roma' started by Hustle and Flo, Feb 4, 2018.

  1. Hustle and Flo

    Hustle and Flo Member+

    May 20, 2015
    Club:
    AS Roma
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    #1 Hustle and Flo, Feb 4, 2018
    Last edited: Feb 4, 2018
    http://www.ultimouomo.com/un-po-di-chiarezza-sul-bilancio-della-roma/

    Forgive me if things got lost in translation , I just used basic "google translate".

    "The situation in Rome is not simple to analyze. The summer market has confirmed the impressions of the eve, or that the Giallorossi were forced to make a lot of capital gains in June, but the 95.2 million capital gains collected in 2016/17 (of which 85 in June) were not enough to reach the target set by UEFA in the Settlement Agreement.

    The certified loss of 42 million (36.1 before tax) did not allow the re-entry target to be reached in the Break-Even threshold for the three-year period 2015/17, given that, following the deficits (always before taxes) of 37.2 million in 2014/15 and 6.8 million in 2015/16, even after virtuous costs, a final loss of about 30 million would have been expected in 2017/18 compared to what actually emerged from the accounts. The need to generate greater capital gains than expected was caused by lower revenues from European cups (the failure to participate in the Champions League cost almost 50 million in lost revenues), from a higher than expected cost increase of about 8 million (in in particular, salaries, although falling from 155 to 145 million, did so less than expected), from 4 million to be recognized as a bonus to the transferring players purchased in previous market sessions and an increase of 3 million in financial costs.

    To further worsen the situation there is still a negative equity even if improving (-88.9 million compared to -117 of the previous year), an indebtedness higher than turnover (192.5 against 175 million) and a mount slightly more than 70% of revenues (precisely 70.6%). Rome, to obtain the benevolence of the European bodies, has presented itself to UEFA by "confessed rea" waiting to understand what the sanction decided by the continental organization will be.
    In a completely theoretical way we can not rule out even a glaring exclusion from the cups for the 2018/19 season, this being one of the sanctions provided and there is a recent precedent linked to Galatasaray, but in reality it seems more likely a milder sanction since usually UEFA takes much into consideration the effort made by the company to comply with the requests (an effort that in the case of the Turks was considered practically non-existent).

    Roma sold several players, some of them very important, in June, and the company never backtracked its losses (a further capital increase of 120 million was approved at the end of October). In addition, participation in the Champions League this year with the qualification to the round of 16 will bring in the yellow and white boxes an increase in revenues for 2017/18 probably not less than 50 million lost last season.
    In order to try to balance the budget balance for the current year, however, there will be another major sales campaign between January and June, given that the 95 million capital gains realized in 2016/17 will cease to exist. Counting only these two data and the 2016/17 loss, the gains to be achieved would be around 75 million, to be deducted in the event of progress beyond the Champions League knockout rounds or increases in other revenues.

    While waiting for the UEFA ruling (the final decision on the Galatasaray related to the "failed" budget requirements for 2014/15 was taken on 2 March 2016) the Giallorossi can only rely on "court clemency" and hope for sanctions " acceptable "as a heavy fine, the limitation of the rose for the next season and / or even more stringent demands on the next budgets, to be met absolutely worth one (at that point almost certain) exclusion from the cups.
    Regarding the future of the Giallorossi, regardless of the constraints of the Fair Play, it is even more evident from the last budget how central it is for the club's growth the construction of the new stadium and the increase in commercial revenues, an aspect that seems finally having been unlocked this year with the signing of several minor sponsors and the agreement with Turkish Airlines for the shirt that would seem to be on the horizon."

    Figure it out guys , I'm tired of trying to explain the situation. There's some of you that just love to heap unwarranted blame without actually considering anything.

    Do the homework and be part of the change , or be like the others, call for Monchi's head, and protest the Dzeko sale with Pallotta's face on dollar bills.

    And the next time you pine for Walter or can't understand why we always sell for a discount, or you want us to retain players by increasing wages, just remember the 16 million we pissed in the wind for Doumbia during the midst of all this.
     
    shiboboo repped this.
  2. Salmeen10

    Salmeen10 Member+

    Jan 10, 2014
    Bahrain
    Club:
    AS Roma
    Nat'l Team:
    Bahrain
    One number doesn't seem accurate: A loss of 50M due to not qualifying to CL.

    We got 10M from playing the qualification round, then an additional 16M from EL if I remember correctly. Had we qualified to CL, we would have made 35-45M (including QL rounds) due to the fact that 3 clubs were sharing the pool not 2.

    So the actual loss from failing to qualify was around 15-20M not 50M. This makes me take all the numbers mentioned in the article with a grain of salt.

    That 75M capital gains required this year seems completely bogus to me, the real number should be around 20-30M, which we should have already secured from the sales of Paredes, Rudiger and Emerson.

    The overall point stands though, we are operating under huge constraints that fans rarely take into account. There is a very thin line that we constantly cross and then try to walk it back, and it puts us in disadvantage when negotiating like what happened with Salah.

    One point I'd like to make though, is that Spalletti can suck it. He knew he had a very expensive squad last year, he pressured the management to not sell anyone other than Pjanic, then failed to achieve anything other than CL qualification. He repaid that trust by acting like douchebag for the most part then bail out to the first competitor that offered him a contract. Taking the CL spot from Inter and getting him fired will be sweet revenge by Roma.
     
    Shen-O, whill4, Oban14 and 4 others repped this.
  3. Hustle and Flo

    Hustle and Flo Member+

    May 20, 2015
    Club:
    AS Roma
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    Ah , I'm not sure. This guy is usually on the money (from what I've been told) and doesn't talk out of his ass. I think you roughly make 42 million pounds alone from the group stage nowadays.

    I wouldn't discount the numbers completely until you fact-check.

    Why is the 75 million bogus?

    I think that amount is directly correlated to the revenue we gain. Which is why he says, "in the event of progress beyond the Champions League knockout rounds or increases in other revenues".-- Which, to me, likely means it's a deduction based on percentages , not totals.

    He held us hostage , but we allowed him to as well. That blame lies with the club an equal amount.

    But yeah , fcuk that guy. Never was a fan from day 1 , I don't care how brilliant tactically he supposedly is, being a great manager also requires you to have the ability to lead and inspire.
     
  4. Java65

    Java65 Member+

    Oct 2, 2012
    North Carolina
    Club:
    AS Roma
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    #4 Java65, Feb 5, 2018
    Last edited: Feb 5, 2018
    Sounds really fishy to me. If this were the case we would have not splashed that kind of cash on Schick. Probably wouldn't have bought Under or Karsdorp either. A loan-purchase of Defrel was probably out of the question.

    If Roma were depending on the clemency of UEFA they are not going to then go and spend that kind of money.

    That story is probably as factual as Alice in Wonderland
     
  5. Roma_NY

    Roma_NY Member+

    Oct 19, 2009
    Washington, D.C.
    Club:
    AS Roma
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Remember that Schick isn't really that expensive right now. He is on loan for 5m euro with an additional 9m to make it permanent with 8m in bonuses. Then Samp are due an additional 20m in 2020.
     
  6. Java65

    Java65 Member+

    Oct 2, 2012
    North Carolina
    Club:
    AS Roma
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    The point is if you are under FFP scrutiny and hoping UEFA is going to show mercy the last thing your are going to do is commit to spending 20-30 mil in the future.

    It's like working out a payment plan with your credit card company and then asking them for additional credit.
     
  7. Roma_NY

    Roma_NY Member+

    Oct 19, 2009
    Washington, D.C.
    Club:
    AS Roma
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Well not really. The payments are broken up in such a way that they don't really hit any individual fiscal year too hard. So its actually really smart. The 20m payment in 2020 is large, but it is also far enough into the future that you can account for it and plan ahead. If you assume that our commercial revenues will be higher at the point (either due to finally getting shirt sponsor, a better TV deal, or the stadium), then it won't be as bad.

    Also, to bring in an economics concept, there is the time value of money. 20m in 2017 (when the deal was made) is worth less in 2020. And with how the transfer market is going, and the market for futbol entertainment generally, it may not be that big a hit.
     
  8. Hustle and Flo

    Hustle and Flo Member+

    May 20, 2015
    Club:
    AS Roma
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    #8 Hustle and Flo, Feb 5, 2018
    Last edited: Feb 5, 2018
    Thanks , please educate Java. He'll argue with everything you tell him , and call reports fiction or call you naive and make conclusions based on nothing, but I like the guy and it needs to be done. I'm tired of trying to teach a man who refuses to learn or admit his lack of understanding.
     
  9. Rellum

    Rellum Member

    Jun 21, 2008
    Brisbane
    Club:
    AS Roma
    Nat'l Team:
    Australia
    Clearly I am out of the loop. I though it was commonly accepted that we sold Salah and Rüdiger for FFP reasons.
     
  10. Salmeen10

    Salmeen10 Member+

    Jan 10, 2014
    Bahrain
    Club:
    AS Roma
    Nat'l Team:
    Bahrain
    We did, it wasn't enough. Rudiger's sale wasn't on time to be included in the previous financial year's statements, Paredes too. I thought that was on purpose, so I'm surprised with the punishment claims this report makes.
     
    shiboboo repped this.
  11. Hustle and Flo

    Hustle and Flo Member+

    May 20, 2015
    Club:
    AS Roma
    Nat'l Team:
    Canada
    You could argue any big sale we make has FFP influence. At the minimum it's due to financial concerns.
     
    shiboboo repped this.

Share This Page