Barcelona: Charged with corruption .... again!

[Acrobat7]

What are you talking about? Barca got 1.9% from Goldman&Sachs for their last 500m credit to refinance other, worse debts. That is considered poor?

The inflation and interest rate landscape has changed a lot since then.

 

[SirReginald]

Pretty sure the way this club is being run is only Ok because it’s Barcelona. If it was an English club UEFA would be all over every single penny in the books.

 

[The Purley King]

So when does piquet get his £42.5m ?
Would make a big hole in any money coming n

 

[The Purley King]

Also isn’t messi due a boat load of cash?

 

[Darlington Padgett]

Barcelona will try to close before the end of the month the remaining 15% of the television rights, between 350-400M.
With that amount they will be able to have the FFP in 1:1.
The sale of 49% of BLM is stopped because according to the latest information it is not necessary to activate that lever.

Interesting, will that allow you to register the new players including Lewandowski?

 

[Berbaclass]

Also isn’t messi due a boat load of cash?

Yes

 

[Berbaclass]

Nice bit of transfer debts outstanding also:

Among other debts, this includes a figure of €29 million being owed to Liverpool for the transfer of Philippe Coutinho. The Brazilian international had joined Barça for a fortune back in 2018, but the club are yet to pay the full fees.

Barcelona also owe around €9 million to Braga for the transfer of Trincao while a figure of €10 million is owed to Bordeaux for Malcom.

Other news outlets have widely speculated that the Catalans also owe money to Bayern Munich for the transfer of Arturo Vidal. The same can be said for Borussia Dortmund, in the case of Ousmane Dembele.

All the debts combined amount to a figure of more than €126 million, owed to 19 different clubs. It puts Barcelona in a perilous position and could serve as a major roadblock in the club’s bid to steer out of their economic woes.

Barcelona are hopeful the sale of BLM and TV rights can help them cut back on losses and repay the debts. But it could come at the expense of a lack of reinforcements in the summer transfer window, which, in turn, could be a major blow for Xavi Hernandez ahead of the new season.

 

[The Purley King]

Nice bit of transfer debts outstanding also:

Wow this fund raise really is just to keep the lights on.
They’ll be signing Albert Steptoe for £50m as the financial controller next …….

 

[Niemans]

Interesting, will that allow you to register the new players including Lewandowski?

Yes, according to the information of the last few weeks.

 

[Devil_forever]

Nice bit of transfer debts outstanding also:

Tbh every club has transfer debt.
To Barca fans on here, does your debt include wages owed to players too like Messi and Pique?

 

[Niemans]

Tbh every club has transfer debt.
To Barca fans on here, does your debt include wages owed to players too like Messi and Pique?

Yes, it also includes loyalty bonuses that will have to be paid to players such as Piqué, Alba or Busquets when their contracts end.
Also includes €150M for player depreciation.

 

[Bluelion7]

They give up €40M a year so as not to be without signing 5+ years and selling important players. The money goes to pay debts and with the salary reduction plus the sale of FDJ gives you to sign

It “may” work out to 40 million a year now, but I seriously doubt someone would buy a percentage of just one deal. They bought a percentage of their rights. Which means a percentage of money from the next deal and the next.

 

[GinobiliTheGOAT]

Pretty sure the way this club is being run is only Ok because it’s Barcelona. If it was an English club UEFA would be all over every single penny in the books.

No, Man City would get away unscathed. English clubs aren't immune to it either.

 

[Niemans]

It “may” work out to 40 million a year now, but I seriously doubt someone would buy a percentage of just one deal. They bought a percentage of their rights. Which means a percentage of money from the next deal and the next.

Sure enough, it will be about 40 million for the next 5 years. In the next agreements it will be a little more money.
Laporta has already said that it is not a good deal but there is no other solution.

 

[Ragnar123]

The inflation and interest rate landscape has changed a lot since then.

It doesn't matter.
He said barca has a poor credit raiting. I pointed out an excellent 1.9% interest on the last big credit they got. What barca would get today is simply speculation, no one knows this. So he has either superficial knowledge or is talking out of his a**, since I came up with a fact.

 

[Dave Smith]

It doesn't matter.
He said barca has a poor credit raiting. I pointed out an excellent 1.9% interest on the last big credit they got. What barca would get today is simply speculation, no one knows this. So he has either superficial knowledge or is talking out of his a**, since I came up with a fact.

https://www.fitchratings.com/entity/futbol-club-barcelona-96852925

Barca have a debt rating of BBB-, that is 'near junk status'. Hence, my statement that Barca have 'poor credit rating' is factually true BBB- is poor and near junk. FHACT (as a certain Spanish Waiter is prone to say.)

Additionally, you stated the GS loan was for 1.95%, however the terms of the deal haven't been made clear and there is conflicting information.

For instance, is the loan fixed or does it have a tracker element to it? Additionally, Barca's own site, said it aimed for a rate of around 3% rather than 1.95% (remember interest rates last year were still at rock bottom rates), which has been backed up by other outlets:

https://www.fcbarcelona.com/en/news/2175534/approval-of-525-million-debt-refinance-proposal

https://www.insideworldfootball.com/2021/06/21/barca-gets-greenlight-e500m-goldman-sachs-loan/

This deal, whilst eliminating the bridging loan you had, which was highly onerous, also had you:

renegotiate the Senior Notes signed for an amount of 200 million euros at a much higher financial cost, and will provide the necessary liquidity over the next 24 months

This is also before we get to whether the loan has been underwritten in USD or EUR. If in USD then this loan is already 10% more expensive to finance than last year as your income is in EUR.

So, all in all, a refinancing that was meant to give you liquidity for 24 months, didn't, which is why you then had to sell your future profits. That is all on Barca's own site.

My reading of is this that:

a) you've been stung by the f/x rate and/or the interest rate of 3% (not 1.95% as your stating)

b) the loan is tracked to the market (in which case you're in real trouble with that loan) as rates are going up quickly.

c) you board are still not managing your finances correctly.

It could be a combination of all three if not just the one.

If you want to believe everything is fine or you're doing things that aren't just kicking things down the line because you're still banking on 'growing your way out of your problems' (as Barto was banking, I may add) that is fine go for it, all financial transactions are based on risk/reward.

However, I haven't said anything that is untrue.

 

[Woodzy]

Perhaps the mostly bizarrely rub club in football.

 

[Acrobat7]

It doesn't matter.
He said barca has a poor credit raiting. I pointed out an excellent 1.9% interest on the last big credit they got. What barca would get today is simply speculation, no one knows this. So he has either superficial knowledge or is talking out of his a**, since I came up with a fact.

Of course it matters since Barca has a lot of short-term debt that need refinancing.

An example: a German company rated investment grade (above Barca) gave out bonds with a coupon of around 1.7% last year. Their last issuance a week or so ago was for a coupon of 5.5%.

 

[Niemans]

https://www.fitchratings.com/entity/futbol-club-barcelona-96852925

Barca have a debt rating of BBB-, that is 'near junk status'. Hence, my statement that Barca have 'poor credit rating' is factually true BBB- is poor and near junk. FHACT (as a certain Spanish Waiter is prone to say.)

Additionally, you stated the GS loan was for 1.95%, however the terms of the deal haven't been made clear and there is conflicting information.

For instance, is the loan fixed or does it have a tracker element to it? Additionally, Barca's own site, said it aimed for a rate of around 3% rather than 1.95% (remember interest rates last year were still at rock bottom rates), which has been backed up by other outlets:

https://www.fcbarcelona.com/en/news/2175534/approval-of-525-million-debt-refinance-proposal

https://www.insideworldfootball.com/2021/06/21/barca-gets-greenlight-e500m-goldman-sachs-loan/

This deal, whilst eliminating the bridging loan you had, which was highly onerous, also had you:

renegotiate the Senior Notes signed for an amount of 200 million euros at a much higher financial cost, and will provide the necessary liquidity over the next 24 months

This is also before we get to whether the loan has been underwritten in USD or EUR. If in USD then this loan is already 10% more expensive to finance than last year as your income is in EUR.

So, all in all, a refinancing that was meant to give you liquidity for 24 months, didn't, which is why you then had to sell your future profits. That is all on Barca's own site.

My reading of is this that:

a) you've been stung by the f/x rate and/or the interest rate of 3% (not 1.95% as your stating)

b) the loan is tracked to the market (in which case you're in real trouble with that loan) as rates are going up quickly.

c) you board are still not managing your finances correctly.

It could be a combination of all three if not just the one.

If you want to believe everything is fine or you're doing things that aren't just kicking things down the line because you're still banking on 'growing your way out of your problems' (as Barto was banking, I may add) that is fine go for it, all financial transactions are based on risk/reward.

However, I haven't said anything that is untrue.

Those links that you have put are of approval of the assembly to be able to request a credit with maximum conditions.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fc...goldman-sachs-by-595-mill_271976_102_amp.html

It is a credit of €595M to 10 years with an interest of 1.98% as I mentioned above.

What things is the board not doing well?

 

[Niemans]

Of course it matters since Barca has a lot of short-term debt that need refinancing.

An example: a German company rated investment grade (above Barca) gave out bonds with a coupon of around 1.7% last year. Their last issuance a week or so ago was for a coupon of 5.5%.

Could you put where you got the information that Barcelona has a lot of short-term debt to refinance?

 

[Blackwidow]

Could you put where you got the information that Barcelona has a lot of short-term debt to refinance?

Swiss Ramble...
made a big Barcelona analysis on June 6th 2022

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Ragnar123]

Of course it matters since Barca has a lot of short-term debt that need refinancing.

An example: a German company rated investment grade (above Barca) gave out bonds with a coupon of around 1.7% last year. Their last issuance a week or so ago was for a coupon of 5.5%.

How about we wait for the next season numbers after activating all economic levers to talk about short term refinancing. And I can only repeat myself. Laporta and his board are not responsible for Bartomeu's horrendous heritage.

Overall they are doing the absolut best out of this situation.
They refinanced a big amount of short term debt for 1.9%. An excellent interest rate for a "trash rating club". To make up for the losses and be able to keep a competitive squad they sold (or are selling) 5% of the clubs income for 25 years. Round about €40m every year. But the difference between Rakuten and Spotify makes up already most of the sum. So with the change of one sponsor, Laporta's board balanced those €40m sold in tv rights.
Also every contract barca deffered is from Barto and his people. Simply because the total wage was 110% of the total income when Laporta took over.
People insult the club and Laporta for blackmailing Frenkie and other players with deffered wages. You know that Bartomeu did this in his last year/month? He extended those contracts and deffered wages for one reason only. When the club has a certain amount of deficit (€100m if I remember correctly) or more during one presidential cycle (6 years in total), the president and his board is liable to make up for it with their own money. That's why Bartomeu deffered those wages, to give all losses and problems to the new board. The problems and losses he was responsible for!

So Laporta got a club, which had to pay 110% of it's income in wages + had a hoard in deffered wages + was restricted on the transfermarket because of the spanish ffp. Now isn't this an easy start for a president who has to keep the club competitive despite all those problems? Of course he wants to renegotiate those outrageous wages the club can't pay. Laporta's board set a new wage limit and every new player or one, who got his contract extension agreed to it. No one is above the club anymore as we saw Messi leaving last summer. Araujo, Gavi, Pedri could have all left if they wanted more money but they accepted thankfully. Dembele the same, take it or leave it is now the rule with Laporta. Are you all surprised that it's the same for Frenkie?

Laporta simply didn't have a choice to act differently.

 

[Acrobat7]

They refinanced a big amount of short term debt for 1.9%. An excellent interest rate for a "trash rating club".

no one called the club „trash“. In credit there is „investment grade“ and „junk“. These are technical terms. Barca is rated BBB- which is only one notch above „junk“.

 

[Pickle85]

How about we wait for the next season numbers after activating all economic levers to talk about short term refinancing. And I can only repeat myself. Laporta and his board are not responsible for Bartomeu's horrendous heritage.

Overall they are doing the absolut best out of this situation.
They refinanced a big amount of short term debt for 1.9%. An excellent interest rate for a "trash rating club". To make up for the losses and be able to keep a competitive squad they sold (or are selling) 5% of the clubs income for 25 years. Round about €40m every year. But the difference between Rakuten and Spotify makes up already most of the sum. So with the change of one sponsor, Laporta's board balanced those €40m sold in tv rights.
Also every contract barca deffered is from Barto and his people. Simply because the total wage was 110% of the total income when Laporta took over.
People insult the club and Laporta for blackmailing Frenkie and other players with deffered wages. You know that Bartomeu did this in his last year/month? He extended those contracts and deffered wages for one reason only. When the club has a certain amount of deficit (€100m if I remember correctly) or more during one presidential cycle (6 years in total), the president and his board is liable to make up for it with their own money. That's why Bartomeu deffered those wages, to give all losses and problems to the new board. The problems and losses he was responsible for!

So Laporta got a club, which had to pay 110% of it's income in wages + had a hoard in deffered wages + was restricted on the transfermarket because of the spanish ffp. Now isn't this an easy start for a president who has to keep the club competitive despite all those problems? Of course he wants to renegotiate those outrageous wages the club can't pay. Laporta's board set a new wage limit and every new player or one, who got his contract extension agreed to it. No one is above the club anymore as we saw Messi leaving last summer. Araujo, Gavi, Pedri could have all left if they wanted more money but they accepted thankfully. Dembele the same, take it or leave it is now the rule with Laporta. Are you all surprised that it's the same for Frenkie?

Laporta simply didn't have a choice to act differently.

But it's not a case of take it or leave it with Frenkie, is it, as you're contractually obliged to allow him to take it. You're phrasing it like big bad barca are getting all tough with football's mercenaries when in reality your club is just trying to welch on contracts negotiated in good faith. It's a weasel move and typical of that club.

 

[Giggsyking]

Could you put where you got the information that Barcelona has a lot of short-term debt to refinance?

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Ragnar123]

But it's not a case of take it or leave it with Frenkie, is it, as you're contractually obliged to allow him to take it. You're phrasing it like big bad barca are getting all tough with football's mercenaries when in reality your club is just trying to welch on contracts negotiated in good faith. It's a weasel move and typical of that club.

Not with Frenkie, it's a bit different of course. He has three choices.

1. take a cut and get into the new wage limit to keep going.
2. leave and earn more money somewhere else
3. stay and keep the current contract.

No one forces him out of the club or blackmails him. Yes, Laporta did some pressure through the media, but that is all. He is not responsible for Bartomeu's contracts and wants to get rid of him. If Frenkie decides to stay and keep the salary, he can continue and nothing changes. Lenglet, Neto and Umtiti also didn't take a cut barca asked for. Dembele also didn't renew in the winter and Xavi keeps them on the pitch if they are good enough in cases of Dembele and sometimes Lenglet. Neto and Umtiti dont play for sporting reasons. So barca dont blackmail anyone with the bench, they just do a little pressure here and there and seeing this horrendous heritage Laporta got from Bartomeu, it's not so unreasonable.

edith: the good faith was onesided sadly. There was no good faith on Bartomeus side, just being delusional in giving Frenkie €20m some weeks before leaving the club as he wanted to feck it one last time.

 

[cyberman]

Not with Frenkie, it's a bit different of course. He has three choices.

1. take a cut and get into the new wage limit to keep going.
2. leave and earn more money somewhere else
3. stay and keep the current contract.

No one forces him out of the club or blackmails him. Yes, Laporta did some pressure through the media, but that is all. He is not responsible for Bartomeu's contracts and wants to get rid of him. If Frenkie decides to stay and keep the salary, he can continue and nothing changes. Lenglet, Neto and Umtiti also didn't take a cut barca asked for. Dembele also didn't renew in the winter and Xavi keeps them on the pitch if they are good enough in cases of Dembele and sometimes Lenglet. Neto and Umtiti dont play for sporting reasons. So barca dont blackmail anyone with the bench, they just do a little pressure here and there and seeing this horrendous heritage Laporta got from Bartomeu, it's not so unreasonable.

But you can’t separate the club from its board. It’s not a reset with every election, as a club you made a commitment.

 

[Ragnar123]

But you can’t separate the club from its board. It’s not a reset with every election, as a club you made a commitment.

yes and that's why no one forces him out of the club.
But don't you really see the situation from Laporta's and the club's point of view, that they want to get rid of those nearly criminal barto contracts as soon as possible and therefore ask players to reduce their wage or maybe if they want to search for another club? Is asking forbidden? Is telling the media about this situation forbidden?
Should he just keep silent and suffer Bartomeus heritage? Come one, stop the one sided view on this matter.

 

[NoLogo]

So when does piquet get his £42.5m ?
Would make a big hole in any money coming n

It's actually a bit insane how many time bombs Bartomeu was able to implement in those player contracts, and what's even more insane is that there are no control mechanisms in place which will prevent this kind of long term damage to the club.

 

[Ragnar123]

It's actually a bit insane how many time bombs Bartomeu was able to implement in those player contracts, and what's even more insane is that there are no control mechanisms in place which will prevent this kind of long term damage to the club.

there are actually as I described in my previous post.
When the club has a certain amount of deficit (€100m if I remember correctly) or more during one presidential cycle (6 years in total), the president and his board is liable to make up for it with their own money.
The problem here is, that Bartomeu persuaded the players to deffer the wages into a new presidential cycle, even in his last days as president, so he found a loophole sadly that wasn't covered since no one thought about such a possibility before.

 

[Javi]

But it's not a case of take it or leave it with Frenkie, is it, as you're contractually obliged to allow him to take it. You're phrasing it like big bad barca are getting all tough with football's mercenaries when in reality your club is just trying to welch on contracts negotiated in good faith. It's a weasel move and typical of that club.

What are you expecting Barça to do? Sign for bankruptcy? Nobody will receive any of that money then.

Debt cuts are par of the course in a situation like that.

 

[Pickle85]

What are you expecting Barça to do? Sign for bankruptcy? Nobody will receive any of that money then.

Debt cuts are par of the course in a situation like that.

I expect them not to be mismanaged to the point that it's in this position. Furthermore, now that they are, I expect them not to act like they have some sort of divine right to be exempt from the consequences of their actions. Also, i would expect a club of their supposed integrity not to pressure players into taking pay cuts on previously agreed contracts. Whichever way you cut it, they've behaved badly every single step of the way.

 

[Javi]

I expect them not to be mismanaged to the point that it's in this position. Furthermore, now that they are, I expect them not to act like they have some sort of divine right to be exempt from the consequences of their actions. Also, i would expect a club of their supposed integrity not to pressure players into taking pay cuts on previously agreed contracts. Whichever way you cut it, they've behaved badly every single step of the way.

So you would file for bankruptcy and make hundreds of people lose their jobs. Great plan. Obviously there was tremendous mismanagement, but now the mess must be cleaned up and cutting 12m a year salaries to 8m a year wont put those players in poverty. Odd take to pity them tbh.

 

[AkaAkuma]

What did Depay get out of this deal?
From what I gather he didn’t sign on for big money as a free agent.
Now Barca are turning him for a profit a year later?

Cristiansen and Kessie, don’t get too comfortable.

 

[ZolaWasMagic]

Is it true they cant actually register Kessie and Christensen yet due to salary cap room?

If that is the case, how are there stories of them spending 60 on Kounde, 60 on Raph, 40-50 on Lewa, trying to get Silva for 60 ish etc.

Especially when you consider these levers are just to keep the heating on

 

[Jam]

Is it true they cant actually register Kessie and Christensen yet due to salary cap room?

If that is the case, how are there stories of them spending 60 on Kounde, 60 on Raph, 40-50 on Lewa, trying to get Silva for 60 ish etc.

Especially when you consider these levers are just to keep the heating on

I’ve given up following Barcelona’s financial position.

It’s financial wizardry fuelled by coke, smoke and mirrors.

 

[Berbaclass]

Is it true they cant actually register Kessie and Christensen yet due to salary cap room?

If that is the case, how are there stories of them spending 60 on Kounde, 60 on Raph, 40-50 on Lewa, trying to get Silva for 60 ish etc.

Especially when you consider these levers are just to keep the heating on

Yes

The next lever they are due to active will allow them to make signings.

 

[simonhch]

Can someone please explain how Barca’s net debt is calculated? Typically net debt is gross debt minus cash on hand. Barca have 1.3bn of gross debt but net debt is quoted at 480mm. Which would indicate that they have 720mm cash on hand. Clearly they have virtually no cash on hand, so how is this calculation arrived at?

 

[Pickle85]

So you would file for bankruptcy and make hundreds of people lose their jobs. Great plan. Obviously there was tremendous mismanagement, but now the mess must be cleaned up and cutting 12m a year salaries to 8m a year wont put those players in poverty. Odd take to pity them tbh.

I don't pity the players, I just think it shows Barca up for the unethical, poorly managed joke they've become. And the cherry on the top of the cake is the narrative that the club are now spinning (and fans are perpetuating) that heroic Barca only want players that really WANT to play for them (and are therefore willing to take a pay cut). The club has a deep lack of humility and an overwhelming sense of entitlement from the top down. I'd love to see it go under.

 

[OmarUnited4ever]

He is not responsible for Bartomeu's contracts

Laporta is responsible for Bartomeu contracts, because Bartomeu was an elected "President of FC Barcelona", and Bartomeu represented Barcelona legally when those contracts were signed, so Barcelona, and Laporta are responsible for those contracts, of course Laporta will try to find "legal" solutions to get rid of those problematic contracts (e.g agree wage cuts, sell players, etc..), but he is still responsible for them as the current "President" of FC Barcelona, and if a player (e.g De Jong decides not to agree to a move to united and not agree to wage cuts), then nothing Laporta can do here, probably only deploy the media and get the fans to hate De Jong, but De Jong can make so that he gets paid no matter what.