Jadon Sancho| Staying at Dortmund for now

[McGrathsipan]

They said the same thing about £100m not very long ago at all.

The fact is that no athlete's services are inherently worth anything. It's pure market economics, nothing more.

EDIT: To be clear, I'm not saying I think we or anyone else should spend £200m. Just observing that the idea of 'worth' is academic.

I agree it's just a word.

I mean, "worth" used figuratively, I agree. Maybe Einstein was worth 200m? Elon Musk? Whoever can hopefully solve the climate crisis?

I would argue, though, that if Messi was available for sale at, say, 20 years old, he would be worth the investment. Shirts sold, sponsorships, match day revenue, guaranteed CL, prize money, appearance fees, etc. If you look at baseline without Messi, then take the 200m, spread it over 15 years, add in his salary and compare to an average player, I believe it would be a bargain. You are basically saying that Messi doesn't add 20m per season to Barcelona's bottom line? Of course he does. In fact, he's probably underpaid and the transfer fee was probably too low.

We look at the huge number and choke, rage and rant that these are all idiots running these football clubs. False. These are huge businesses that have Harvard trained, Goldman Sachs quants running financial numbers at the top clubs. And these smart guys still missed on Coutinho and Dembele!

Building a football club is really hard. I think it's easy to look at the on-pitch performance and complain as a fan, but there is much, much more behind the scenes that we don't understand.

Unless you know a player is going go be Messi then its a massive massive risk.
You are saying a massive transfer fee = 20 million bottom line for 15 years ?

How many players like Messi are there ever likely to be. You can count less than 10 players in his league over the last 50 years. Paying 200 million doesn't make a player the next Messi. Hes a very very rare type.

Value is relative anyway. If it's cash then someone might be happy. If it's titles then someone else might be happy. Do you think the Glazers are unhappy with how United perform on the field? I'd say it may be a minor inconvenience given the cash performance.

If a club wishes to invest in an asset I'd say they've got the cash sums done as I think the cash invested must be protected first.

Spunking 200 million after covid19 isn't going to happen

 

[Adnan]

This is not an argument. Having highly competent people running personnel and scouting does not mean that they are not financially vulnerable. They can even have highly competent executives on the finances side of club management and STILL have liquidity issues because they didn't plan for the pandemic.

Dortmund's financial position is much more precarious than ours, and that is just a fact.

Here's Dortmund's latest financial report of 2019-2020. They had Euro 0.00 earnings per share, no profits and just 30m Euro in cash and cash equivalents as of September 30, 2019. They made Euro 175m...

https://aktie.bvb.de/eng/Publicatio...rterly-Financial-Report-1st-Quarter-2019-2020

Furthermore, their wage bill grew substantially with the addition of Haaland (making over 150K/week in wages). Almost 10m in player salaries per month alone. That doesn't include coaches, reserves, academy, plus all support staff. They will try to offload Witsel and other high wage earners (Balerdi with a handful of appearances but making over 125K per week???), but the market for these players is going to be very poor.

https://www.sportekz.com/football/borussia-dortmund-players-salaries/

On the other hand, United made over four times as much as Dortmund at 627m pounds. We had over 300m in cash. Do we have a higher wage bill? Yes. But our revenue is much more diversified with a smaller portion coming from football operations.

https://ir.manutd.com/~/media/Files/M/Manutd-IR/documents/2019-mu-plc-form-20-f.pdf

Look, I'm not saying that Sancho will definitely move to United and at a cut-rate price. It's possible that Dortmund will have access to cheap loan capital, that they can cut costs in other ways, that they can engage in a number of financial kung fu moves to keep Sancho. But if you really read the financial tea leaves and assume that a) Sancho is ready to move back to England, b) that he wants a better contract and c) Dortmund needs cash to run operations, they really don't have a lot of options left if the player genuinely wants to go.

My argument was in response to a post suggesting Dortmund could be on the verge of bankruptcy and I don't believe they're. So the rest of your post has little relevance to what I posted.

Dortmund also have a highly competent DoF who runs the football department and is heralded by his peers and journalists alike as being among the very best in the business which has helped them adopt a specific strategy which has been successful IMO.

My argument from the start has been that there is a very real possibility that we could sign Sancho for less than what he was being touted for pre-pandemic.

 

[Adnan]

Even with 1 year left in his contract, Sancho would be still expensive. I mean they sold Pulisic who wasn't a starter for €64m with 1 year left in his contract.

With one year left on his contract they'd be risking losing him on a free in six months time on a pre contract agreement. It would also be very beneficial for Sancho to wait it out in such a scenario due to the financial gain and he'd have the pick of the big clubs to choose from unlike Pulisic who didn't garner anywhere near the interest that Sancho has.

 

[DSG]

I agree it's just a word.


Unless you know a player is going go be Messi then its a massive massive risk.
You are saying a massive transfer fee = 20 million bottom line for 15 years ?

How many players like Messi are there ever likely to be. You can count less than 10 players in his league over the last 50 years. Paying 200 million doesn't make a player the next Messi. Hes a very very rare type.

Value is relative anyway. If it's cash then someone might be happy. If it's titles then someone else might be happy. Do you think the Glazers are unhappy with how United perform on the field? I'd say it may be a minor inconvenience given the cash performance.

If a club wishes to invest in an asset I'd say they've got the cash sums done as I think the cash invested must be protected first.

Spunking 200 million after covid19 isn't going to happen

You're thinking like a fan, not like a business owner. Club owners want to grow revenue, profits and club value. Otherwise, there is no point to owning a club. What's 200m when you own an asset like Old Trafford? How about oil fields in Saudi Arabia?

I'm actually saying a massive transfer fee for a can't miss player is quantifiable investment in your business. Messi is the absolute peak case, for sure, but Ronaldo wasn't worth 200m? Even though he moved for 89m? How many shirts did Real sell? How much did sponsorship revenue increase? CL titles? Appearance fees? Was 100% attributable to Ronaldo? No, but 70%? Probably, yes. Then they sold him to Juventus for 100m.

Look, I can't explain corporate finance to you in a forum post. Business is risk. FFS, oil barrel futures just tanked to NEGATIVE $37 per barrel, and the oil business might be one of the most stable businesses around. That means that oil producers were essentially paying companies to take their oil because they didn't have enough space to store the excess.

I didn't say that there would be a 200m transfer this season. I just said that the math indicates that some players ARE worth 200m. The smart clubs with cash will invest this summer because so many clubs will need to sell assets in order to survive, and they will pay a lot less. But mark my words, when Mbappe moves to Real, it's going to be at least 300m, maybe 350m

So, what do you do in the case of a classic overpay for talent? Just to name a few, Coutinho, Dembele, Bale... Is it a loss? Yes. But when your company is worth $6 billion, writing off, say, 100m isn't going to kill you.

 

[Adnan]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[DSG]

My argument was in response to a post suggesting Dortmund could be on the verge of bankruptcy and I don't believe they're. So the rest of your post has little relevance to what I posted.

Dortmund also have a highly competent DoF who runs the football department and is heralded by his peers and journalists alike as being among the very best in the business which has helped them adopt a specific strategy which has been successful IMO.

My argument from the start has been that there is a very real possibility that we could sign Sancho for less than what he was being touted for pre-pandemic.

I wasn't necessarily responding to your post, but more the tenor of the discussion.

No disagreement over the football side of operations with Dortmund. Top class. Also, agree we may sign Sancho for less.

Dortmund may be on the verge of bankruptcy unless they make moves to reduce costs and increase revenue. They can increase revenue by a resumption of play, selling assets (players). They can reduce costs by furloughing staff, reducing match day and internal costs, but the biggest area is to reduce player's wages. If they get rid of Alex Witsel, Gotze, Hummels and Reus, maybe they can keep Sancho. But then you are basically trying to offload very expensive contracts for players that are in their 30s -- not easy.

Just because Dortmund is a "well run club" doesn't mean they don't have pretty significant financial challenges due to coronavirus. Having just 30m in cash when costs are 15m per month (according to their financials) is pretty irresponsible. There will be very little revenue trickling in due to the pandemic, but you still have a lot of costs. I would say they are "well run" on the football side, but not so much on the commercial side.

 

[Adnan]

I wasn't necessarily responding to your post, but more the tenor of the discussion.

No disagreement over the football side of operations with Dortmund. Top class. Also, agree we may sign Sancho for less.

Dortmund may be on the verge of bankruptcy unless they make moves to reduce costs and increase revenue. They can increase revenue by a resumption of play, selling assets (players). They can reduce costs by furloughing staff, reducing match day and internal costs, but the biggest area is to reduce player's wages. If they get rid of Alex Witsel, Gotze, Hummels and Reus, maybe they can keep Sancho. But then you are basically trying to offload very expensive contracts for players that are in their 30s -- not easy.

Just because Dortmund is a "well run club" doesn't mean they don't have pretty significant financial challenges due to coronavirus. Having just 30m in cash when costs are 15m per month (according to their financials) is pretty irresponsible. There will be very little revenue trickling in due to the pandemic, but you still have a lot of costs. I would say they are "well run" on the football side, but not so much on the commercial side.

Dortmund have in the last 3/4 weeks donated money to help struggling clubs in the German Buli. I think they're comfortable financially especially when you see the club donating money.

It could affect their plans to sign Bellingham though.

 

[Adnan]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

 

[Offside]

Really hope we buy him even if it’s the only player we do buy.

 

[SAFMUTD]

Really hope we buy him even if it’s the only player we do buy.

I agree, I think its “safer” to buy 2 “proven” players each year than gambling in 4-5 players.

Eventhough we overpay for those players I think on the long run we’ll ultimately end with a better team, and not because its a better strategy overall but because our scout network seems a completely failure and we cant discover any unearthed gems anymore.

 

[LawCharltonBest]

Really hope we buy him even if it’s the only player we do buy.

Same. Players in every other position can improve.That last attacking position needs filling though.

Would like to see Pogba stay at least another season though if it was literally our only signing.

 

[DSG]

Dortmund have in the last 3/4 weeks donated money to help struggling clubs in the German Buli. I think they're comfortable financially especially when you see the club donating money.

It could affect their plans to sign Bellingham though.

Look, I hate to continuously point out your misinformation, but you are reading the news incorrectly. Dortmund did not donate 20m. They, along with the other German CL clubs TOGETHER donated 20m. Of the shared 20m, 12.5 was undistributed media revenue. It wasn't even on their balance sheet yet as recognized revenue. The actual cash-out-of-pocket donation was 7.5m between four clubs.

I don't think that donating 1.85m in cash to the rest of the Bundesliga clubs -- several which are potentially on the edge of insolvency -- is an indicator that Dortmund is awash in cash. Just read their financials...

To give you perspective, Bayern has more than 4x the revenue of Dortmund, and made a profit of almost 60m. I don't know how much cash Bayern have on hand, but the fact that Dortmund actually broke even / lost money in a season where they made it to the knockout stages of the CL tells you that they are not strong financially.

 

[Adam-Utd]

Look, I hate to continuously point out your misinformation, but you are reading the news incorrectly. Dortmund did not donate 20m. They, along with the other German CL clubs TOGETHER donated 20m. Of the shared 20m, 12.5 was undistributed media revenue. It wasn't even on their balance sheet yet as recognized revenue. The actual cash-out-of-pocket donation was 7.5m between four clubs.

I don't think that donating 1.85m in cash to the rest of the Bundesliga clubs -- several which are potentially on the edge of insolvency -- is an indicator that Dortmund is awash in cash. Just read their financials...

To give you perspective, Bayern has more than 4x the revenue of Dortmund, and made a profit of almost 60m. I don't know how much cash Bayern have on hand, but the fact that Dortmund actually broke even / lost money in a season where they made it to the knockout stages of the CL tells you that they are not strong financially.

Bingo. There's a reason they've been selling him in the media this season. They know he's their cash cow and this summer is when they would have got maximum profit.

 

[Adnan]

Look, I hate to continuously point out your misinformation, but you are reading the news incorrectly. Dortmund did not donate 20m. They, along with the other German CL clubs TOGETHER donated 20m. Of the shared 20m, 12.5 was undistributed media revenue. It wasn't even on their balance sheet yet as recognized revenue. The actual cash-out-of-pocket donation was 7.5m between four clubs.

I don't think that donating 1.85m in cash to the rest of the Bundesliga clubs -- several which are potentially on the edge of insolvency -- is an indicator that Dortmund is awash in cash. Just read their financials...

To give you perspective, Bayern has more than 4x the revenue of Dortmund, and made a profit of almost 60m. I don't know how much cash Bayern have on hand, but the fact that Dortmund actually broke even / lost money in a season where they made it to the knockout stages of the CL tells you that they are not strong financially.

I didn't state anywhere that Dortmund donated 20m. It seems you're seeing things in my post that aren't there.

I also never said they were strong financially, so please read my posts carefully in the future before jumping to conclusions.

 

[DSG]

I didn't state anywhere that Dortmund donated 20m. It seems you're seeing things in my post that aren't there.

I also never said they were strong financially, so please read my posts carefully in the future before jumping to conclusions.

I believe you did say that they aren’t close to bankruptcy.

Before I complicating my argument with facts and data about their financials, I should have just said: they will be bankrupt in a few months if the Bundesliga doesn’t start again. That’s how I read their financial position.

 

[Adnan]

I believe you did say that they aren’t close to bankruptcy.

Before I complicating my argument with facts and data about their financials, I should have just said: they will be bankrupt in a few months if the Bundesliga doesn’t start again. That’s how I read their financial position.

Dortmund have assets that they could sell for significant sums of money if push comes to shove and aren't close to being bankrupt IMO.

Germany have also done a good job thus far in controlling the pandemic and are very close to relaxing restrictions in the country starting from tomorrow according to reports.

 

[Cliche Guevara]

Let’s not get too hung up on the bankruptcy thing.

I made the remark in relation to us not specifically knowing their true current financial position. This was in relation to a poster who said they don’t have to sell Sancho just because that’s what Dortmund’s CEO said.

This will have hit Dortmund hard and their business model will always have included cashing in on Sancho this summer. It’s their MO and they do need to sell in order to keep the process going.

 

[do.ob]

This is not an argument. Having highly competent people running personnel and scouting does not mean that they are not financially vulnerable. They can even have highly competent executives on the finances side of club management and STILL have liquidity issues because they didn't plan for the pandemic.

Dortmund's financial position is much more precarious than ours, and that is just a fact.

Here's Dortmund's latest financial report of 2019-2020. They had Euro 0.00 earnings per share, no profits and just 30m Euro in cash and cash equivalents as of September 30, 2019. They made Euro 175m...

https://aktie.bvb.de/eng/Publicatio...rterly-Financial-Report-1st-Quarter-2019-2020

Furthermore, their wage bill grew substantially with the addition of Haaland (making over 150K/week in wages). Almost 10m in player salaries per month alone. That doesn't include coaches, reserves, academy, plus all support staff. They will try to offload Witsel and other high wage earners (Balerdi with a handful of appearances but making over 125K per week???), but the market for these players is going to be very poor.

https://www.sportekz.com/football/borussia-dortmund-players-salaries/

On the other hand, United made over four times as much as Dortmund at 627m pounds. We had over 300m in cash. Do we have a higher wage bill? Yes. But our revenue is much more diversified with a smaller portion coming from football operations.

https://ir.manutd.com/~/media/Files/M/Manutd-IR/documents/2019-mu-plc-form-20-f.pdf

Look, I'm not saying that Sancho will definitely move to United and at a cut-rate price. It's possible that Dortmund will have access to cheap loan capital, that they can cut costs in other ways, that they can engage in a number of financial kung fu moves to keep Sancho. But if you really read the financial tea leaves and assume that a) Sancho is ready to move back to England, b) that he wants a better contract and c) Dortmund needs cash to run operations, they really don't have a lot of options left if the player genuinely wants to go.

I mean everyone knows United make more money than Dortmund and I have no idea how the Corona crisis will play out for the football world. But I hope you understand that you are comparing Dortmund's report for the first quarter (as in three months) with Uniteds annual numbers (as in twelve months).

http://aktie.bvb.de/eng/Publication...rterly-Financial-Report-1st-Quarter-2019-2020 p13

Matchday income actually makes up a fairly similar percentage of both club's revenue chart for 18/19. Absolute numbers are of course much higher for United.

And that wage chart you have linked is quite obviously full of shit.

 

[ehsanul]

Will you sell Pogba and just sign Sancho?

 

[DSG]

I mean everyone knows United make more money than Dortmund and I have no idea how the Corona crisis will play out for the football world. But I hope you understand that you are comparing Dortmund's report for the first quarter (as in three months) with Uniteds annual numbers (as in twelve months).

http://aktie.bvb.de/eng/Publication...rterly-Financial-Report-1st-Quarter-2019-2020 p13

Matchday income actually makes up a fairly similar percentage of both club's revenue chart for 18/19. Absolute numbers are of course much higher for United.

And that wage chart you have linked is quite obviously full of shit.

You are correct, I mistakenly took the Q1 numbers. But this is even worse. When you dig into their reports, they have structured their financial reporting to be after the transfer period (Sept 30). And they only report Q1 and Q3 -- the two quarters where they have the highest revenues. Last year they claimed revenues of 400m.

To have 30m in cash reserves at the end of the biggest transfer cycle is pretty poor cash management. You state that the wage chart is "full of shit". I'm not saying it's correct to the last euro, but even if it is 95% correct as their first team wage bill, it's still bad business to have just one month's business operating expenses in cash.

Furthermore, when you dig further, almost all revenue growth increase has come from transfer fee profits. They list transfer fee profits as their largest revenue category. Basically they needed to make 35m in transfer fees just to break even.

I disagree that revenues have similar breakouts or ratios. United doesn't list transfer fee profits in their reports. In the case of Dortmund, 40% of their revenue is coming from profits derived from transfers.

Their model is to buy players for cheap and sell players for high dollar amounts in order to stay solvent. They sold Pulisic for 70m, then spent every penny on wages to challenge for a league title and remain in the CL.

I stand by what I said previously -- cash is low for a business of that size; they aren't managed well from a finances perspective. If there is a 30% drop in match day related revenue (tv, tickets, etc) and a 30% drop in transfer fees, they will be in trouble.

 

[DSG]

Let’s not get too hung up on the bankruptcy thing.

I made the remark in relation to us not specifically knowing their true current financial position. This was in relation to a poster who said they don’t have to sell Sancho just because that’s what Dortmund’s CEO said.

This will have hit Dortmund hard and their business model will always have included cashing in on Sancho this summer. It’s their MO and they do need to sell in order to keep the process going.

Absolutely. The financial statements DO back this up. I don't think this can be emphasized enough.

 

[DSG]

Will you sell Pogba and just sign Sancho?

I would, personally. I can see the argument why you would keep Pogba though.

 

[croadyman]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

The top bit sounds very positive for us but despite the current situation I still think getting him for much lower than £100m is a huge ask.

 

[croadyman]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

There is that line about Sancho preferring to sign for a champions league club which I honestly think is very likely true.

 

[do.ob]

You are correct, I mistakenly took the Q1 numbers. But this is even worse. When you dig into their reports, they have structured their financial reporting to be after the transfer period (Sept 30). And they only report Q1 and Q3 -- the two quarters where they have the highest revenues. Last year they claimed revenues of 400m.

To have 30m in cash reserves at the end of the biggest transfer cycle is pretty poor cash management. You state that the wage chart is "full of shit". I'm not saying it's correct to the last euro, but even if it is 95% correct as their first team wage bill, it's still bad business to have just one month's business operating expenses in cash.

Furthermore, when you dig further, almost all revenue growth increase has come from transfer fee profits. They list transfer fee profits as their largest revenue category. Basically they needed to make 35m in transfer fees just to break even.

I disagree that revenues have similar breakouts or ratios. United doesn't list transfer fee profits in their reports. In the case of Dortmund, 40% of their revenue is coming from profits derived from transfers.

Their model is to buy players for cheap and sell players for high dollar amounts in order to stay solvent. They sold Pulisic for 70m, then spent every penny on wages to challenge for a league title and remain in the CL.

I stand by what I said previously -- cash is low for a business of that size; they aren't managed well from a finances perspective. If there is a 30% drop in match day related revenue (tv, tickets, etc) and a 30% drop in transfer fees, they will be in trouble.

There is no sinister mystery at play which you are uncovering regarding financial figures. Dortmund, like lots of other football clubs, have their fiscal year in sync with the football season. Which means it goes from the beginning of July to the end of June, which means the first quarter ends with September.

And if you actually look at their main page or at the header of the page you have linked yourself, you can see that they don't just do two reports per year - I'm not so sure whether that would even be legal.

And why not take the wage number from the very reports you are scrutinizing?


You seem very focused on cash, but that's only half the story. Dortmund have low cash reserves, but also minimized their debt, they have some leeway.

If you look at Deloitte's FML (or Dortmund's latest report) you can see revenue numbers excluding transfer fees. You will see some growth, as well as a revenue breakdown that list matchday revenue as 17% for United and 16% for Dortmund.
And generally speaking every club will have to make adjustments if you suddenly cut 30% of their revenue.

Dortmund have put their loss per game without fans at €3m, that would be €15m for the remainder of the season. On the other hand players and management have agreed to reduce wages and Bundesliga is supposed to resume playing soon. In general Dortmund were predicting further growth in their latest report and even signed a fat contract for their jersey sponsorship since then. I think there are several conflicting factors at play here and I find it hard to predict how much pressure individual clubs will be facing. And even if Dortmund end up needing extra money, they might rather make use of their €60m open line of credit rather than take a bad deal for Sancho.

 

[sammsky1]

The top bit sounds very positive for us but despite the current situation I still think getting him for much lower than £100m is a huge ask.

All depends on Dortmund’s financial position. His value will be lowest only this window. Their brinksmanship skills and Woodward’s nerve will determine the price.

We lost in that battle with Mcguire. But did well with Bruno. Personally I think it will be a moderate up front fee in region of £70m with significant team success based add on rising to max £120m over 6 years.

It will be very interesting to watch.

 

[Bondi77]

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

He wants to go for the money eh?
Bloody mercenary!

 

[GiddyUp]

The top bit sounds very positive for us but despite the current situation I still think getting him for much lower than £100m is a huge ask.

It'll probably just be shy, maybe 95-98. Public perception will be a factor in this transfer.

 

[Ali Dia]

All depends on Dortmund’s financial position. His value will be lowest only this window. Their brinksmanship skills and Woodward’s nerve will determine the price.

We lost in that battle with Mcguire. But did well with Bruno. Personally I think it will be a moderate up front fee in region of £70m with significant team success based add on rising to max £120m over 6 years.

It will be very interesting to watch.

id say they would take that if Sancho genuinely wants to come here. The profit they'll have made on dembele pulisic and sancho is very good business.

 

[DSG]

Dortmund have assets that they could sell for significant sums of money if push comes to shove and aren't close to being bankrupt IMO.

Germany have also done a good job thus far in controlling the pandemic and are very close to relaxing restrictions in the country starting from tomorrow according to reports.

Yes, assets like Jadon Sancho... I'm not saying Dortmund will go bankrupt. I'm saying they will need to sell assets at a discount if the pandemic goes on much longer. And, more importantly, they need to sell assets to support cost of operations and wages (which are substantial). There is no secret in this, they've been very open about their business objectives.

 

[DSG]

There is no sinister mystery at play which you are uncovering regarding financial figures. Dortmund, like lots of other football clubs, have their fiscal year in sync with the football season. Which means it goes from the beginning of July to the end of June, which means the first quarter ends with September.

And if you actually look at their main page or at the header of the page you have linked yourself, you can see that they don't just do two reports per year - I'm not so sure whether that would even be legal.

And why not take the wage number from the very reports you are scrutinizing?


You seem very focused on cash, but that's only half the story. Dortmund have low cash reserves, but also minimized their debt, they have some leeway.

If you look at Deloitte's FML (or Dortmund's latest report) you can see revenue numbers excluding transfer fees. You will see some growth, as well as a revenue breakdown that list matchday revenue as 17% for United and 16% for Dortmund.
And generally speaking every club will have to make adjustments if you suddenly cut 30% of their revenue.

Dortmund have put their loss per game without fans at €3m, that would be €15m for the remainder of the season. On the other hand players and management have agreed to reduce wages and Bundesliga is supposed to resume playing soon. In general Dortmund were predicting further growth in their latest report and even signed a fat contract for their jersey sponsorship since then. I think there are several conflicting factors at play here and I find it hard to predict how much pressure individual clubs will be facing. And even if Dortmund end up needing extra money, they might rather make use of their €60m open line of credit rather than take a bad deal for Sancho.

I didn't see a breakout of wages for players vs support staff. Did you? If so, please share.

Judging from the previous projection, and the buckets of revenue they outlined, I think they are pricing in future profits from player transfer fees as part of their revenue projections.

Not saying that businesses have to make hard choices in these times that revenue is down. Of course, all businesses will need to do this (mine will as well). I do think that when you look at the size of the business and their costs, 30m in cash (1 month of operating cost reserves) is extremely low. Yes, they have another 30m credit line, but still, that's only another month.

Regarding debt, I have to say false. Football clubs do not typically have much "traditional" debt because their stadiums are mostly owned outright. But they do have debt in the form of player contracts. These are obligations that must be met. There are many clubs that have gone under due to inflated wages and no way to get out from under these contracts.

To reiterate, I do not think Dortmund will go under. They have too many young players worth a lot. But that doesn't mean they don't have to sell. And when the market knows this, it's difficult to get top dollar.

 

[DSG]

There is no sinister mystery at play which you are uncovering regarding financial figures. Dortmund, like lots of other football clubs, have their fiscal year in sync with the football season. Which means it goes from the beginning of July to the end of June, which means the first quarter ends with September.

And if you actually look at their main page or at the header of the page you have linked yourself, you can see that they don't just do two reports per year - I'm not so sure whether that would even be legal.

I agree that there is nothing sinister. They have all quarters and yearly reports. The organization was a bit strange, but maybe that is a German thing. I also have no issue with the way they space the fiscal year.

 

[Bondi77]

Gotta love the Sun,
It is so bad that it is funny.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/11485211/man-utd-sell-pogba-transfer-sancho/

 

[Drifter]

United given Jadon Sancho transfer update by Borussia Dortmund
Dortmund sporting director Michel Zorc says the club is ‘totally relaxed’ about Jadon Sancho’s future amid intense interest from Manchester United.

United had lined up a move for Sancho, 20, before the coronavirus outbreak in Europe placed football on hiatus indefinitely. Dortmund chief executive Hans-Joachim Watzke had previously said it was likely Sancho would leave in the summer transfer window.


Ever get the feeling that this may not happen despite the encouraging noises.

 

[pascell]

United given Jadon Sancho transfer update by Borussia Dortmund
Dortmund sporting director Michel Zorc says the club is ‘totally relaxed’ about Jadon Sancho’s future amid intense interest from Manchester United.

United had lined up a move for Sancho, 20, before the coronavirus outbreak in Europe placed football on hiatus indefinitely. Dortmund chief executive Hans-Joachim Watzke had previously said it was likely Sancho would leave in the summer transfer window.


Ever get the feeling that this may not happen despite the encouraging noises.

As it stands there's more important matters in the footballing and outside of it too, obviously. I think clubs are more relaxed regarding transfers, simply because we're probably going to have to wait longer than usual for the window to open, giving us more time to negotiate and ensure relationships are kept healthy.

 

[Adnan]

Yes, assets like Jadon Sancho... I'm not saying Dortmund will go bankrupt. I'm saying they will need to sell assets at a discount if the pandemic goes on much longer. And, more importantly, they need to sell assets to support cost of operations and wages (which are substantial). There is no secret in this, they've been very open about their business objectives.

Assets like Sancho, Haland and a few others.

Yes they aren't gonna go bankrupt which was what I have been saying all along and I'm glad you agree.

 

[charlenefan]

United given Jadon Sancho transfer update by Borussia Dortmund
Dortmund sporting director Michel Zorc says the club is ‘totally relaxed’ about Jadon Sancho’s future amid intense interest from Manchester United.

United had lined up a move for Sancho, 20, before the coronavirus outbreak in Europe placed football on hiatus indefinitely. Dortmund chief executive Hans-Joachim Watzke had previously said it was likely Sancho would leave in the summer transfer window.


Ever get the feeling that this may not happen despite the encouraging noises.

Of course he's relaxed it's win win as far as theyre concerned, they either keep a potentially WC player or they make a massive profit on him

 

[McGrathsipan]

You're thinking like a fan, not like a business owner. Club owners want to grow revenue, profits and club value. Otherwise, there is no point to owning a club. What's 200m when you own an asset like Old Trafford? How about oil fields in Saudi Arabia?

I'm actually saying a massive transfer fee for a can't miss player is quantifiable investment in your business. Messi is the absolute peak case, for sure, but Ronaldo wasn't worth 200m? Even though he moved for 89m? How many shirts did Real sell? How much did sponsorship revenue increase? CL titles? Appearance fees? Was 100% attributable to Ronaldo? No, but 70%? Probably, yes. Then they sold him to Juventus for 100m.


Look, I can't explain corporate finance to you in a forum post. Business is risk. FFS, oil barrel futures just tanked to NEGATIVE $37 per barrel, and the oil business might be one of the most stable businesses around. That means that oil producers were essentially paying companies to take their oil because they didn't have enough space to store the excess.

I didn't say that there would be a 200m transfer this season. I just said that the math indicates that some players ARE worth 200m. The smart clubs with cash will invest this summer because so many clubs will need to sell assets in order to survive, and they will pay a lot less. But mark my words, when Mbappe moves to Real, it's going to be at least 300m, maybe 350m

So, what do you do in the case of a classic overpay for talent? Just to name a few, Coutinho, Dembele, Bale... Is it a loss? Yes. But when your company is worth $6 billion, writing off, say, 100m isn't going to kill you.

I am not thinking like a fan. I am in fact thinking like a business owner. If I was thinking like a fan would I give a shit how much money goes on a player?
Of course oil clubs wouldn't care they have billions. 200 million is peanuts but how many of those clubs are there - just a few and they are totally distorting things for the market.

Youre talking about a cant miss player being quantifiable but you have also cast hyperbolic aspersions on revenue streams that you cant possible know about.
Do you know the total cost of ownership for Messi vs Revenue he has directly brought into the Barcelona? same for Ronaldo? Wages + Transfer fee
How much does a club get for winning domestic league and the CL etc? How much of a shirt sale goes to the club when the complete supply chain have had their cut including players (image rights) and manufacturers ( Lions share)?
Clubs get only a fraction of the price a shirt sells for.

If you told me Sancho would have a stellar 15 year career in the worlds top 10 then of course you can plan for ROI to justify your investment, maybe sponsors would be lured in by his name in time, But there is no such thing as a sure thing so the businesses like United have to analyse the the potential ROI, from the football and the money side. Getting the Investment vs ROI number right is where its at - and there is no such thing as a sure thing. Sancho might be the next George Best - or the next Ravel Morrison. You just dont know and when you have to balance the money men and the football me it becomes complex.

Right now United Inc are in no position to be considering massive fees for players nor should they be and FYI I think you are off your rocker if you think Mbappe might fetch 350 million from Real Madrid. Maybe from an oil company as they are a law unto themselves but 300/350 mill for a player is just not sane.

 

[cyberman]

Of course he's relaxed it's win win as far as theyre concerned, they either keep a potentially WC player or they make a massive profit on him

They cant be that relaxed though. I cant see how the buy young and sell for profit strat works when the market collapses. Especially with 2 years left on his deal, feck i can't think of how bad the market will be next year after a seasons worth of BCD matches and no vaccine (which is likely unfortunately)

 

[UncleBob]

You're thinking like a fan, not like a business owner. Club owners want to grow revenue, profits and club value. Otherwise, there is no point to owning a club. What's 200m when you own an asset like Old Trafford? How about oil fields in Saudi Arabia?

I'm actually saying a massive transfer fee for a can't miss player is quantifiable investment in your business. Messi is the absolute peak case, for sure, but Ronaldo wasn't worth 200m? Even though he moved for 89m? How many shirts did Real sell? How much did sponsorship revenue increase? CL titles? Appearance fees? Was 100% attributable to Ronaldo? No, but 70%? Probably, yes. Then they sold him to Juventus for 100m.

Look, I can't explain corporate finance to you in a forum post. Business is risk. FFS, oil barrel futures just tanked to NEGATIVE $37 per barrel, and the oil business might be one of the most stable businesses around. That means that oil producers were essentially paying companies to take their oil because they didn't have enough space to store the excess.

I didn't say that there would be a 200m transfer this season. I just said that the math indicates that some players ARE worth 200m. The smart clubs with cash will invest this summer because so many clubs will need to sell assets in order to survive, and they will pay a lot less. But mark my words, when Mbappe moves to Real, it's going to be at least 300m, maybe 350m

So, what do you do in the case of a classic overpay for talent? Just to name a few, Coutinho, Dembele, Bale... Is it a loss? Yes. But when your company is worth $6 billion, writing off, say, 100m isn't going to kill you.

It wasn't until i read some of your other posts that i discovered that this wasn't sarcasm, christ.

What's Old Trafford worth in an economic collapse ?

The oil and gas industry is volatile, has been for ages.