FC Barcelona Finances

[LeeRomeno]

As far as i have understood, majority of big purchases between clubs are done in installments, not to mention 100 different clauses that are often added there. In that sense Neymars move to PSG was extraordinary one, as we got cash upfront right away, as with buyouts, you have to do it.
It almost never happens with such sums. This gave massive positive cashflow for 1 season and has directly resulted in Coutinho/Dembele/Griezmann purchases.
In reality most of clubs owe each other money for some old transfers, who may not even be in club anymore.

 

[JamDav1982]

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2009/jul/01/cristiano-ronaldo-one-off-payment-real

.

Wrong.

Madrid paid in installments it was later revealed.

Just as Suarez was a flat fee as was Bale.... all later revealed to be in installments.

You really need to stop with the ignorance and accept the way these deals are usually done.

 

[FC433]

^
I would assume the same happened with Higuaín's deal. This is why clubs often negotiate to pay more than the release clause.

Here is Bale's leaked contract: https://e00-marca.uecdn.es/deporte/documentos/TottenhamHotspurRealMadridGarethBale.pdf and the source: https://www.marca.com/en/football/real-madrid/2016/01/21/56a01913e2704ef1288b464e.html

The first three payments totalled 23,689,101, the first of which was to be paid ten days after finalising the transfer deal; the next two were due before 24th July 2014 and 2015.

 

[FC433]

+
Man Utd owe over £100m in unpaid transfer fees – and are still shelling out for Pogba and Lukaku

It means that the full £89m fee for Paul Pogba to return to United from Juventus was not paid up front but will be split over the five years of his initial deal at the club.

 

[George_Costanza]

Contracts are confidential; you are being unreasonable here. Now, to put you into perspective, can you prove that the payment occurred upfront?

I already explained to [MENTION=5226]Wolfe[/MENTION] but it seems he doesn't understand basic finance. Barcelona has an obligation to disclose all assets. liabilities, operating expenses, income statements...etc every year and it's audited usually by one of the big four (Ernst & Young). Non-Current liabilities (Which players like Coutinho and FDJ listed under) mean we don't have to pay it in the coming fiscal year, i.e installment.

 

[El Gato]

Wrong.

Madrid paid in installments it was later revealed.

Just as Suarez was a flat fee as was Bale.... all later revealed to be in installments.

Nope. All there is is one newsline from Marca who argued about the number more than the terms of the deal anyway. Zero proof of that.

Don't need to produce 50k links [MENTION=20666]maldhowayanr[/MENTION] I'm well aware it's common practice.

 

[JamDav1982]

Nope. All there is is one newsline from Marca who argued about the number more than the terms of the deal anyway. Zero proof of that.

Don't need to produce 50k links [MENTION=20666]maldhowayanr[/MENTION] I'm well aware it's common practice.

Marca reported that Ronaldo fee paid in installments but you know better.

As I said you are wrong and quite ignorant on subject.

 

[El Gato]

Marca reported that Ronaldo fee paid in installments but you know better.

One news report by a newspaper with no references to back up their claim.

Lol.

 

[JamDav1982]

One news report by a newspaper with no references to back up their claim.

Lol.

Yeah Marca made it up and you know better.....

Lol.

 

[El Gato]

Yeah Marca made it up and you know better.....

Lol.

Suggesting journalists don't make things up? So Guardian didn't make their statement up? Still waiting for that sweet proof bro.

 

[JamDav1982]

Suggesting journalists don't make things up? So Guardian didn't make their statement up? Still waiting for that sweet proof bro.

The Guardian most likely not aware of structure of deal at time and I doubt they made anything up.

Just as press when Bale, Suarez signed in big deals were not aware of structure.

Marca has no reason to lie and make it look like Real paid over 100m for Ronaldo.

Real paid in installments. Simple.

When the documents were divulged, some media outlets compared the above total, of which Real Madrid will make the last payment on 24th July this year, with the figure of 97 million euros quoted for the signing of Cristiano back in the day.However, what this doesn't take into account is that Real Madrid also agreed to pay 72 of the 97 million for Ronaldo in three instalments, taking out loans in order to complete the deal. The interest on these payments puts the overall price of bringing in the Portuguese star at 104.7 million.

 

[El Gato]

Marca has no reason to lie and make it look like Real paid over 100m for Ronaldo.

But of course they did, just as well as the journalists in the UK had the reason to report Bale cost 100M while Madrid insisted he's cheaper than Ronaldo just to avoid everything that came with the tag at the time. They released the report in the wake of Football Leaks documents when nobody touched the subject. While providing no references to back it up.

 

[JamDav1982]

But of course they did, just as well as the journalists in the UK had the reason to report Bale cost 100M while Madrid insisted he's cheaper than Ronaldo just to avoid everything that came with the tag at the time. They released the report in the wake of Football Leaks documents when nobody touched the subject. While providing no references to back it up.

Who reported the structure of Bale transfer correctly at time?

No one.

Your claiming Marca lied because they wanted it to seem Real paid 24m more for Ronaldo than they actually did.

Interesting angle. Ridiculous though.

 

[El Gato]

Your claiming Marca lied because they wanted it to seem Real paid 24m more for Ronaldo than they actually did.

Interesting angle. Ridiculous though.

No. They merely present no data and go with Perez's original position on the Ronaldo fee. Granted he never said Ronaldo was paid in installments either. This stuff they just make up. "Ronaldo was more expensive than Bale" was the main message, no matter how it's achieved.

 

[JamDav1982]

No. They merely present no data and go with Perez's original position on the Ronaldo fee. Granted he never said Ronaldo was paid in installments either. This stuff they just make up. "Ronaldo was more expensive than Bale" was the main message, no matter how it's achieved.

Which in no way means they were lying about instalments.

It is just them trying to twist the way the fee was paid to ease Ronaldos ego.

Does not mean they were lying and no one has come out since to dispute it.