Van Gaal vs. Rijkaard vs. Guardiola spending

Barcaman

Administrator
Staff member
Transfer spending during Van Gaal era (3 seasons): 147 million euros

Transfer spending during Ferrer/Rexach/Van Gaal/Antic (3 seasons): 222 million euros

Transfer spending during Rijkaard era (5 seasons): 241 million euros

Transfer spending during Guardiola era (4 seasons): 370 million euros (Real Madrid during that time 530 million)


A bit surprised at those figures. Frank was here one season longer and still the club spent 130 million less.


What will happen under Tito? The trend seems to go up and the rumors now say we have 100 million to spend this summer.
 

Aryagorn

Improvin' Perfection!!
We made some stupid transfers under Pep, that's for sure... At the same time Transfer Market inflation played its part too IMO
 

Ryan_Cule

barça amor d mi alma
Well, market valuation of players have gone up too. .

Guardiola - Barcelona have won 175 of 242 games, a winning percentage of 72.3%.

Rijkaard - 160 wins from 273 matches, a winning percentage of 58.6%.

---------------------------

Rijkaard lost 50 matches .

Guardiola lost 21 matches.

------------------------

UEFA Champions League - ( here Rijkaard wins in terms of % )

Rijkaard -Won 25 out of 41 matches ( Winning percentage 61%)

Guardiola - 31 out of 52 matches ( Winning percentage 59.6% )


UEFA Cl - Guardiola 2 / Rijkaard 1
 

Barcaman

Administrator
Staff member
Actually the market deflated somewhat since the early-mid 00s. There was some inflation in currency though but that's a different thing.
 

DucdeOrléans

New member
But FCB and RM are getting richer and richer for each season due to the monopoly in La Liga. I expect to the see the current trend of a lot spending to continue for a long time unless Spain's economy collapses even further, which would be a "remarkable" achievement.
 
Last edited:

Barcaman

Administrator
Staff member
Both clubs were getting deeper and deeper in debt during that time too. There's 2 sides to that coin ;)
You bring an interesting issue with fragile Spain economy though.
 

DucdeOrléans

New member
Both clubs were getting deeper and deeper in debt during that time too. There's 2 sides to that coin ;)
You bring an interesting issue with fragile Spain economy though.

It's really not that bad. There is healthy debt and unhealthy debt. Both RM and FCB have the former kind of debt.

Also the current debt both clubs have can easily be repaid since both clubs are the richest ones in terms of revenue. Also there is the regional and political support you won't find in many football clubs.
 

Barcaman

Administrator
Staff member
There is only bad and worse debt. There is no such thing as "healthy" debt. Unless, of course, you are a bank and looking to leach and enabling/enticing spending.
It's like saying there's good and bad illness. Word itself means something negative.
"Good" or "bad"..
  • it represents an obligation which must be paid back
  • it represents a lien on-, and therefore a reduction in-, our income
  • it lowers our net worth
  • it limits our mobility and constrains our options
New management took some measures though but so did Laporta before succumbing. It remains to be seen if they can keep it from rising for a longer period.
 

DucdeOrléans

New member
There is only bad and worse debt. There is no such thing as "healthy" debt. Unless, of course, you are a bank and looking to leach and enabling/enticing spending.
It's like saying there's good and bad illness. Word itself means something negative.
New management took some measures though but so did Laporta before succumbing. It remains to be seen if they can keep it from rising for a longer period.

Of course there is healthy debt. The serviceability is the key word in the case of FCB, RM and all other big institutions/companies.

Of course debt alone is not a problem. If I have a million dollar mortgage, but I have a job that pays me $2 million per year, my large mortgage is not really a problem. However, even if I have a small $50,000 mortgage, if I’m not working I won’t be able to make my mortgage payments on even a small mortgage. The key here is serviceability: your ability to service the debt you have.

Both FCB and RM are able to do exactly that.

Of course most debt is unhealthy but still some of it can be labelled as healthy (you can't really compare it to having an illness)

They can and they are doing exactly that. The "huge" debt reported by the media in the summer of 2010 were referring to the total liabilities.

To get the full picture of the health of a football club you need to look at the balance sheet. In the case of RM and FCB it's looking good as expected.

Also just in 1 single year Rosell and the staff managed to reduce the total debt by 15 percent and further reduction is expected this summer.

I think it is safe to say that both FCB and RM will be absolutely fine in the near future as well.
 

Barcaman

Administrator
Staff member
Typicall answer that brainwashing media and the banks want you to have.
If you are generating debt that in itself means you are spending more than you make. Then you have interests which mean you are digging yourself even more. Next... yes, you can have high income that can service the debt but taking it as something you can count on indefinitely is naive. You yourself mentioned economy. And guess what. It can go down the tubes, as opposed to your debt, which won't go away anywhere.
Also, taking a mortgage as an example? Seriously? With the housing market crash? You are investing in something which is a liability and not an asset.

Taking loans and going into debt is never a good thing unless you are investing in something that will generate profit but then you are just rolling a dice and gambling with someone elses money.
 

DucdeOrléans

New member
Typicall answer that brainwashing media and the banks want you to have.
If you are generating debt that in itself means you are spending more than you make. Then you have interests which mean you are digging yourself even more. Next... yes, you can have high income that can service the debt but taking it as something you can count on indefinitely is naive. You yourself mentioned economy. And guess what. It can go down the tubes, as opposed to your debt, which won't go away anywhere.
Also, taking a mortgage as an example? Seriously? With the housing market crash? You are investing in something which is a liability and not an asset.

Taking loans and going into debt is never a good thing unless you are investing in something that will generate profit but then you are just rolling a dice and gambling with someone elses money.

What has anything what I wrote to do with brainwashing media?

I am just telling you that the debt FCB and RM have is not necessarily bad debt in the sense of the word. If you actually take a look at both clubs balance sheets you would see this.

The fundamental is whether the debt is too high or not (balance sheet), how well debts are covered by items such as income and cash-flow, overall strength (or weakness) of each club’s balance sheet, i.e. also at assets, not just liabilities.

The amount of debt mentioned by the media was total liabilities not bank debt.

This includes what might be described as operational debt, such as: (a) trade creditors (payables) for amounts outstanding on bills for products or services received, e.g. rent, electricity; (b) money owed to staff, e.g. wages earned by staff paid at the end of the month, bonus payments; (c) other accrued expenses (accruals), which are the same as payables except no invoice has yet been received; (d) provisions, which are an estimate of probable future losses, e.g. legal claims; (e) and, most bizarrely, deferred income for payments received for services not yet provided, e.g. season ticket revenue for matches to be played in the future.

About the income part:

Both FCB's and RM's revenues are growing each year and there is nothing that indicates that it will not happen again next season. Yes, nothing is 100 percent sure but I think you are underestimating both FCB's and RM's ability to deal with such a situation.

Also, both clubs have huge assests so in a worst case scenario they would not be as fucked as other clubs.

FCB and RM are constantly investing as clubs every single season and are generating revenue. I seriously doubt, as I said previously, that they face financial difficulties in the near future, UNLESS of course Spain's economy will worsen and become a even bigger liability.
 
Last edited:

Barcaman

Administrator
Staff member
That's the same philosophy that brought most Western economies in the position of financial crisis.

In short: They were taking loans and investing/banking on growing market shares and rise of real estate prices.
Even shorter:they were gambling.

If you have to you take loans to open businesses, create added value and jobs. This is what generates growth and is a basis of healthy economy.
Not taking loans to continue spending money you don't have on liabilities just because you are healthy enough to service the debt.
 

DucdeOrléans

New member
That's the same philosophy that brought most Western economies in the position of financial crisis.

In short: They were taking loans and investing/banking on growing market shares and rise of real estate prices.
Even shorter:they were gambling.

If you have to you take loans to open businesses, create added value and jobs. This is what generates growth and is a basis of healthy economy.
Not taking loans to continue spending money you don't have on liabilities just because you are healthy enough to service the debt.

But I don't see any gambling in RM's and FCB's case other than what you usually see in all other top football clubs. In fact I see a very stable income that only will grow due to the dominance of both clubs in Spain (mainly due to the monopoly and history) and also their popularity, strenght in Europe, marketable value, regional and political importance, advantages in terms of bank loans (very low rates compared to all other football clubs) etc.

The problem with your reply is that both FCB and RM have debt that is manageable and in accordance with their income.

If Zaragoza had the same kind of debt (total liabilities) they would be fucked since they have a very low income but not in the case of RM and FCB.

As I said previously, I seriously doubt that they will face financial difficulties in the near future, UNLESS Spain's economy will worsen and become an even bigger liability.

But let us agree on disagreeing, Bojan.:)
 

Home of Barca Fans

Top