FC Bayern Forum

Bazi wrote:

endrity wrote:That number for RM is surely wrong. They already had a revised revenue (revenue without fees for sold players I suppose) of close to 520m last year. Surely they will have increased on that.

That's what Real Madrid's financial report had to say:

"During the financial year ended June 30, 2014, the Club obtained net income of €102,083 thousand (June 30, 2013: €40,825 thousand) from the transfer of rights over several players to other clubs. The net profit from all disposals after deducting the net carrying amount totaled €51,908 thousand (June 30, 2013: €20,224 thousand) (Note 17.5)"."

To my understanding that means we have to subtract € 102M from their total revenue to get the revised revenue, but I'm not 100% sure.

Yeah I am more into economics than pure accounting, but usually I wait for the Deloitte Money League that comes out every mid-January to make proper comparisons. Those guys do a really good job of making sure to apply the same standard for every financial statemet accross different countries so you can really gauge where clubs stand compared to others. I really don't know what to make of that statemet right now.

Bazi wrote:

runaway wrote:What is most admirable to me is despite the low TV revenue which drives MU's, RM's, and Barca's income up, we've been able to keep up with their earnings.

That's because having a huge audience in public television benefits our sponsorship deals a great deal. Imagine we could be only seen on pay-tv, we'd have a much smaller national audience and sponsors would obviously pay us less money, because they get less public exposure.

The guy that just won the Nobel Prize for Economics would pretty much agree with you. His whole argument, shown through some incredibly complicated math, was that some companies can profit by being a platform for two other types of customers. For example Google is completely free because they want as many people to go there, and therefore they can use this huge number of clicks to ask for massive amounts of money from advertising.

In a way Bayern, and Dortmund, might be on to something here as well. By keeping ticket prices low and making sure that their stadiums are always full and with passionate fans they can then turn around and ask for massive money from companies that want to advertise through them. I really wish our board could have a chat with the Nobel economist.

The Mainz manager Heidel is convinced VFL Wolfsburg has more money to spend then the rest of the BL, even Bayern.. I dont know what they give their staff in Mainz, but he Always makes comments like that towards Bayern.

Well if they do, they have done a piss poor job in spending it then.

Focus published another article about our financial year 2013/2014 with a few new pieces of information and analysis from an accounting expert of high reknown. Some key points of the article:

- Comapred to last year Bayern München's salary to turnover ratio decreased from 48% to 41% which translates into a moderate increase of our wage-bill from € 202.8M to € 214M However the way the line in question is phrased leads me to believe Focus used Bayern's total turnover (including transfer fees) to calculate that ratio. According to my calculations our "real" salary to turnover rate should be therefore at 43.8%, which is still an incredible result. According to the article most of our European competitors operate at 50-60%, Man'City s even at 86% and Chelsea FC at 69%!


- Our equity ratio rose from 70% to 76%, which is another strong indicator of our club's financial health and unrivaled in European football.

- The remaining liabilities drastically decreased (they don't mention exact numbers) by utilizing € 75M of the Allianz SE money to pay-off the remaining Allianz Arena debt. It also means that we only needed 10 instead of the initially planned 25 years to pay-off the Allianz Arena, even more remarkable considering we had to take care of 1860 München's share as well. The rest of the € 110M purchasing price of Allianz SE's shares of the Bayern München AG will be used for the construction of our new youth development centre, which is currently in the final stage of its planning phase. The costs for this project are approximately € 70M (not in this article, but HERE) so our CFO should easily find a way to decrease our tax burden over the next couple of years.

http://www.focus.de/sport/fussball/bund ... 96502.html


I can't wait for the Annual General Meeting in late November when our CFO will present all the numbers in great detail.

Does Bayern pay a dividend? I would assume such a financial powerhouse in the football world would have more than enough to do so.

They do. In 2013 for example:

A record dividends check for all FC Bayern Mùnchen eV shareholders amounting to 30 cents a share [source]

In the financial year 2012/2013 the Bayern München AG paid a total dividend of € 8.25M. However, roughly 82% of this money went directly to the FC Bayern München e.V., which means merely € 1.5M left the club. This year the Allianz SE, our third shareholder, will also receive their piece of the cake of the annual dividend, but the e.V. is still keeping 75.1% of the total amount.

So it's not really a big problem for the club. From what I've read the FC Bayern München e.V. is currently sitting on roughly € 70M and sizeable amount of that money is going to be used for the construction of our new club premises at Ingolstädter Straße.

Is that close to HWMW clinic? So his rift with Pep would be resolved.

Tedesco wrote:

Bayern's 346 million € Allianz Arena is now fully paid off. 16 years earlier than planned. [source]

Did we not buyout 1860's share too?

I hope so, its time they go back where they belong, Grunwalder Stadion.. And let FCB II play in the AA

40M /year available now for transfer expenses.

ottackon wrote:40M /year available now for transfer expenses.

Yeah, right...

More likely we will take a loan or something in invest in youth. I hope we do this.

I think the investment in the youth system is financed from the 110M brought by Allianz.