Skip to main content

Juventus make losses for four years in a row

The Swiss Ramble reports from Zurich on the latest financial results of Juventus.   One interesting general point to emerge is that Juventus are yet another club who have become increasingly reliant on player trading, but it is a volatile source of funds, especially after the pandemic.

Juventus remained in 10th place in the Deloitte Money League, based on 2019/20 revenue, having overtaken Arsenal the previous season. However, their €255m revenue growth since 2010 is the lowest in the top 10, miles below the likes of PSG, Manchester City, Barcelona, Liverpool and Spurs.

They are still very much the biggest club in Italy, certainly in financial terms. Although the 2021/22 season will deliver another large loss, the club expects the economic performance to “improve significantly starting from 2020/23 financial year.”

The pre-tax loss more than doubled from €82m to €208m (€210m after tax), despite revenue rising €43m (11%) from €407m to €450m, mainly because profit on player sales fell €136m from €167m to €31m. Operating expenses also increased by €37m (6%).   Unsurprisingly, Juventus huge €208m pre-tax loss is the worst in Italy, though their figures are the only ones to include a full year of the pandemic. In fact, it is the highest ever in Italy.

After four years of profits up to 2017, Juventus have now reported losses four years in a row, adding up to a €326m deficit in that period, including €289m in the last two years alone. COVID has exacerbated their losses. Club expects 2021/22 to also show a “significant loss”.

The club estimate the impact of COVID on 2021 revenue as €70m (match day and retail sales), while overall loss for 3-year period between 2020 & 2022, including lower player sales from less liquid transfer market, will amount to hefty €320m (assuming gradual recovery in 2022).

COVID has impacted Juventus ability to make big money from player sales. In the four years up to 2020 they averaged annual €132m profit from this activity, but only managed to realise €31m in 2021.  The importance of player trading to Juventus business model is illustrated by them making €563m profit from player sales in the 5 years up to 2020. This is nearly €200m more than the next best performer in Italy, namely Roma €372m, followed by Napoli €325m and Inter €226m.

Despite reflecting a full season of COVID, Juventus €450m revenue is still highest in Italy, well ahead of Inter €302m, Napoli €179m, Milan €172m, Roma €149m & Lazio €106m (2019/20).

Broadcasting revenue shot up €69m (41%) from €166m to €235m, a club record for this revenue stream, benefiting from income deferred from 2019/20 for games played after end-June accounting close.    It is the highest in Italy by far, but below average in Europe (in a normal year).

It is imperative that Juventus do well in the Champions League to boost their broadcasting income, as the TV rights in Serie A are relatively low.  The Champions League is extremely important for Juventus, who have earned an impressive €454m from Europe in last five seasons, which is significantly higher than other Italian clubs.

Commercial income rose €9m (5%) to €194m, as new sponsorship deals, up €16m (13%) to €146m, offset €6m reductions in sale of products. This resilience holds Juve in good stead, as other Italian clubs have suffered, e.g. Inter’s Chinese sponsors have reduced.

The wage bill rose €39m (14%) from €284m to €323m, partly due to players giving up some salary in 2020 because of COVID.   It is almost back to €328m club high in 2019. Wages have grown more than any other Italian club (€124m since 2015), but will fall after CR7’s departure.   

The wage bill of €323m is significantly higher than the rest of Serie A with closest clubs being over €100m lower: Inter €198m, Milan €161m, Roma €155m and Napoli €141m. However, a fair bit less than European peers, e.g. Barcelona €443m, PSG €414m.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Wolves get raw deal from FFP

  I used to see a lifelong Wolves fan for lunch once a month.   He was approaching ninety, but still went to games.   Sadly he passed away the other week. As football finance guru Kieran Maguire has noted, Wolves continue to be constrained by financial fair play rules.  Radio 4 this morning described them as this year's 'crisis club' and the pessimists have certainly been piling in. Martin Samuel wrote sympathetically in the Sunday Times yesterday, saying that the Premier League drives talent away with regulatory red tape: 'Why could Al-Hilal sign Neves? Because Wolves needed the money. And why did Wolves need the money? Because the club had to comply with an artificial construct known as financial fair play. So Wolves are going skint, yes? No. There is no suggestion that Wolves are in financial trouble, only that they are failing to meet the rigours of FFP. Wolves’ owners appear to have the money to run the club, and invest in the club, and in fact came up with a pow

Gold standard ground boosts Tottenham's income

The gold standard in European football grounds is the Tottenham Hotspur stadium in north London, a £1bn construction project completed in 2019. Its impact on the club’s finances has become increasingly clear as the effects of the pandemic have faded. Previously, the average fan would spend less than £2 inside the ground on a typical match day, but now that figure is about £16, thanks to new facilities including the longest bar in Europe and an on-site microbrewery. Capacity has gone up from 36,000 at the club’s previous home of White Hart Lane to 62,000.  The new stadium — built on land adjacent to White Hart Lane — has opened the door to a broad range of other events that have helped to push commercial income up from €117mn in 2018 to €215mn in 2022. Last year, Tottenham hosted US singer Beyoncé for five nights on her global Renaissance tour, two NFL matches, as well as rugby games and heavyweight boxing bouts.  Money brought in from football has gone up too. Match day income is

Charlton takeover approved

The long awaited takeover of Charlton Athletic by SE7 Partners from Thomas Sandgaard has been approved:  https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/se7-partners-obtain-efl-approval-for-charlton-athletic-takeover/ Charlton have had unhappy experiences with owners for over a decade, so how this works out will remain to be seen.  There is certainly potential there, but will it be realised? This interview with Charlie Methven gives detail not available elsewhere:  https://thecharltondossier.com/charlie-methven-on-the-record/