Re: [新聞]

看板FCBarcelona作者Petrie ( )時間14年前 (2010/07/29 01:49)推噓2(2推 0噓 1→)

留言3則, 3人參與討論串57/233 (看更多)

※ 引述《kevinishia (love will keep us alive)》之銘言： : 3. 財政領域的副主席 Javier Faus 說，本季巴薩將虧損 77.1 M歐元（上賽季 : 盈餘 11.1 M）。 here are some excerpts from the Xavier Sala i Martin note from Facebook: “I read that the new board has decided that the club’s 2009-10 season was counted as the first trophy of the Rosell era, not as the last of the Laporta era. Why? Because, says the vice president Javier Faus, titles are not counted on just the league (as they did until now) but the day the trophy was delivered. And as the League Cup is not until late August will be delivered once Rosell is president, they decided (unilaterally) that the league was earned during his presidency…. Well, that’s sad, absurd and pathetic is that the news yesterday when he starred Javier Faus said that some auditors had rebuilt the accounts of the club and they had “discovered” that the club had a loss of 70 million. How can that be? From +11 to -77 there is a difference of 88 million. How can the results of a change so blatantly? … Well, for example, saying that the sale of land is not effective on the day of the contract of sale (as was always done until now) but the day it was recorded, or that the bonus Mediapro gave the club as a reward for audiences obtained during the last two years of sporting success is not an award that can be assigned to Laporta, and will be paid during the tenure of Rosell. Therefore, Rosell decides to appropriate them. That is, to change the date of certain transactions that have occurred, revenue of Laporta was passed, by magic accounting, to Rosell and many of the expenses that were Rosell’s, were assigned to Laporta. I will not discuss now each of the items questioned by Javier Faus. I will later have the audit report when I asked the club (and, curiously, nobody wanted the club has not sent). What will the moment there are four reflections. The first is that the lack Faus isn’t telling the truth when he says that the auditors have reformulated the accounts: The auditors give their opinion on the accounts made by the club managers. The “new” accounts, therefore, were drafted by Javier Faus, not by any auditor. This must be very clear. The second concern is that the new board gives very the club a bad image, destroys its international reputation and seriously damages the interests of the club. That the economic situation is chaotic within the club is not true, as explained in the following reflection. Third, note that the changes proposed by the new board are the date on which income and expenses are counted. That is, Rosell and Faus say that we count income that does not exist. … with the proposed changes of Faus what happens is that the loss of 70 million would be automatically compensated for in earnings of 70 million the next year. Laporta’s board lost 70 million, and has a 70 million gain from Rosell… Therefore, the second message is a message of peace to all partners: the economic health of the club is superb and the “reformulation of the accounts” no way alters that conclusion. The only thing altered by this reformulation is who gets the medal for good economic management Laporta, or Rosell. And this brings us to the fourth consideration: … as just explained, when you say it is the worst situation … Rosell will have 70 million profit this way, and the new board will appear as the great savior of the economic situation when in reality it would have been a simple magic trick of accounting. The second possible explanation is monetary in nature: if Rosell’s board shows a profit of 70 million the first year, you can retrieve all the 60 million deposited in the LFP. … The LFP requires new boards of clubs like Barca to deposit a bank guarantee worth 15% of the cost of the club from the previous year (as the expenses were 400 million, Rosell had to make a guarantee of 60 million). The rule is that if the LFP finds in the following year that the club showed profit, for example, 15 million, the amount of the deposit will be 60-15 = 45. If next year there is about 10 million in other profits, the guarantee will be 45-10 = 35. And so on until you reach zero. From here, the deposit will always be zero. Rosell miraculous generates revenues of 70 million the first year, and the guarantee would be zero immediately. Thus, Rosell and his board would save 60 million annually over the next five years. Remember that the cost of a guarantee is around 1% of the amount so guaranteed, so thanks to this accounting ploy Rosell saves 600,000 euros of his own pocket … every year! This could be the real intention of the board. During the election campaign, Javier Faus said it would be an honor for him and for the new board if I would be a club ambassador in New York. I thank him the board for their trust. As a potential ambassador, however, allow me to ask them the following question: Is it worth sullying the national and international image of the club just to get some personal benefits (repeat, personal) of 600,000 euros? I have a clear answer. The question is: Do they?” -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 219.87.89.129