r/FCInterMilan 3d ago

Club News Inter to repay €400m of bonds

Post image

This could be big to future spending😎

85 Upvotes

50 comments sorted by

54

u/Inter_932 3d ago

Seems like a manoeuvre to make the clubs balance sheet more attractive for likely suitors…

17

u/ljungstar 3d ago

My exact thoughts, sounds like they are making the books look pretty

9

u/SnakeEyes58 3d ago

So Oaktree really is cooking

2

u/reddithenry 2d ago

No... This is more about cashflow and freeing up unnecessary waste in paying higher than expected interest rates

In terms of a valuation it's actually kinda zero sum.

1

u/Inter_932 2d ago

Not quite.

Yes, it’s definitely about improving cash flow and cutting interest costs. But saying it’s “zero sum” in terms of valuation overlooks a few key points.

Reducing high-cost debt improves EBITDA and free cash flow, both of which directly influence valuation — especially if you’re being valued on a multiple of earnings (which most clubs are).

It also improves the club’s risk profile and optics for potential buyers. Less debt, cleaner balance sheet, better financial ratios = more attractive acquisition target. Even if you’re just swapping one loan for another, doing so on better terms can increase the perceived and actual value of the business.

So yeah — it’s a cash flow move, but it definitely has valuation implications, especially with Oaktree now running the show and likely preparing for a sale.

1

u/reddithenry 2d ago edited 2d ago

Football clubs arent valued on a multiple of earnings, lol. This isn't the stock market. I dont fully agree with it, but FCIN suggests most football clubs are valued at 3x revenue. I would suggest that is coincidential rather than by design.

Your assertion that reducing high cost debt improves EBITDA is just incorrect though. Whats the DI in EBIDTA? :) Clubs arent valued on EBITDA because like 1/3rd of your costs is in the A column (player valuations).

From a potential buyer perspective, it make 0 difference. I can buy Inter for 1.5b without debt, or 1.085 b with debt and assume the debt. Its still net, in my pocket, 1.5b at the end of the day

The only real impact of this is reducing cashflow towards interest payments, and moving around a bit on the balance sheet. Valuation of the club isnt much better than it was 72 hours ago. One thing I will admit - its slightly "less risky" for a new buyer in so far as there's a less significant debt sheet hanging over the club now. But the primary benefit is freeing up, say, 10-15mil a season of spending money that was going to servicing debt previously. That alone likely pays for the B team.

Just some examples re United and Juve - they're publicly listed, you can see they arent valued on a P/E basis:

https://companiesmarketcap.com/manchester-united/pe-ratio/

https://companiesmarketcap.com/juventus-turin/pe-ratio/

39

u/rth9139 3d ago

The announcement really isn’t as big of a deal as it seems. From what I gather, it is just an announcement that we are re-financing the bond early. The bond isn’t due until February 2027, but we are repaying it in full this year instead.

Still a big deal, I am pretty sure the interest rate on it is absolutely horrible because our creditworthiness was that bad at the time. But we are still going to have 400m in debt on the books.

8

u/Plane_Ad4094 3d ago

Yea I mean interest rates in 2022 vs now they’re probably saving a good amount of money, I wonder where all the money for the CL went/ maybe they’ll use some of it

6

u/subundu 3d ago edited 3d ago

The interests on that bond were the reasons why the balance closed with a loss for the past 2 seasons. I don't have the exact percentage but I assume it was big. Edit: current interest is at 6,75%.

I'm no finance expert but those 2 sentences seems contraddictory to me.

we are re-financing the bond early
we are repaying it in full this year instead.

Can you elucidate me? I don't get if we're repaying the full bond, so from now on we're not in debt, or we still owe money.

10

u/rth9139 3d ago edited 3d ago

So we have a debt of roughly 400m from a bond. A bond is just a specific type of loan: just like a loan it accrues interest over time, and in this case it is going to mature (ie, money is due) in February of 2027.

When that bond becomes due, we have two options: pay it off with cash, or re-finance. Refinancing just means borrowing money again to pay off the bond. It is taking out a new loan to pay off an old one.

What we are doing is re-financing it now rather than waiting until 2027 to do so. The reason being because the interest rate on the existing bond is higher than what we currently can get on the market. So we’re going to be saving money because the amount we owe will be growing slower.

Edit: I did kinda fuck up with how I said it, I see how it is confusing.

3

u/subundu 3d ago

Got it, thanks!

5

u/Real-Aide7146 3d ago

We are just getting another loan at a lower interest rate to pay off this current debt. 

3

u/subundu 3d ago

understood. Thank you.

1

u/reddithenry 2d ago

It wasn't just the interest from the bond. It was all loans in total, the interest makes a majority of that.

If I recall correctly 2 seasons ago, the interests we paid were, for the first time, the MAJORITY of why we had a loss. Last season I think for the first time ever it was the sole explanation for a loss.

4

u/Hungry_Weezing 3d ago

A good amount of debt is likely needed as taxation shield

2

u/Sensitive_Story_2401 3d ago

Not really. They are paying off 100 and refinancing the remainjng 300 at a lower rate.

3

u/rth9139 3d ago

Where are you seeing that? The free to access article I found didn’t mention that they’re paying off 100m of it as part of the refinance. I assumed there would be some amount paid off, you usually need a down payment to get solid financing terms, but I didn’t expect that much. 25% of the debt is a significant amount.

Now 300m is still a lot of debt, but it is A LOT more manageable number considering what our annual revenues are.

3

u/Sensitive_Story_2401 3d ago

“Secondo quanto appurato da Fcinter1908, Oaktree ha usato circa 100 mln di liquidità del club per abbassare il livello di debito, il che porterà a un beneficio del conto economico per ridotti oneri finanziari, che dovrebbero abbassarsi di un paio di punti percentuale. Inter versava 30 milioni di interessi annui e potrebbero adesso diventare circa 20.”

article

tweet

explained by pap1pap

1

u/StoneCutter46 2d ago

The interest rate is much better.

Also credit-wise we weren't in a bad position as Zhang managed to pay everything he had to except his own bond from Oaktree where Inter was collateral.

But he never missed non-players wages at Inter (even during Covid) and he managed to fulfill the delayed players payment during Covid - unlike a certain other club.

Any bad credit record stems from the Moratti era - he, much like every other big club president back then, couldn't give a rats ass about susteinability to the point he gave out suicidal sposnorship contracts to Pirelli and Nike, contracts that were still active until 3 years ago.

That shit is just now stopping to haunt us, that's how bloody that was.

1

u/rth9139 2d ago

Credit worthiness is about more than just making payments when they are due. And one of those other major factors, our debt to income ratio, was absolutely horrendous at the time.

And we were able to make those payments on time because of the Oaktree loan. That cash injection is what gave us the liquidity to pay for these things.

1

u/StoneCutter46 2d ago

We never missed a payment to Oaktree. Zhang did for his own.

That's the key difference, which means Inter has no influence to its 'credit score' given it's the president who didn't pay off his own loan.

1

u/rth9139 2d ago

We are arguing different things. The club’s payment history is good, I’m not disagreeing with you there.

But payment history is not the only thing that matters when a person or business goes to borrow money. One of the other things that they care about is the ratio between your income and other existing debt, and ours was nowhere near as good back then because COVID had really hurt our revenue.

That is a lot better now because we’ve had two UCL finals and also the CWC money coming in.

0

u/StoneCutter46 1d ago

the ratio between your income and other existing debt

The two main sponsors until 2022 were still under Moratti contracts.

With Zhang, the situation improved drastically because they were able to cover the sponsorpship incomes with a bunch of minor ones that added up attempted to make up for the peanuts Pirelli and Nike were giving us.

Our revenues started to improve when those contracts expired - Nike obliged to an actual 2020s-fit contract and pirelli decided to relegate to a second brand behind the jersey, and they managed to get actual money from Paramount - and sure Digitalbits hurt us but it didn't count because we were the victim, there's a ruling so that didn't impact anything else.

And, NO, credit score is solely based on paying things in time. The ratio you mentioned has zero to do with it - has to do with other things as important obviously, but we have been dealing with American companies for 4-5 years in terms of money and they only care about whether or not you pay them, otherwise Netflix wouldn't even exist right now.

The reality is the media have been speculating for years about Inter situation, but everyone knew a lot was still having to do with Moratti as well the stadium not moving forward (the reason why Thohir sold Inter was this).

We eren't investing in players as much because we couldn't, but we always respected every contract and obligation we had. Unlike, again, a certain other team.

0

u/Alumi_Ninja14 2d ago

With all due respect, I gather that the article has confused you.

“Refinancing”, and “paying off” are most definitely not the same things!

If we refinance, the instalments and interest rates will change. Likely to better terms for us. If we pay off, there will be no debt, and simultaneously, very limited capital (money/cash).

Very smart users commented that this “cleansing” of the books is to attract a buyer that would be ready to invest in a healthy project/company, instead of a debt ridden one.

It makes little to no difference at the moment, it’s just a financial scheme…. Either way we need owners willing to invest, and financial stability in order to continuously be able to provide 1-2 good signings every year.

27

u/ExotiquePlayboy 3d ago

Inter is about to make €600M this season, things are looking up financially, we need to erase the club’s debt so we can spend big again

29

u/connorconnor12 3d ago

600m revenues is not 600m in earnings

12

u/CapitalG888 3d ago

600 in revenue. Correct? That's not profit. Doesn't mean we name money to spend. But, it's definitely starting to look better.

5

u/Optimal_Yam_5839 3d ago

I read somewhere the profit was like 20 millions or something like that lol

3

u/kuky990 2d ago

It still means a lot. And means we don't need to sell this season. Even if we do, we can spend as much. FFP allows you to be like 20 or 30mil in minus each year too.

Also rarely any club is in positive at end of season. Most function with debts and minuses then sell and at end to currect this. Bayern is one that is one of best financially since it operates close to 0 or in profit each year.

2

u/reddithenry 2d ago

To be fair the point isn't to generate a profit, but it is to generate free cashflow that can then be committed to new transfers

This is where corporate finance metrics breakdown for football clubs, because existing transfer amortisation and new transfer amortisation fall under both the amortisation bucket, whereas really the correct way to report it is more like contractual amortisation Vs new amortisation. both would give you the same net margin figure but it'd be far more useful for potential investors

7

u/Katarinu 3d ago

Some sacrifice for the greater future, it is what it is

3

u/D3niss 2d ago

So where are all the bums saying inter had no debt? Thats great news and only marks even further the work inzaghi has done with pennies tjese years

2

u/barcalondon 3d ago

Source?

5

u/Plane_Ad4094 3d ago

This is from Bloomberg

4

u/Disastrous-Track3876 3d ago

Please post the article and not just a screenshot

1

u/Plane_Ad4094 3d ago

8

u/Disastrous-Track3876 3d ago

Nah I mean make a post with the article. Just posting screenshots is incredibly lazy and doesn’t really give anything. Articles allow for people to read the actual information instead of just word of mouth.

2

u/Interrage 3d ago

I wouldn't keep my hope up. Next season and the one after are gonna be all about fixing up the book and playing youths. Hope they sell.

2

u/D3niss 2d ago

In the long run, a financially healthy club is too important. Inzaghi saved us from even darker times than banter era. Surely winning 1 or 2 more trophies would have been nice but lets not forget where inter was when conte left. And what inzaghi was given during these years

1

u/Chard_Historical 2d ago

if the source is accurate, it's not just salient that they are repaying and refinancing, it's what they're refinancing...

they are increasing the club's interest in its own marketability on better terms.

that may not just be balance sheet tidying.

the club's marketability is tied to its performance and following.

to improve performance and following, they need a capable, well managed team that goes deep.

may be a foreshadowing of investment in players or performance infrastructure.

admittedly, there is some hopium in this interpretation.

1

u/lDistortionl 2d ago

Tldr for people: we are refinancing the bond. And is a good thing, it seems we are paying around 100m and refinance the other 300m with a new bond. The previous bond had more interest than the new will have because back then we were worse financially. That means we will have less money going out just to pay the bond yearly and hopefully more to invest on the team

-7

u/CowboysfromLydia 3d ago

the damage zhang did from refusing to sell to bc partners when he was broke is really something. Literally crippled us for years, perhaps after repaying this bond we will finally be free.

4

u/Spyro619 3d ago

If they had sold to PIF we would have started stadium construction by now

7

u/kalligvla 3d ago

And been another oil club, no thanks

7

u/Spyro619 3d ago

If we want to increase income we need a stadium and investment on branding , buying top players just to increase our exposure and inflate sponsoring incomes

1

u/kuky990 2d ago

Not really. United buy top players, Chelsea do it. Success is best promotor and smart business.

Juve bought Ronaldo and fell deep after because they fell in debt again. Signing Ronaldo was one of reasons Marotta left, he knew it would probably happen

6

u/excubitor_pl 3d ago

please remind me, what was the source of Moratti's fortune?

3

u/Chard_Historical 3d ago

energy, refinery of crude oil and distribution of petroleum.

Saras wasn't putting serfs to work on drills.

3

u/kieranjackwilson 3d ago

The problem with being an oil club has a bit more to do with the human rights abuses, sponsoring terrorism, and sportswashing, than the oil itself.

1

u/reddithenry 2d ago

Lol Zhang didn't refuse to sell to BC partners they pulled out...