Arsenal for some reason (stadium?!) seem to be forced to generate a massive transfer surplus, thus actually needing the money from sales. That's not the case for Dortmund anymore, they can (net) spend. Lewandowski would be sold for half his value, Ronaldo was sold for the highest transfer fee ever, not exactly comparable.
I told you: the club has to pay taxes and they have an opportunity cost of around €5m because the next striker will probably earn around €6-7m. So if Bayern offers them €20m they have to pay taxes and then lose another €5m because of wages, reducing their net gain to something below €15m which is peanuts for a striker like Lewandowski in my opionion. The market does not offer them a suitable replacement either, so they'd be forced to overpay or buy a player they don't really want, further lowering the gain of that transfer.
The money is a secondary issue here. What will make or break a deal is the question if they find a suitable player to replace him.
Lewandowski had a similar situation with Lech before he left for Germany. Didn't stop him from playing a good season. Moreover it's up to the officials to judge his character in that regard.
'Investing the money wisely' would mean what? Signing Dzeko and completely ruin the wage structure? Signing Benteke for €30m or more? Signing Martinez for €40m? Signing some unknown player and hope it turns out well?
And what does the past tell you about Dortmund when you look out that window? Dortmund's development has been a huge surprise every year. They have established a certain basis by now, but their future offers a lot of possibilities. 5 years ago they were a midtable side with a lot of debts hanging over their head, now they probably have a sustained turnover of close to €200m as long as they don't feck up in an incredible way.
So it is rational if they don't want to sell to for lets say €25m to Bayern, but if they don't want to sell him for the same amount to a different club it's stupid, because apparently they need the money and keeping an unhappy player? Also they explicitly mentioned Bayern because according to Lewandowski that's the only club he wants to go to and according to one of his agents he already has an agreement in place with them.
I took the liberty of combining the whole thing as the multi-quotes were getting messy. Hopefully, I addressed all your points in the post below.
Also, contrary to what the village idiot says in a couple of posts above, I hope you understand that this is a discussion and I am not trying to prove a point to you.
I think there are a few wrong
premises in your posts above.
(1) BVB does not have a
sustained turnover of €200m. In fact, they have never even crossed the €200m mark till date.
(2) You are not looking at the tax deduction the right way. A club is taxed on the actual profits made not on every individual transfer. If BVB utilize the money from his sale towards the club than they won’t be paying taxes as you mentioned.
(3) I have never read Lewandoski mention that Bayern is his only club of choice. In the interviews and quotes I have read, he has always avoided the questions on his transfer speculation.
(4) You are assuming that a player with one year left on his contract, and one who wants to leave, is somehow undervalued at around €25m. IMO, that figure is neither his half value nor peanuts. I am sure most will agree.
BVB’s revnues at the end of the last 4 seasons are as follows:
(1) 2008-2009: €105m (Finished 6th in the league)
(2) 2009-2010: <€109.4m (Aston Villa was the 20th place club with €109.4m) (5th in the league)
(3) 2010-2011: €138.5m (First time they won the league since 2001)
(4) 2011-2012: €189.1m (Won the league & Champions League qualification)
I wouldn't call that a
sustained turnover of €200m. Those are the revenue figures of a growing club, tied to their recent success. In the same period Liverpool without winning much and only one champions league qualification had revenues of €217m, €225.3m, €203.3m, €233.2m. Which is a
sustained revenue stream.
You are right when you say that five years back they were a mid-table side and since then success has been phenomenal. However the thing to look at is how was the success built. It was built on the back of players from the academy excelling, cheap buys in the market turning out to be excellent and a brilliant manager who brought out the best in them. All things falling in place at the same time. They didn't spend a lot in the market and only had to pay modest wages. A couple of years ago they could take a punt of on a Japanese player from the J-league for €300k or a Polish lad from Lech Poznan, paying them decent wages.
Things have changed now, have you considered the increased expenses due to the all new contracts that are being handed out to the likes of Subotic, Hummels, Gundogan, Piszczek etc.? What about the new players coming in? Will they come on the same wages as BVB were paying earlier? Can they afford to take punts on players as they did the last few years or will they have to go for more established players now? Will the next batch from the academy be as talented as Gotze, Sahin, Rues etc.? Can they compete with Bayen now by taking more risks with players when Bayern can spend close to €40m on Martinez, Gotze etc. every window without breaking a sweat? They obviously will need increased depth in the squad. How will that affect the operating expenses? What about new personnel to explore marketing potential of this new success? Will you have a Kagawa or Gotze to sell every year to boost the revenues?
Maintaining success is harder than getting there in the first place. They’ll have to make prudent decisions both commercially and financially, on and off the pitch. Selling an unhappy player when you can get a decent sum from his sale is far more canny then trying to make a statement. At least in my book. You can obviously beg to differ.