05-25-2020, 04:06 PM
|
Summer mercato 2020
|
05-25-2020, 08:07 PM
Forza Diavolo ale!!!
05-25-2020, 08:36 PM
Chelsea have decided against using their buyback clause for Sassuolo’s Jérémie Boga. (Fabrizio Romano)
Forza Diavolo ale!!!
05-25-2020, 10:27 PM
Players from Germany that Milan have been linked recently-
Marcel Sabitzer Lazar Samardzic Marcel Halstenberg
Forza Diavolo ale!!!
05-26-2020, 12:13 AM
(05-25-2020, 11:53 AM)Hitman Wrote: Inter are also another club who could remain strong after all this as their funds come from Suning. If Suning’s economy is still thriving then Inter will be okay. How you can attack people's opinions and reasoning and act all high and mighty and talk about healthy discussions is beyond me. I could sit here and pull apart every piece of what you wrote but let me just say this. if you think that top clubs are that poorly organised that they can't take a hit without going bankrupt then you're living in a fantasy land. Just because Milan was run that way, does not mean that other clubs are. On Suning... Sunings success has nothing to do with Inter's compliance with FFP. On Gazidis and Poch. I really don't care what Gazidis did at Arsenal. At Milan he's stopped us spending on a top coach leading Maldini and Boban getting Giampaolo and Pioli. I'm not saying that it's not necessary. It is. Because so far we've got no new revenue streams so need to work on curbing spending. On your response to Nefremo. That first line says it all. It shows you do not understand how businesses run. They do not run on Imagination or hopes and dreams. They run on careful, calculated moves based on PAST HISTORY. Also. There is no logic in your discussion. So... clubs will be that worse off that they'll be selling players off at 50% yet somehow Milan will be unaffected and will not have only 50% to spend? With all the FFP issues we've had. With no new incoming revenue. We'll somehow still have 100m to spend? And what? Use the money from selling Gigio, Suso, Kessie, etc for the same price Pre Covid. (05-25-2020, 01:56 PM)GeoTav Wrote: Ibra would have got a severe injury today. His season could be over. Calf Injury? WE shoul entertain keeping him around for depth and his leadership. Achilles Injury? I'd put money on him retiring. Achilles injuries suck and take a long time to fully recover. At his age, it could well be something that could take him out for way too long. (05-25-2020, 08:36 PM)Sleeping Giant Wrote: Chelsea have decided against using their buyback clause for Sassuolo’s Jérémie Boga. (Fabrizio Romano) Great! now we can make a move for him. 
 (05-25-2020, 11:53 AM)Hitman Wrote: Nefremo, You do not seem to have that imagination to be able to think of what might happen in a future that hasn’t happened before. You always seem to be base the future’s projection on the actual reality of yesterday’s analysis of today. Your analysis of the situation of today is outdated and needs an update. And you’ll eventually get updated, you just need to see it take place for you to say ‘Well I did not know that this was going to happen because who knew that they were going to lose much this in revenue? You are right man. I don't have the imagination. I choose to base my opinion on years of facts pertaining to economics, recessions, examples of bankruptcies, etc. So...yes. Can something that hasn't happened before happen? Sure. I just don't think it'll work out the way you are saying it'll work out. The only accurate thing in your analysis is that yes, there is a crisis of today. But your assessment of the crisis’ impacts is negligent. You think as a result, clubs will be even more hesitant not to devalue/sell their prized assets (in other words the market will remain unaffected). Isn’t that situation already what was in January - where top clubs will not drop their asking prices for players? You are failing to account for the impacts of the pandemic on the balance sheets of these clubs. Each club is in a unique different situation from the other club and that’s why you cannot generalize the whole football market. Just because players from the top 10 clubs may not be devalued, does not mean the same will be applied for the rest of football - which is 98% of the football market. Yes...but the players you are claiming can be bought for "chunk change" don't play for the "98% of the football market". They play for top clubs in the top 5 leagues in the world (Neymar, Dembele, Coutinho, Arthur...) Your assessment of creditors being more lenient is also invalid. Creditors actually prefer that they don’t receive payments on time do you know why? Ask Paul Singer! The current owners of our club got our club because the previous owners couldn’t pay their debt and now they got Milan for a bargain (330m) and are trying to turn it to a profit - in their own way. Point being is that there are many different type of creditors and they’ll be the ones setting the rules on how lenient they’ll be. Some will be lenient, some won’t. The ones that won’t will push the market downwards. Let’s say for example that Man United has debt of $250m (number inaccurate, just for example) today that’s meant to be paid over 5 years. The EPL revenue package today for the 4th-7th club in EPL will earn the club around $150-160m a season. They also have match day revenue of at least $6m per match. For the remaining 10 matches in the league, they’ll lose out on $60m that was projected and if the league doesn’t continue - they would not have a huge chunk of the $150m. That’s $210m in one season only taking into account the match revenue + TV rights. If they don’t make their debt payment this year, Man Utd can also face a future that Milan faced, it can go to whoever lent them the debt. How do you think they’d be able to afford that payment without the TV rights deal? Not sure what line of work you are in, but it's clearly not finance/accounting/acquitisons/etc. "Some creditors may be lenient and some won't"??? This is simply NOT how things work. You are comparing Milan's/Lee's situation with Elliot with Manchester United. This could not be any further away from reality. Lee left the club as collateral. When he defaulted on the repayment of the loan, Elliot could legally come in and repossess the club. These types of loans (ones that have collaterals like this) are very very very very very very rare and Lee was stupid enough to do it, simply because he had NO business owning Milan. He didn't have the means nor the money. He was in too deep. You can bet your ass United does not have the club as a collateral for ANY of their debt. How do I know that? They are publicly traded. There is ZERO chance this is the case. So, NO, their creditors can NOT repossess the club. They can put liens on assets, etc....but these are things that sometimes take years to materialize through courts. It is in nobody's interest to do this. Not for the club and not for the creditor. In United's case (and I know you only used them as an example, so I'll just continue with it)....IF United defaults on their loan repayments (including the interest payments), several things can/will happen: 1) United will negotiate to restructure the debt. This option is THE #1 option for EVERYONE, including the creditor. Believe it or not, Elliot (who you used as an example) is the odd example here. 99.99999% of creditors don't want to own football clubs or repossess these clubs (EVEN if they could do it, and i'll tell you that most of them can't legally do it anyway without a provision like Elliot's). This costs a TON of money and time and even more and more investment. Just "ask Paul Singer" as you say as Milan currently is costing him a shit ton more than he lent Lee...and the value of the club is still not where he wants it to be in order for him to make money worthwhile. So, chances are that United will be able to restructure their debt.....and listen to this......even borrow MORE MONEY from the same creditor even...hence at a higher interest rate and more strict commitments. This may sound crazy...but they'll be able to pay off the old debt, with NEW debt. Why? Because it's in the creditor's interest for the club to keep moving as a "going concern" and NOT, (this is very important), NOT devalue the club by selling off it's most prized assets. 2) IF #1 doesn't work (99% of the time it does work since it's in the best interest of everyone concerned)....than you go to court. This is a process that can take a long time and nobody really wants to go through...but it's necessary sometimes. Mediation will happen and the parties will negotiate how to restructure the debt. (similar to #1, but this is done with outside parties and actuaries) Assets will be valued and at this point...it's all up in the air and anybody's guess. But more often than not...creditors will be ok with companies to keep moving forward and operate as normal, as long as they get a large chunk of the "new shares". Now...again, very important....these shares are only worth a lot (and worth enough in order to return the money lent) if assets keep operating and keep providing revenue. In other words...it would not make sense for United to sell off their most prized assets since the new shares given to the creditors will be worthless at that point anyway. 3) Liquidation. Worst case scenario. This is when we see clubs going from Serie A/B to Serie D and restart again. I can promise you....imagination or not....Not a single lender out there that has lent out 250M will allow a club to go into liquidation. They'll lend the club more money (under stricter rules and provisions...and possibly demand the club as collateral) before moving forward with this. I'm sorry man...but you are just completely wrong and talking out of your ass on this one. Now think of the pressure that the management is enduring to pay their debts this year. Do you think they’ll continue paying Alexis Sanchez $20m a season? Do you think they’ll continue to splash $80m on a Maguire kind of player? They’ll be under pressure to get rid of unwanted players with high expenses and they’ll want to sell ASAP. Of course now losing that TV rights revenue is unlikely now given that the EPL realized that it is inevitable and necessary to finish the season. Ligue 1 for example will not get their TV rights deal in full because they finished the season abruptly. I don't disagree here. But there are several different things we're talking about. Alexis Sanchez was not needed in United prior to Covid-19 anyway. So, in other words, he is NOT an asset that's bringing revenue in. Why would they keep him. In their restructuring of their expenses, Alexis will FOR SURE be the first one to go. BUT, if we are talking about an asset that's central to their plans and has been on the forefront of their team helping bring in revenues...than no, they will not just let them go or sell at huge discounts (Neymar being an example). Smaller clubs like Ajax, Croatian clubs, Serbian clubs, Belgian clubs will all absolutely NEED to sell their top players to be able to afford the rest of their expenses. Those clubs revenues is mostly from their match revenues and now that is all gone. They do not have the luxury being able to stay patient. If these clubs are faced with bids of 10-20m for any player it would be extremely financially irresponsible to reject it, especially if this 10m-20m represents ~5x the annual wage bill! I don't disagree here. You are 100% right. But this conversation started with you saying "we should go for devalued assets like Neymar at 70M, Arthur at 18M, Dembele/Coutinho at 35M. As far as I know...none of them play at these clubs and all of them play in a top club at one of the top 5 leagues in Europe. My whole point was that we have ZERO chance in buying ANY of those players. Going for players from Ajax, Croatia, Serbia, Belgium? That's a different matter. I'm not disagreeing with that. Saying ‘unless teams are forced to sell’ indicates that you’re of the opinion that these clubs will be the exception. What we’re trying to tell you is that the vast majority of clubs will be forced to sell to stay afloat. Only the top 10-20 clubs in world football will be able to sustain this... The top clubs in turn will take advantage of this situation and buy from other clubs at bargains. If the PSG bid of 50m for Icardi is true, then that is evident of what I’m implying. Firstly, both of these clubs would be considered in the ‘healthy tier’ of clubs and PSG bidding 30m less than the option price of 80m shows you that PSG believe in Icardi and are testing Inter’s financial resolve with a cheeky bid. This of course is only a rumor. My main points though are about how difficult this crisis will be for the other 98% of the market. Again, not correct. Majority of the clubs will NOT be forced to sell to "stay afloat". NOT in the top 5 European Leagues. Therefore, those that might be (and i'm sure there will be some...but there are always some every summer, Covid or not) forced to sell WILL be the exception. The notion that "majority of clubs will be forced to sell to stay afloat" is simply not correct. Selling isn't the be all end all of staying in business. Who are you going to sell to?????? Who, if everyone else (majority, as you say) is in the same situation as you? Who will have the money to buy and to provide these salaries and transfer fees???? What you are suggesting is unrealistic! What you are not understanding is that selling top players at discounts is THE ABSOLUTE WORST way for clubs in financial hardship to get away from it. Not when this is an EXTERNAL factor and yes, believe it or not, things will eventually get back to normal. So the first things that clubs facing financial hardship will do, at least in this first transfer window or two, is going to be to restructure and renegotiate their debt and expenses. You are also assuming that Milan is just OK. That others will be in financial hardship while we can just go in like a bunch of bosses and buy up their most prized assets at discounts. Completely unrealistic. You are unaccounting for the fact that Milan is also going to struggle financially. Elliot is not here to burn money. They've already done that. They are here to get the club to be self sustaining, raise revenues (build a stadium at that), and therefore raise the value of the club. So while you are right that the entire market will adjust and that we will not see 100+ mil transfer fees for a little while....the market will adjust across the board due to everyone's revenues shifting in a downward trend. So the simple way to think of this is....if we couldn't afford player X prior to the pandemic...chances are we can't afford player X now either, devalued or not. 
05-26-2020, 05:08 AM
(05-25-2020, 03:29 PM)Sleeping Giant Wrote: Newcastle proposed the idea of a €5million loan plus a option to buy at around the €25-30m mark for kessie. The offer was rejected.*Everton.
"Above Milan there is only the sky." Antonio Cassano
I'd taket a 5m loan with obligation but no option. Don't give them a chance to see how useless he is. haha
Or even make it like Suso. Option that becomes an obligation if certain conditions are met. The only condition should be the deal becoming an obligation if Newcastle stay in the EPL.
05-26-2020, 05:29 AM
@Nfermo, by saying using the credit card, I meant banking your next year revenue on the current transfer campaign.
I should have explained it better, i.e. inter spent money they didn't have while basing it on a forecast that they'll make x amount. Now to illustrate my point, they bought luakaku and Barella on the credit card (their payment is due this year or the next), they planned to pay up based on many variables (which it changed and it impacted their balance sheet). Guess who is in trouble when obligation gets activated? I hope I made myself clear. You give me the impression that football is an independent entity and it does not get affected if the onwer's main business isn't doing okay. Remember how the lawsuit on Silvio destroyed our club and we were never the same again? Football isnt self-sustaining and it won't be until something change with the way this industry is operating. When the onwer isn't doing OK the money fountain will run dry and the club will struggle. Now outside of football, how do you see the impact of this world crisis? Tv and Matchday money isnt the whole revenue of a football club, they are the main contributing inlets but not the whole thing. Sponsorship and commercial revenues are going to be significantly lower.
"Above Milan there is only the sky." Antonio Cassano
05-26-2020, 05:31 AM
(05-26-2020, 05:22 AM)porcho Wrote: I'd taket a 5m loan with obligation but no option. Don't give them a chance to see how useless he is. hahaGazidis knows where is the money in EPL, if Newcastle wants kessie then he's going for more than 40m straight sale. Forget everton, they won't pay.
"Above Milan there is only the sky." Antonio Cassano
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
