I don't think he would have left Milan or that he asked for more money in order to stay. If the latter had happened though I think Milan would be right to refuse a pay rise, he was already earning more than enough.

My answer is 1. He def would not have left. He's come out many times himself and said that he was forced to leave because the club was in debt. Was it a mistake selling him? I thinkso. I would rather be in debt and pay it off over time like 99% of all clubs out there, than lose our future captain and legend only to fix the debt. Thats how I feel but not in regards to just kaka. I would feel the same for any of our loyal players even pirlo/gattuso etc.


If inter/juve can be in debt and pay it over a period of time, then why can't we? Berlu is just stupid imo and would rather have a healthy balance account than a competitive team that can challenge on all fronts.

This post has been edited by Bluesummers: Aug 19 2009, 11:09 AM

Whilst I pretty much agree, I don't think we're in a position to call him stupid. It's a lot of money (and it's his, not ours) - plus, it's a sensible thing to do from a financial point of view.

It's a shame though, because he's irreplaceable in my opinion. I guess time will tell if Milan have made the right move.

It doesn't have to be his money though, thats the beauty of it. Juve don't have a rich owner, yet they have money to spend??? Barca/madrid they are in the same boat yet nothing is stopping them. We can borrow a small 50 million from the bank and pay it off over 3-5 years like all clubs do. I'm not talking about hundreds of millions in debt; i'm talking about a small amount in order to rejuvunate the squad and make it competitive. If we are able to do well and perhaps win a trophy or at least get close to it, our profits will raise from where they are and we can pay back a portion of this.


But berlu does not want to do that at all. He wants to spend what we earn, which imo cannot work in football today. If clubs like mancity have unlimited accounts how can we compete? Either we stop them and put a cap or make new rules or we have to borrow to cope and pay it off over time like everyone else. What we cannot do is ignore the problem and allow ourselves to stoop lower and lower and cause our team's name further damage than already has been done.

Jmo.

@Bluey: You have also to realise that loans come up with interest. 5 years ago, 50 million would give you one worldclass player and enough money left to tie him to a 4 year contract at the club.

Now 50 million might just give you the player.

Don't forget bank loans will come with high interest.

So essentially if you buy a player for 50 million...assuming a bank interest of 5%(very very generous indeed) and player's wages of 7 million a year(still cheap)

After four years you have to pay: Loan Principal (50mill)+Interest(10 million) + Wages (28 million)

Please note this is simple interest I've used. Banks everywhere use compounded interest now!

So a grand total of 88 million. And this is just for one player and for a small amount as loan.

Now Manchester has loans of 700 + million.

Real has 220 MM in loan just for two players. What about the other players who they've purchased before and now need to sell at a loss (KJH for instance)? Those loans don't stop having to be paid, just coz the player left the club. Real also has an additional 300 (or was it 400) MM from before in debt.

So now do the math yourself, and calculate how much time do you mean when you say 'pay over time'.


See Bluey, unlike a stadium which makes sense. 700 million at one go true, but Arsenal have a regular source of income as well as an appreciating asset thanks to real estate, players are nothing like that. Borrowing money to buy a player is always going to be a loss. You'd really need to win big, to earn the kind of money to pay off that kind of debt (hell..considering the mortgaged assets, I'd say staying in existence) forget making profit.


This is where Man U, Liverpool, Madrid etc. have shot themselves in the foot. This is also where Arsenal are safe. They're in debt, but they don't HAVE to win big to survive (unlike Leeds). This is where Man City and Chelsea are safe(1 billion in debt...but interest free...and the owner will remain).



From Silvio's point he's done right. The club would continue to bleed money if they loans are not closed immediately. Could he instead have gone the Abramovich route and given us the money direct. Sure! But he'd argue he'd done that back in 1986 and it's about time he stopped.

AC Milan is registered as a subsidiary company of Finninvest. As long as it remains a commercial enterprise it will need to maintain balance books. Regardless of the cost. That unfortunately is a sad reality, I'm starting to realise.

Either I've messed up or you can't vote anything other than option 3 because you're supposed to vote in both sections.

Blue, just for the record, Juve's owners are probably richer than Milan's. The Agnelli family (now the Elkan family) own Fiat (and also Alfa Romeo, Ferrarri, etc).

While I'm not sure if Kaka really wanted to go or not, I do think the club was right not to offer him yet another raise in order to stay (so yes, good as he is, I don't think anyone's irreplacable). I also think there's a bit of a money whore about him whether he actually asked for the raises or not. He coudl also have taken a massive salary cut to stay if it were truly a money issue.

A salary cut still wouldn't have made any difference, Milan needed the instant money and their answer for that was to sell Kaka.

And how come people want Kaka to get the massive salary cut when you've got Dida, Kaladze, Seedorf making 4m a season??? So Kaka gets a massive cut and gets put in the Favalli league of salaries, our most deserved earner by far since he's practically carried the entire team after Sheva left but Dida, Kaladze, etc still get their 4m a season while they're either using up our medical resources or just plain screwing everything up and costing us matches, how is this in any way fair I do not understand...

And money whore??? Concidering that he has been one of the top 3 players in the world for quite sometime I think he wasn't paid enough when comparing what Messi, C.Ronaldo and even Ibrahimovic got and the latter wasn't even in contention for any of the personal prises and failed his team on a yearly bases in the CL.

Seems there's a bit of disagreement. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif) I'm not going to argue with anyone about it, however. I've got my opinion and am welcome to have it; others are equally welcome to their opinions.

That threw me as well. I just voted for what I wanted (Option 1) then boted for which one in Option 3 I would have gone for, had I gone for ption 3 (Option 3a).

I think he would have stayed, had he not been forced out the club.

So, option 2 is potentially redundant but essential to make the poll work (IMG:style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif)

Ok, I'll do that.

^^Yeah like if it was a salary issue (not matter if you think otherwise) you think Milan should have given in?


What?


Yeah it does not work the way I thought so you have to answer the second question anyway... just answer like you would had you voted for number 3 in the first one.


That's just unfair. Surely 65m + ending of the highest contract cannot be compared to 10m over 3 or 4 years...

think hoq much more we would have made if we waited for other signings and played hard to get like inter with ibr and munich with frank. we would have gotten 100M with players maybe

Im not glad we sold Kaka but i don't think it's bad too if they manage to get young prospect players for that moneys.
Kaka was forced to leave the club i know but that's the way the life goes, it's was not up to him to decide but the time will show was to our managment was it right or no... Look at the Shevchenko sample and look what hapend to him? May be there is somthings that we can't see coes we are onlly watching 90 minuts of the game and making opinions of the players...

I think it is pretty clear that it was all down to us needing that cash. I don't think Ricky ever wanted to leave, but this is our fate.