[han2503]

But what can you do with no money?

We have a debt of 15m euros and we are missing out on 30m euros that we can get from CL.

Thats 45m we are lacking. We still lack sufficient funds to do anything. So either Silvio opens up his wallet or we spend our money where it matters most.


If we sell constant, we should keep Vila and use him there. Take the money and use it towards a midfielder or attacker.

We need to spend at least 30m euros for a chance at fighting for 3rd.

Who told you we have no money?

We have a budget every summer for transfers, it's how we threw away 12m on Matri last summer. From our budget.

We can get a LB, that's just decent and used for cover for a low price, there are a lot of them in Serie A. Players who are actual LBs not makeshift ones who started out as mids and were moved to the LB position for the simple reason that they are left footed by Allegri.

[Rossoneri7]

Silvio will sell the club, he will not recoup his investment in Milan (which exceeds 1bn to date), but he will put it on the market and if it meets his valuation he will sell part or whole.

I am positive the Berlusconi family want Milan to stand on its feet, to relieve the burden off of fininvest and open the door for an investor. Add to that FFP.

Berlusconi selling because he can not contain the losses + he is not allowed to under FFP. Hence whats the point in keeping the club? Not sure if the next owner can do a PSG, as PSG themselves are in a fix having not complied with FFP. Take precedence with inter and Thohir.

[X-Offender]

Dzemelai is a waste of money in my opinion.

Get rid of Essien. Promote Mastali.

Honda, Monto, de jong, sapo, poli, muntari, cristante, mastali

Take that 5m were gonna spend on him and put it towards the attacking signing. Once robinho hits the deck, splash on someone like Griezzman.

Yeah, sure, cos Mastali will solve our problems.

Dzemaili is a decent player, would be ideal as sub, and for just €4 million I think it's a great deal.

And for Griezzman we need to splash +€30 million, as that's what Atletico bid for him in the last few hours. If we could spend that kind of money we'd have signed Iturbe.

Silvio will sell the club, he will not recoup his investment in Milan (which exceeds 1bn to date), but he will put it on the market and if it meets his valuation he will sell part or whole.

I am positive the Berlusconi family want Milan to stand on its feet, to relieve the burden off of fininvest and open the door for an investor. Add to that FFP.

Berlusconi selling because he can not contain the losses + he is not allowed to under FFP. Hence whats the point in keeping the club? Not sure if the next owner can do a PSG, as PSG themselves are in a fix having not complied with FFP. Take precedence with inter and Thohir.

You're taking for granted that Silvio wants to sell the club, but that's just an assumption you're making. Personally, I don't think that's the case.

[Danny]

3 years? I don't get your calculations? Are you putting the time where he was barely featured, and still pretty raw in your calculations? 1 year, or 1 year and a half I can understand..

You don't pay £15M for a 'pretty raw' player. Furthermore MDS is the same age as him and played 5 times in 2011/2012. El-Sha, 'barely featuring' as you put it, made 27 appearances in the same season.

Not sure I can totally buy your calculations either tbh.

No, thanks..I'll give him my support until he shows ON THE FIELD that he doesn't deserve it. He's always given more than 100 percent for Milan.

Erm, I'll give him my support always because he wears red and black. I'm just making (IMO) valid criticism of his worth up till now.

[Danny]

Silvio will sell the club, he will not recoup his investment in Milan (which exceeds 1bn to date), but he will put it on the market and if it meets his valuation he will sell part or whole.

I am positive the Berlusconi family want Milan to stand on its feet, to relieve the burden off of fininvest and open the door for an investor. Add to that FFP.

Berlusconi selling because he can not contain the losses + he is not allowed to under FFP. Hence whats the point in keeping the club? Not sure if the next owner can do a PSG, as PSG themselves are in a fix having not complied with FFP. Take precedence with inter and Thohir.

FFP is a joke and you well know it. Real Madrid are in 500M worth of debt yet throwing hundreds of millions around in transfer fees. And the one time PSG were 'found guilty of violating it' they appealed the 'sentence' and got it substantially reduced.

Stop using FFP as an excuse. It's just a FIFA buzzphrase to pretend they're doing something about the silly money when in reality the power clubs can do what the hell they like.

[Rossoneri7]

FFP is a joke and you well know it. Real Madrid are in 500M worth of debt yet throwing hundreds of millions around in transfer fees. And the one time PSG were 'found guilty of violating it' they appealed the 'sentence' and got it substantially reduced.

Stop using FFP as an excuse. It's just a FIFA buzzphrase to pretend they're doing something about the silly money when in reality the power clubs can do what the hell they like.

Thats ur opinion, not mine (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

[han2503]

Thats ur opinion, not mine (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

It's not an opinion, it's a fact that clubs like City and PSG have made a mockery out of FFP.


FFP is mostly just a convenient excuse for Silvio and Galliani

[X-Offender]

FFP is mostly just a convenient excuse for Silvio and Galliani

Absolutely.

[Rossoneri7]

It's not an opinion, it's a fact that clubs like City and PSG have made a mockery out of FFP.


FFP is mostly just a convenient excuse for Silvio and Galliani

How is it a fact han? Please don't insult my intelligence buddy, just present me with the facts. Or does it just fits the bias of B&G?

[han2503]

How is it a fact han? Please don't insult my intelligence buddy, just present me with the facts. Or does it just fits the bias of B&G?

Um, how about the fact that they broke the "FFP rules" and were slapped on the wrist by a fine.

And then some club in Russia breaks the rules and they're omitted from European competitions.

Like Danny said, the big clubs will continue to do whatever the hell they like because they're holding UEFA and FIFA by their necks. Clubs have gotten bigger than the governing body of football these days which is why the system is corrupt and cannot be monitored fairly.

[Rossoneri7]

Um, how about the fact that they broke the "FFP rules" and were slapped on the wrist by a fine.

And then some club in Russia breaks the rules and they're omitted from European competitions.

Like Danny said, the big clubs will continue to do whatever the hell they like because they're holding UEFA and FIFA by their necks. Clubs have gotten bigger than the governing body of football these days which is why the system is corrupt and cannot be monitored fairly.

You did not present facts, just assumptions. I'll wait till you present me with a fact.

PS. There are several analysis done online with regards to PSG and City FFP compliance; I suggest you read the facts and point them out to me.

[han2503]

You did not present facts, just assumptions. I'll wait till you present me with a fact.

PS. There are several analysis done online with regards to PSG and City FFP compliance; I suggest you read the facts and point them out to me.

It is a FACT that both City and PSG were fined.

Other clubs like Malaga, Hajduk Split, Bucharest, Besiktas and Bursaspor were all initially banned due to their finances.

[Rossoneri7]

It is a FACT that both City and PSG were fined.

Other clubs like Malaga, Hajduk Split, Bucharest, Besiktas and Bursaspor were all initially banned due to their finances.

PSG and City were fined. But they did not face the peril of a ban. Those clubs you mentioned got banned for not paying player wages nor taxes. A technical component that surprisingly City and PSG complied with.

How about you explain to me how PSG or City, so far, have managed to get only a fine? With facts please.

This post has been edited by Rossoneri7: Jul 27 2014, 10:57 PM

[han2503]

PSG and City were fined. But they did not face the peril of a ban. Those clubs you mentioned got banned for not paying player wages nor taxes. A technical component that surprisingly City and PSG complied with.

How about you explain to me how PSG or City, so far, have managed to get only a fine? With facts please.

PSG and City have been doing the same thing that you've been telling us cannot be done, which is spending ridiculous money that comes straight from their owner's pocket.

With Real and Barca it is understandable how they can basically fly under the FFP radar because of their revenues, but that is not the case with City or PSG. They're in the same both as us (losing more money than they're making) relying on cash from their owners, they're certainly not self sustaining.

And isn't it you that has been telling us over and over that Silvio cannot continue to fund the club as he did in the past because of FFP? City and PSG do just that and get a slap on the wrist for it. (Fine + squad restriction of 21 for the CL which won't really hurt them anyway as City only used 21 players last season in the CL anyway)

[kurtsimonw]

When all this FFP kicked up, there was meant to be a rule about the amount of money you could make via sponsors as well, to stop a rich owner just using another company of his to sponsor his club for silly money. "Fair value" it was called, I believe. But Barca went way and beyond that and everyone turned a blind eye to it, now United have done the same and it's being ignored again.

FFP means absolutely nothing to a rich club. It's all about creating a glass ceiling to keep certain clubs at the top.

This post has been edited by kurtsimonw: Jul 27 2014, 11:28 PM