Andrea Poli - CM/AM - Sampdoria (6 Viewers)

[Dostoevsky]

Good, however we look at it. No risk taken and we buy our shares in case he does make it one day.

How is that not risk?

If he fails to impress we've wasted money on his half of contract.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Alen]

How is that not risk?

If he fails to impress we've wasted money on his half of contract.

Make it "less risk taken" then. No risk would be not to consider him at all.
Half of his contract should be cheap and considering his youth even if he doesn't make it we'll still be able to get back a good chunk of the money by selling our part or by including it in some exchange deal.

 

[Suns]

Wait, why the fuck would we let our new signing spend time in Serie B?

 

[Dostoevsky]

Wait, why the fuck would we let our new signing spend time in Serie B?

Because he wouldn't play here as much? Out there he'd be a starter most likely. And plus it might be the only way to get him, if we give him a stay at Samp for one season.

 

[acmilan]

Wait, why the fuck would we let our new signing spend time in Serie B?

learn the ropes, he is not ready yet for Juve and also facilitate the transfer

 

[JCK]

So we bought half a player but left him at his club?

This co-ownership stupidity has reached new levels.

 

[Cheesio]

So we bought half a player but left him at his club?

This co-ownership stupidity has reached new levels.

Just a rumour, Nothin official .

 

[Flamez]

So we bought half a player but left him at his club?

This co-ownership stupidity has reached new levels.

Actually, this is the first co-own I understand. Very well planed, if true.

 

[JCK]

Actually, this is the first co-own I understand. Very well planed, if true.

What is good about it? We paid half the value of a player that we are to pay the other half if we like him. If we don't like him we would have flushed half his value into the gutter. I am trying so hard to understand what good is there in it but I keep failing.

 

[Flamez]

What is good about it? We paid half the value of a player that we are to pay the other half if we like him. If we don't like him we would have flushed half his value into the gutter. I am trying so hard to understand what good is there in it but I keep failing.

He is a good prospect, but he hasnt space in our squad, so its good to let him stay with Samp. If he turns out to be a very good player, do you think Samp have the capacity to outbid us in a blind auction? And I guess Marotta has some gentlemen agreements with them to facilitate a eventual buy of the other half.

If he doesnt step up, then we dont lose all the money we could if we had paid for the full player.

 

[JCK]

He is a good prospect, but he hasnt space in our squad, so its good to let him stay with Samp. If he turns out to be a very good player, do you think Samp have the capacity to outbid us in a blind auction? And I guess Marotta has some gentlemen agreements with them to facilitate a eventual buy of the other half.

If he doesnt step up, then we dont lose all the money we could if we had paid for the full player.

I know all of that but still for me it doesn't make sense and sounds all stupid.

 

[javi_berti]

if this kind of deals do not affect other deals that are required to strenghten our squad, then why not. we're buying 50% percent now at his current worth and should make a deal for the remaining 50% as well. we're betting on the fact that his value at least stays the same or goes up. in case his value rises we made a good deal.

 

[JuveJay]

Actually, this is the first co-own I understand. Very well planed, if true.

It happens a lot as well.

 

[Kasaki]

Soon

the time is fast approaching

 

[javi_berti]

Soon

the time is fast approaching

soon what?

 

[Bianconero81]

Pointless transfer, if it indeed does goes through. We are stacked in the CM department. Shouldn't we be attempting to offload people first before acquiring this dud? I do understand that if he is procured he shall be left to rot @ Samp for a season, which again makes no fucking sense.

I heard they want 14 million Euros for him?

 

[JCK]

Pointless transfer, if it indeed does goes through. We are stacked in the CM department. Shouldn't we be attempting to offload people first before acquiring this dud? I do understand that if he is procured he shall be left to rot @ Samp for a season, which again makes no fucking sense.

I heard they want 14 million Euros for him?

And we are paying them half of that and keeping him with them. That's 7 Million, only 3 Million short of the difference between the asking price and the offered price for Agüero.

Marotta: We could not afford Agüero, Atletico's demands were much higher than our budget.

 

[Joe]

And we are paying them half of that and keeping him with them. That's 7 Million, only 3 Million short of the difference between the asking price and the offered price for Agüero.

Marotta: We could not afford Agüero, Atletico's demands were much higher than our budget.

WHAT? That better just be there to reinforce your point.

 

[AOD4]

It doesn't make sense to buy a player on co-own at this point and let him play elsewhere when we are having problem to raise money for Aguero unless we are including some player that we couldn't sell elsewhere in that deal.

 

[AFL_ITALIA]

Actually, this is the first co-own I understand. Very well planed, if true.

Agreed, I was surprised by this plan.