change a letter (and shoot an other messenger) 
Buy on AliExpress.com
Board & Management (109 Viewers)
- Thread starter .zero
- Start date
Listen, I'm too old for this, you give me the name now or Juve gets another -5.
Buy on AliExpress.com
With Calciopoli the issue was the amount of damage. You could probably claim it cost Juve at least half a billion euro in revenue. But do you want to bankrupt your own league? Not to mention that, by the time we found out there was no evidence with regard to Calciopoli, Juventus were already beating everyone left and right. We were beating Inter so hard they couldn't sit straight for years. I guess we sort of lost motivation to sue. Because, you know, we were beating Inter so hard and we were sort of focused on continuing beating Inter. Because they can never be beaten enough.
Fuck Inter.
Fuck Inter.
it's italy, they should have known better considering the circumstances. if the whole system is after you, there are some hints. and especially after calciopoli, you should be alert.
look, at my previous job we had some governmental money to spend, so we knew that the press and a few political parties will be watching us. a few colleagues thought that they might be wiretapped, we searched everything in the building, and we found some bugs. we did nothing illegal, but we stopped using the phones and the office building for sensitive conversations. and we mostly were young, inexperienced, naive people.
agnelli has been reminded thousand times in the last 20 years that juventus is a target. those wiretaps were recorded through locally planted devices, like mics in cars and offices. club's been paying tens of millions on a yearly basis for useless agents, but apparently not enough on security. let's hope the next proper president (not this puppet) is a bit more paranoid than aa was.
and yes, we should have never started those swap deals. it's a terrible business practice, that's undefendable, even if it's not illegal by the accounting standards. you can use amortization to ease financing as it's a non cash expense, that's corporate finances 101, but you can't get away with hundreds of millions of amortization on the long run. not only covid screwed with our finances.
look, at my previous job we had some governmental money to spend, so we knew that the press and a few political parties will be watching us. a few colleagues thought that they might be wiretapped, we searched everything in the building, and we found some bugs. we did nothing illegal, but we stopped using the phones and the office building for sensitive conversations. and we mostly were young, inexperienced, naive people.
agnelli has been reminded thousand times in the last 20 years that juventus is a target. those wiretaps were recorded through locally planted devices, like mics in cars and offices. club's been paying tens of millions on a yearly basis for useless agents, but apparently not enough on security. let's hope the next proper president (not this puppet) is a bit more paranoid than aa was.
and yes, we should have never started those swap deals. it's a terrible business practice, that's undefendable, even if it's not illegal by the accounting standards. you can use amortization to ease financing as it's a non cash expense, that's corporate finances 101, but you can't get away with hundreds of millions of amortization on the long run. not only covid screwed with our finances.
The question regarding the capital gains should be did we do anything illegal which means against the law? The law doesnt restrict valuation of players therefore we should get the points lost back. I just hope the judge will find sense in it.
The wages thing - thats another story.
If there are secret agreements - They clearly show intent and I just wonder if intent=actually doing it.
I mean do they need to find proof these secret agreements been fulfilled or is the intent enough as actually doing it.
Is there a difference in punishment?
P.S latest news say we might be excluded from Europe for a year, good thing we arent going to qualify anyway with this reduction. The joke is on them
The wages thing - thats another story.
If there are secret agreements - They clearly show intent and I just wonder if intent=actually doing it.
I mean do they need to find proof these secret agreements been fulfilled or is the intent enough as actually doing it.
Is there a difference in punishment?
P.S latest news say we might be excluded from Europe for a year, good thing we arent going to qualify anyway with this reduction. The joke is on them
When the whole system is after you, is the solution to always look over your shoulder? When does it exactly stop? I didnt like plusvalenza practice either because in the long run it isnt viable to run business in that way but still it is not illegal and there shouldnt have been a case to begin with. If not for plusvalenza, there would have been something else and then in a few years something again would pop up. You cant just be that careful, especially since the rules seem to be changing based on someones whim.
Also this is not some insignificant football club. We are talking about a club that has 35-40% share in entire Italian fanbase. What is shocking to me is how little influence we have in politics, considering our multibillion owners and connection they have to have.
Also this is not some insignificant football club. We are talking about a club that has 35-40% share in entire Italian fanbase. What is shocking to me is how little influence we have in politics, considering our multibillion owners and connection they have to have.
plusvalenza isn't illegal, swap deals aren't illegal.
inflating the value of assets is illegal. it's borderline impossible to prove though. since there's no objective way to calculate players' value, it requires to prove the bad intent first. in juve's case, the number of the swap deals and the difference between the supposed value (ehh...), plus the added wiretaps were the key to prove the bad intent. not that i agree, i think the case should have been dismissed and never reopened, but that's probably how they figured out how to fuck with us. we'll have to wait until the official explanation though.
here's a long ass thread on the case. it's pretty well put together at first sight:
also, the mofo prosecutor (chiné) allegedly said that juve used swap deals to create virtual money (not my words, alleged quote i read) to buy players. this is the result of spending virtual money within the league:
and let's not forget the 700m of definitely not virtual money exor recently raised the capital with.
inflating the value of assets is illegal. it's borderline impossible to prove though. since there's no objective way to calculate players' value, it requires to prove the bad intent first. in juve's case, the number of the swap deals and the difference between the supposed value (ehh...), plus the added wiretaps were the key to prove the bad intent. not that i agree, i think the case should have been dismissed and never reopened, but that's probably how they figured out how to fuck with us. we'll have to wait until the official explanation though.
here's a long ass thread on the case. it's pretty well put together at first sight:
also, the mofo prosecutor (chiné) allegedly said that juve used swap deals to create virtual money (not my words, alleged quote i read) to buy players. this is the result of spending virtual money within the league:
and let's not forget the 700m of definitely not virtual money exor recently raised the capital with.
also, the mofo prosecutor (chiné) allegedly said that juve used swap deals to create virtual money (not my words, alleged quote i read) to buy players. this is the result of spending virtual money within the league:
and let's not forget the 700m of definitely not virtual money exor recently raised the capital with.
and let's not forget the 700m of definitely not virtual money exor recently raised the capital with.
They decide to value them at £whatever. Hence when the swap is made it creates a profit for both, and therefore more capital to spend elsewhere? Is that what they're saying?
Coni court won't be judging on merit, they'll simply be judging on whether the sporting court followed procedures and correctly applied its own rules. That means they can either confirm the sentence or overrule it, they can't, say, give Juventus a reduced sentence.There are high chances that the penalty will stay. (Tuttojuve)
