Cristian Romero (1 Viewer)

Karim30

Senior Member
May 6, 2012
1,603
that's not how it works, mate. cash flow and book value has nothing to do with each other, and the counterparties are actual separate contracts. the board doesn't have an asterisk besides romero's name stating that "ruru was part of the same deal and wasn't worth too much anyways"

would you be happy selling arthur for 30m? by your logic, we paid 9m +10m for him (pjanic was sold for 63, arthur was bought for 72m + potential 10m bonus), so selling him for 30m would mean a potential "profit" of 11m to 21m by your logic, right? in reality, selling arthur for 30m this winter would result in a capital loss of ~35m, bonus aside.

romero's yearly amortization is 5,5m per season. not only we gave him to genoa for free, we paid them 2m (that could rise to 5,3m), and we loaned him to atalanta for 2+2m (a loss of 1,5m even is bonus conditions are met), and will potentially sell him for 16m to atalanta, which is below his expected book value (~17m) next summer.

if your own calculation still makes you happy, then i'm happy for you. i only have one explanation for this: we accepted the best offer, so shame on romero's agent and tici for not working harder to find a better one.
Yeah but he is to be sold the summer after so we have a plusvalenza, right?
 

Nejc

Senior Member
May 13, 2006
1,690
the board doesn't have an asterisk besides romero's name stating that "ruru was part of the same deal and wasn't worth too much anyways"
Since you seem to know this stuff, wouldn’t sale of Sturaro then also need that asterisk when his book value was a few million but was sold for about 10 million more?

What I imagine is the club would record appreciation(not sure its the correct term) of about 10 million on Sturaro sale and then record depreciation of ~5 million every year that Romero has a contract?

And then similar thing with Muratore and Romero this year...
 

Boksic

Senior Member
May 11, 2005
10,029
Was always an odd transfer given that he seems pretty ideal for the back 3 that Pirlo is trying to play and our injury issues at the back.

I think we undervalued him after panicking that we needed to get some plusvalenza. Hopefully we have kept an option on him to bring him back at a reasonable price.
 

MikeM

Senior Member
Sep 21, 2008
10,165
Looked bad at Genoa. Better at Atalanta. But both teams use 3 CBs. At Genoa he played on the right and had to mark and sit deep. At Atalanta he's in the centre just running and killing people 1 v 1.

I wish we could see him in a traditional setup. Atalanta is completely irregular. There is no defensive line, no passing off attackers, just pure 1 v 1 all over the field.

Physically he's superior, clearly.
 

kappa96

Senior Member
Jun 20, 2018
3,336
Since you seem to know this stuff, wouldn’t sale of Sturaro then also need that asterisk when his book value was a few million but was sold for about 10 million more?

What I imagine is the club would record appreciation(not sure its the correct term) of about 10 million on Sturaro sale and then record depreciation of ~5 million every year that Romero has a contract?

And then similar thing with Muratore and Romero this year...
Agree, but didn't bother to point that out.
At the end of the day, it doesn't matter. If a player is sold for 18 and the other is bought with 28, the club records a loss + the salary difference, regardless of the number of years the amortization takes place.
The difference would still be - 10 mil. +- salary.

It's just financial gymnastics for ffp reasons.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)