I think if we take a step back, we have paid the value of Portanova and Petrelli for Rovella whose contract was expiring and would have been available for free in a few months.
Regardless of using other players in the Locatelli deal. Both players have a value and could have been used in other deals if not that one. Personally, that does not seem like good business sense to me. Essentially we have paid a few million for a guy we could have got for free. I understand the attitude that if he meets the bonus targets then he must have done well and therefore have no issue. However, that 20m could be used on someone else (assuming it is 20m, the wording is a bit unclear).
It is this short term thinking I really don't like and it will catch up with us, if it hasn't already.
We can celebrate a plusvalenza on a couple of guys. But in truth we would likely have had a plusvalenza on them at some point soon anyway and we will take far more of a hit to our P&L by amortising a potential 40m for Rovella.
Regardless of using other players in the Locatelli deal. Both players have a value and could have been used in other deals if not that one. Personally, that does not seem like good business sense to me. Essentially we have paid a few million for a guy we could have got for free. I understand the attitude that if he meets the bonus targets then he must have done well and therefore have no issue. However, that 20m could be used on someone else (assuming it is 20m, the wording is a bit unclear).
It is this short term thinking I really don't like and it will catch up with us, if it hasn't already.
We can celebrate a plusvalenza on a couple of guys. But in truth we would likely have had a plusvalenza on them at some point soon anyway and we will take far more of a hit to our P&L by amortising a potential 40m for Rovella.
That's not how I operate on FM though, I act like a shark on 30th of December trying to steal any player I like on expiring contract while he is negotiating with his current club for a new one, but Juventus in real life chose to do it in a different way, we might not like it but from their point of view it does make sense and it can be profitable in the future.
Actually the only thing I disagree with you is that this is a short term thinking, I think it's more like laying the groundwork for eventual long lasting relationships that might and can be profitable for both clubs in question. Would it really turn out to be profitable, I don't know, it might or it won't, is it a good strategy or a bad strategy - don't know, it might be good or not so good, time will tell. That's how the club operates and even if I personally don't fully agree I am honest when I say that I really see the logic in their actions, I really do, even if it was up to me I would probably be an ass and not only sign players on free but convince them not to renew with their current club even if they have an year or more lasting contract...
