Sebastian Giovinco (11 Viewers)

[KB824]

Do Juve have a right to accept or decline the offer? Is the price just fixed if they want him for that price and can we just say no?

I might be wrong on this, but if Juve declines the offer, it might end up going to a blind bid for him. WHomever bids the highest gets his full ownership

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[KB824]

Conversely, if neither side submit a bid, then Gio would be Parma's property from here on out

 

[Buck Fuddy]

I`m confused. Isn`t Giovinco`s future is in Parma`s hands?
From what I understand Parma have a fixed price to sign Giovinco`s other 50%
so If Parma make the offer and they already said they will isn`t Giovinco theirs?

Which other 50%?

They have the option to buy 50% of his contract, right now they own 0%.


The remaining 50% will have to be negotiated, probably at a later time. His future is as much in Parma's hands as it is in ours.

 

[KB824]

Actually, now that I think about it, Parma doesn't own 50% of him yet, so until that happens, my last two posts are irrelevant

 

[Hust]

So how and who decides which team he plays for when both teams own 50%.

 

[Muayyad]

Italian football is so complicated.

 

[JuveJay]

So how and who decides which team he plays for when both teams own 50%.

He goes to the 'buying' team unless agreed otherwise. When the co-ownership is to be resolved to a full transfer, the clubs either agree on the fee or it goes to the blind auction.

 

[Kasaki]

Actually, now that I think about it, Parma doesn't own 50% of him yet, so until that happens, my last two posts are irrelevant

I like this



Sent from my HTC Vision using Tapatalk

 

[Orgut]

Oh I was sure they own 50% of Giovinco
So there is hope of seeing him again in black and white

 

[Flamez]

But Parma will buy 50% for sure. Like I said before, I wouldn't mind losing 2/3M with this deal. I mean, Parma pay the clause (3M) and we give them 5/6M to get his full ownership back.

It's a stupid move, but the stupidity of this was in the initial clause mainly.

 

[Stevie]

I can't understand why we even gave them an option to buy 50% in the first place. To me it sounds like the stupidest thing ever. I'm sure we could of found plenty of clubs who woud of been more than happy to just take him on loan for a season.

 

[Fake Melo]

Parma wouldn't take him and build their team around him if they didn't get the option on 50%. Dumb business from us no doubt.

 

[Kasaki]

Parma wouldn't take him and build their team around him if they didn't get the option on 50%. Dumb business from us no doubt.

They can build a team around Amauri


Sent from my HTC Vision using Tapatalk

 

[Ahmed]

indeed, would be a force to be reckoned with in Serie B with Amauri & Giovinco.

 

[X Æ A-12]

Imagine Italy heading to Euro2012 with Serie B players.

 

[v1rtu4l]

it's really simple. the italian attitude towards loanees in general is "don't play them if you do not benefit from it". surely it would not benefit parma getting gio, building their play around thim, just for us to take him back and leave them with a non-functional team. so by giving the option, the club at least has something from boosting the players form and playing him. we did the same with stendardo... loaned him out because we were in need, but never actually played him when everybody was fit.

 

[Ahmed]

Stendardo was Lazio's, not ours.

 

[Stevie]

it's really simple. the italian attitude towards loanees in general is "don't play them if you do not benefit from it". surely it would not benefit parma getting gio, building their play around thim, just for us to take him back and leave them with a non-functional team. so by giving the option, the club at least has something from boosting the players form and playing him. we did the same with stendardo... loaned him out because we were in need, but never actually played him when everybody was fit.

I don't agree with it at all im sure there would of been plenty teams across europe that would of been more than happy to take a player like Gio even just for the year and played him as much as possible still knowing they would have to give him back. He could be so useful to many teams right now. The italian way of doing things when it comes to football sucks and is so outdated.

Jut for example if barcelona wanted to loan us messi for a year would we say no unless we had an option to buy half at the end of the season?

 

[v1rtu4l]

Stendardo was Lazio's, not ours.

that was my point. we loaned him (without an option) and so we did only play him when absolutely necessary (because of injuries)

The italian way of doing things when it comes to football sucks and is so outdated.

doesn't matter, because it is how it is, no matter how much you or i like it

Jut for example if barcelona wanted to loan us messi for a year would we say no unless we had an option to buy half at the end of the season?

it's a bit of a long shot to compare this to messi.

let's make it a more plausible comparision. do you think we would have gone for a loan of aquilani if we had no option to buy him ? we would integrate him and trust him and probably just boost his confidence to help liverpool have him next season and we would be confronted with the same problem (lack of CM) next season.

 

[Stevie]

I don't think that Aquilani is a fair comparison either because giovinco is too good for a club like Parma and Aquilani is not too good for a club like Juve. Thats the point i was making. Parma should be lucky to have a player like Gio for a season to boost their chances of staying up.