a pretty good interview with a jj fan finance/accounting professor:
https://www.ilbianconero.com/a/drag...bn-plusvalenza-fittizia-che-errore-il-p-14703
(some background that the interview also touches on: dragusin plusvalenza accounted by juve is criticized by consob for years. not because of the amount, the amount itself isn't an issue. it is getting criticized because two transfers happened at the same time: genoa loaned dragusin with obligation, jj got cambiaso. the club accounted the two transactions as separate deals, while consob believes they should have been treated as a swap. according to the accounting standards i think it's fine, the club think it's fine, jj's auditor think it's fine. the league didn't challenge it either, by the regulations it's fine. it's only consob who insist that it should be treated as a swap. those were separate deals with conditions that were unrelated of each other.)
some key points:
- prof explains why he also thinks that the capital gain wasn't fictitious
- dragusin's current market value confirms that the player is valuable
- on jj's debt: it's a lot. covid hit the club hard because the wage bill was high. also last season's penalty and consequent uefa ban meant that the debt can rise for the current season as the club won't get the revenues they considered in their business plan. the club also has a 175m bond to repay. that's what the capital gain is for: finance the club.
- we can't expect expensive transfers. reducing costs is important. (see also extensions with players which are about cost spreading and lower wages, not raises á la tici.)
- inda's financial situation is worse. their problem is that they financed themselves with loans, not capital increases. loans must be repaid and they'll have difficulties finding new financing options because no one wants to refinance a loan that is only used to finance a team. the real question with inda is whether they'll have new owners or not
https://www.ilbianconero.com/a/drag...bn-plusvalenza-fittizia-che-errore-il-p-14703
(some background that the interview also touches on: dragusin plusvalenza accounted by juve is criticized by consob for years. not because of the amount, the amount itself isn't an issue. it is getting criticized because two transfers happened at the same time: genoa loaned dragusin with obligation, jj got cambiaso. the club accounted the two transactions as separate deals, while consob believes they should have been treated as a swap. according to the accounting standards i think it's fine, the club think it's fine, jj's auditor think it's fine. the league didn't challenge it either, by the regulations it's fine. it's only consob who insist that it should be treated as a swap. those were separate deals with conditions that were unrelated of each other.)
some key points:
- prof explains why he also thinks that the capital gain wasn't fictitious
- dragusin's current market value confirms that the player is valuable
- on jj's debt: it's a lot. covid hit the club hard because the wage bill was high. also last season's penalty and consequent uefa ban meant that the debt can rise for the current season as the club won't get the revenues they considered in their business plan. the club also has a 175m bond to repay. that's what the capital gain is for: finance the club.
- we can't expect expensive transfers. reducing costs is important. (see also extensions with players which are about cost spreading and lower wages, not raises á la tici.)
- inda's financial situation is worse. their problem is that they financed themselves with loans, not capital increases. loans must be repaid and they'll have difficulties finding new financing options because no one wants to refinance a loan that is only used to finance a team. the real question with inda is whether they'll have new owners or not
Buy on AliExpress.com
. I guess we switched from ItalJuve to Juve.pl
