Why is Juve so reluctant to spen $money$ (1 Viewer)

.AB.

Mafioso
Jul 15, 2002
1,042
#1
I mean Inter havent won anything since my bed wetting days and they go out and get Stankovic, Milan Got Kaka Roma got Chivu etc and we were linked with all these players i hope we atleast get Diego. We are the 2nd Richest club and why dont we spend. Surely we have more money than Milan and Inter. We havent made a big signing since Nedved, Buffon, Thuram and I think thats not enough we have to take a few risks.
 

IceBlu

Senior Member
Aug 26, 2003
1,364
#2
Well you answered the question yourself... Juve are the 2nd richest club due to smart business over the years.

Whats the use of spending and being crap like Inter ?

Juve spend wisely.

this season should see a few big transfers though as many old players need replacement.
 

Elnur_E65

Senior Member
Feb 21, 2004
10,848
#3
Well, we bought Legro, Appiah and brought Micolli back from loan. All three are young and promising.

I don't think it's the fact that the club is reluctant to spend some cash. Rather, last summer, after winning the Scudetto and losing the CL on a lottery, Moggi/Lippi thought that "everything is fine".
 

IceBlu

Senior Member
Aug 26, 2003
1,364
#4
and no one expected so many injuries during the most crucial part of the season.

What have Real achieved after spending so much on Beckham ?

what a waste ...
 

Juve_7

Junior Member
Apr 5, 2004
192
#5
I totally agree, there's no use in getting big names just for the sake of buying new players.... apart from Kaka's signing in Milan you have not mintioned any extra influencial one .... and with the likes of Nedved and Buffon i Think of Juve as a club that spends wisely and would like them to stay that way ...
 

Juve_7

Junior Member
Apr 5, 2004
192
#6
++ [ originally posted by IceBlu ] ++
and no one expected so many injuries during the most crucial part of the season.

What have Real achieved after spending so much on Beckham ?

what a waste ...
Money my freind ...yeterday's game for Real against Monaco showed that they only signed beckham for all the commercial reasons ...i mean with the amount they paid on Beckham they could ve got two good defenders which is logically better for the squad ...but its obviouse now that all there start signings where for money resons and not the good of the game
 

Lilianna

Senior Member
Apr 3, 2003
15,969
#7
++ [ originally posted by abhinav ] ++
I mean Inter havent won anything since my bed wetting days and they go out and get Stankovic, Milan Got Kaka Roma got Chivu etc and we were linked with all these players i hope we atleast get Diego. We are the 2nd Richest club and why dont we spend. Surely we have more money than Milan and Inter. We havent made a big signing since Nedved, Buffon, Thuram and I think thats not enough we have to take a few risks.
3rd ;)

it's real,man u and then juventus
 

Elnur_E65

Senior Member
Feb 21, 2004
10,848
#8
++ [ originally posted by Juve_7 ] ++


Money my freind ...yeterday's game for Real against Monaco showed that they only signed beckham for all the commercial reasons ...i mean with the amount they paid on Beckham they could ve got two good defenders which is logically better for the squad ...but its obviouse now that all there start signings where for money resons and not the good of the game
And they might eventually realize that buying players and then selling jerseys with their names on the back will not get them too far. If Valencia (now trailing by just one point) catches up with them in the Liga this will be particularly the case.
 

Elnur_E65

Senior Member
Feb 21, 2004
10,848
#10
++ [ originally posted by Lilianna ] ++


3rd ;)

it's real,man u and then juventus
No, we're second and Real is 4th :)


The Top 20 on Deloitte's 'Rich List' were:

1. Manchester United £167,83m - € 251,4 m
2. Juventus £145.75m - € 218,3 m
3. AC Milan £133.66m
4. Real Madrid £128.5m
5. Bayern Munich £108.6m
6. Inter Milan £108.4m
7. Arsenal £99.87m
8. Liverpool £99.74m
9. Newcastle United £92.73m
10. Chelsea £89.32m
11. AS Roma £88.39m
12. Borussia Dortmund £82.78m
13. Barcelona £82.38m
14. Schalke 04 £79.17m
15. Tottenham Hotspur £63.81m
16. Leeds United £61.41m
17. Lazio £59.34m
18. Celtic £58.07m
19. Olympique Lyonnais £56.27m
20. Valencia £53.73m

Real was on top back in 2002.

WORLD SOCCER RICH LIST 2003
(revenue 2001-02, £m/em)

1 Real Madrid 180/252
2 Manchester United 148.1/207.3
3 Juventus 139.3/195
 

Lilianna

Senior Member
Apr 3, 2003
15,969
#12
++ [ originally posted by Pendir ] ++


No, we're second and Real is 4th :)


The Top 20 on Deloitte's 'Rich List' were:

1. Manchester United £167,83m - € 251,4 m
2. Juventus £145.75m - € 218,3 m
3. AC Milan £133.66m
4. Real Madrid £128.5m
5. Bayern Munich £108.6m
6. Inter Milan £108.4m
7. Arsenal £99.87m
8. Liverpool £99.74m
9. Newcastle United £92.73m
10. Chelsea £89.32m
11. AS Roma £88.39m
12. Borussia Dortmund £82.78m
13. Barcelona £82.38m
14. Schalke 04 £79.17m
15. Tottenham Hotspur £63.81m
16. Leeds United £61.41m
17. Lazio £59.34m
18. Celtic £58.07m
19. Olympique Lyonnais £56.27m
20. Valencia £53.73m

Real was on top back in 2002.

WORLD SOCCER RICH LIST 2003
(revenue 2001-02, £m/em)

1 Real Madrid 180/252
2 Manchester United 148.1/207.3
3 Juventus 139.3/195
aha!!
i didn't have this new list!
 

Elnur_E65

Senior Member
Feb 21, 2004
10,848
#13
++ [ originally posted by Lilianna ] ++


aha!!
i didn't have this new list!
Actually you know, these lists only show the profits for a certain period of time. They do not claim the actual value of the club, i.e. what the value of its shares is.
 

Adrian

Senior Member
Jan 31, 2003
4,402
#14
++ [ originally posted by Zambrotta ] ++
Di Vaio was a big signing.
dont remind us please.

anyway, the past decade or so has seen juve not having to spend big in the transfer. besides the season that zidnae was sold for that uge amount of money, we havent really spent big.

in saying that, we have never really been in such a crisis like we are now in terms of having to fix so many positions on the field. Hence, we have to sell big and spend wisely on younger players. Moggi really has no choice, this team is very bad right now. it seriously has nothing going for it.

being rich is one thing, but if you dont have the players, then you win trophies, hence, you dont make money.
 

Elnur_E65

Senior Member
Feb 21, 2004
10,848
#15
++ [ originally posted by Adrian ] ++


dont remind us please.

anyway, the past decade or so has seen juve not having to spend big in the transfer. besides the season that zidnae was sold for that uge amount of money, we havent really spent big.

in saying that, we have never really been in such a crisis like we are now in terms of having to fix so many positions on the field. Hence, we have to sell big and spend wisely on younger players. Moggi really has no choice, this team is very bad right now. it seriously has nothing going for it.

being rich is one thing, but if you dont have the players, then you win trophies, hence, you dont make money.
Wasn't purchase of Buffon, Nedved and Thuram all in one year a big thing? And we used most of Zidan's money on those three.
 

Azzurri7

Pinturicchio
Moderator
Dec 16, 2003
72,660
#16
i don't like the idea of spendin money on the players , like madrid and chelsea are doing ... juve got smart asses , they know how to deal with the money:d and am sure after 2 years we will pass man utd in $$ anyhow am soo ****in happy that madrid is OUt with all their stars...::D:D:D:D:p:p
 

swag

L'autista
Administrator
Sep 23, 2003
76,321
#17
Buying your way to a good team is rarely a successful strategy. Kudos to Roman for what he's done with Chelsea, as that's more the exception than the rule.

It's like the conventional wisdom of when you win Serie B promotion: don't cast aside all the players that got you there -- and try to recreate yourself with a random assortment of higher-paid talent with no experience working as a team.

The best clubs always seem to stick with a large return crew and complement them with a few key trades now and then. That might lead you to assume a good approach is to blow your whole budget on single superstars. But superstars have a way of not living up to expectations, and it's safer to diversify as it were. For example, I'd rather see Juve pull in 2-3 players in the squad who show promising talent for the price of some hot player who hit their peak, unlikely to ever return to that form.

IMO, Milan's greatness this year is in signings like Kaka or even Pancaro. It's not in signing David Beckham.
 

The Arif

Senior Member
Jan 31, 2004
12,565
#18
well, it is good that juventus doesn't spend money in the big signings. they buy some good players and young players, who may not be 'stars', but they are very helpful.


but after this season it must be diferent, we must sign at least 4 or 5 players.
 

Hydde

Duke NUKEM
Mar 6, 2003
36,791
#19
4 or 5 very good polayers.

Really--- is stupid to not spend this season... because the logic says to you that u have a problem (a bif problem in this case) u have to fix it.. in this case by taking out the rotten apples.

Moggi...please dont be a bastard and buy-
 

Lilianna

Senior Member
Apr 3, 2003
15,969
#20
++ [ originally posted by Pendir ] ++


Actually you know, these lists only show the profits for a certain period of time. They do not claim the actual value of the club, i.e. what the value of its shares is.
;)
 

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