Gareth Bale

coco1247

Banned
3 trophies in 5 years. Perfect model. Keep going. lol

Well, I think we can all agree Flo is an idiot when it comes to football, there's no doubt about it.
Financially though...that man is a wizard. Whether Bale will flop or not on the pitch (I say he will), he's gonna make some money out of it.
 

Aryagorn

Improvin' Perfection!!
conclusion, players don't really impact on revenues as much as someone like beast and perez would have us believe.

just look at the revenues of the clubs now, real have 10m more than us, with a bunch of super stars signed.

look at man utd, revenues growing rapidly, no big global stars in sight.
How can you say that we or Utd didn't have superstars!? We had too, not as many as Real per se but we always had stars ourselves too. But when you are mocking away the star value, did you consider the amount of success we had or Utd had in the mean time? We won 3 CL trophies, Utd one and then the countless league trophies too! Both these clubs have been far more successful than Real, have been in the due time, when it comes to winning .... But Real's income matches one and beats one :shrug:
 

S7_MUFC

New member
How can you say that we or Utd didn't have superstars!? We had too, not as many as Real per se but we always had stars ourselves too. But when you are mocking away the star value, did you consider the amount of success we had or Utd had in the mean time? We won 3 CL trophies, Utd one and then the countless league trophies too! Both these clubs have been far more successful than Real, have been in the due time, when it comes to winning .... But Real's income matches one and beats one :shrug:

Because they focus solely on marketing and they get better TV deals....let's just compare recent commercial revenue of Real with Bayern or United....you can see there isn't much difference...and winning has no impact on TV or Matchday revenue and only performance in UEFA competetion has impact on revenue and Real are doing better than United in recent years............
 

Beast

The Observer
Because they focus solely on marketing and they get better TV deals....let's just compare recent commercial revenue of Real with Bayern or United....you can see there isn't much difference...and winning has no impact on TV or Matchday revenue and only performance in UEFA competetion has impact on revenue and Real are doing better than United in recent years............

ehm Barcelona have better shirt sponsor and almost a smiliar TV deal ...

and you have better exposure and higher sponsor deal with your kit manufacture (Nike ) and shirt sponsor ...as well as better and wider exposure
 
Last edited:

Beast

The Observer
I wasn't debating that the model works, just that it would've worked even if you didn't buy Kaka. For other clubs, success is more important than anything else.

Look at what Kaka has cost you. 60-65 million euros to buy, and 12 million euros (?) yearly wages + tax. How much money have you gotten from his image rights and shirt sales? These account for the money you directly get from Kaka. Indirectly you get money through higher match day revenue, extra money for friendlies etc. but you would've got that even if you didnt buy him. Surely not more than 12 million per year + tax, let alone enough to cover the 65 million initial outlay.

Edit: I looked at Forbes to see Ronaldo's endorsements. They say 21 million dollars per yr which at current rate is ~15 million euros per year. Now if you get 40% of that, that's ~6 million per yr for Madrid.

Anyway Ronaldo's is a separate case, he has scored a goal a game for you that's enough value than anyone could've hoped for.

Edit 2: Kaka's endorsements according to Forbes is 6 million dollars per year = 4.5 million euros per year. 50% image rights = 2.25 million euros per year which is not a lot really compared to 11 million euros (forbes) wages + tax. Just the tax on his wages (~2.75 million euros) is more than your direct income from him.

No you wouldn't get higher revenue without big names in the team... as i said you wouldn't pay a team like Arsenal, Liverpool or Dortmund the same fee you pay Real or Barca etc it's a given

as for Kaka his value deteriorated naturally (and your figures belong to now not before ) , we are not talking about current kaka value but the man who joined in 2009 as a champion , Brazil starter not the dud he is now
 

Beast

The Observer
beast is just talking crap, the signing of big players helps, but not in the huge way that he is making it out, a simply barca vs real comparison brings this across.

very simple

perez wins, triples real revenues by saying i will sign the best players blah blah blah does so.
laporta wins, triples barca's revenues, and while he had, dinho, he didn't put the huge emphasis on this as real

conclusion, players don't really impact on revenues as much as someone like beast and perez would have us believe.

just look at the revenues of the clubs now, real have 10m more than us, with a bunch of super stars signed.

look at man utd, revenues growing rapidly, no big global stars in sight.

the club is always bigger and more important brand.

You do realize this post of yours is a funny fictional post , right ?
because it would be ridiculous if this what you actually think...

Say hi to Dinho Joga Bonita
 

S7_MUFC

New member
I agree that the big names impact the overall revenue but it's not as significant as you claim..There is also a point of diminishing returns on impact of Big names on the bottom line...Your revenue will not go up every time you sign a big name...Once you have 2 or 3 big names the next big name won't make as much impact....and even players you sign for small amount can make significant impact to the clubs revenue(a.k.a. Ji Sung Park)...so, this notion that once you sign a player for 60m+ he will pay his fee back with shirt sales(let's just assume shirt sales is metaphor for impact of a particular player on revenue) is ridiculous...
 

footyfan

Calma, calma
Yup the point of diminishing returns is what I was talking about. For example had they signed Ribery as well would have made negligible difference to their revenue stream.

@beast: Kaka never ever had more than 8.5 million euro endorsements and that was during his heydey at Milan, which still means you would get only about 4 million from his image rights
 

Beast

The Observer
I don't have Kaka old figures if you have them please let me know but i doubt it's an 8.5 Million Kaka was for a long time Adidas face as well as other stuff like Giorgio Armani , Video games , Pepsi etc
And again you are mentioning 4 Million for image rights and neglecting the rest...go back to the original post.. image rights is part , shirt sales are part etc If you make (for exampel ) 5 -6 million of his own image rights , 2-3 Million shirt sales , squeeze your sponsors for extra cash , sell those massive VIP lounge in the Bernabeu for extra cash let's say 4 Million (with the friendlies ) that's what an average of 10 Million a year ? over 4-5 years ?
Don't now hold on to "Shirt sales " or "Image rights " as the sole reason (same goes for u S7-MUFC ) it's part of the whole sum not the ONLY part
If those players are not making a significant impact we would have gone down in revenue especially with our spending... right ?
make no mistake in Kaka case if Perez wasn't make money of him he would have send him packing earlier
 

footyfan

Calma, calma
I don't have Kaka old figures if you have them please let me know but i doubt it's an 8.5 Million Kaka was for a long time Adidas face as well as other stuff like Giorgio Armani , Video games , Pepsi etc
And again you are mentioning 4 Million for image rights and neglecting the rest...go back to the original post.. image rights is part , shirt sales are part etc If you make (for exampel ) 5 -6 million of his own image rights , 2-3 Million shirt sales , squeeze your sponsors for extra cash , sell those massive VIP lounge in the Bernabeu for extra cash let's say 4 Million (with the friendlies ) that's what an average of 10 Million a year ? over 4-5 years ?
Don't now hold on to "Shirt sales " or "Image rights " as the sole reason (same goes for u S7-MUFC ) it's part of the whole sum not the ONLY part
If those players are not making a significant impact we would have gone down in revenue especially with our spending... right ?
make no mistake in Kaka case if Perez wasn't make money of him he would have send him packing earlier

Revenue has nothing to do with spending, revenue is just the money GENERATED by the club.

In very very simple terms, revenue minus spending (which are independent of each other when calculating) = profit/loss.

The players are making a significant impact but what I'm saying is had you not signed Kaka, you would've still made the same money on sponsors or VIP lounges or whatever because you already have so many other stars. Remember you bought Ozil in 2010, just a year after Kaka and he has been the second star in the team since then quite consistently. Even in your calculation, where you're estimating you're getting 4 million euros for extra cash from sponsors, friendlies, VIP lounges etc. you are attributing it all to Kaka which is wrong, you need to divide it up as contributions from all the players.

In fact, you're actually not counting the biggest sources of revenue, which are tickets, TV deal and prize money for performances. Maybe you can attribute a portion of the revenue increase in 2009/10 tickets to Kaka, but in 2010/11, he was already announced to miss atleast 6 months even before the season started, yet your match day revenue actually went up because guess what, you have so many other stars, specially Ronaldo, people didn't care about Kaka anymore. I don't know if your TV deal was renegotiated after Kaka was signed but he probably helped you in that regard, again only if it was signed in 2009/10 because after that everyone knew he wasn't really coming back as a big player. He sure as hell didn't help you win any extra prize money from UEFA or Liga.

Which is why I was looking only at the direct revenue you're getting from Kaka, which are shirt sales + image rights. For the record, I don't think you would've made 2-3 million on shirt sales for Kaka every single year. Madrid get no money on the replica kits obviously.

Every year you were getting less and less money directly from Kaka, because not only were his endorsements going down but also his shirt sales. On the other hand, you were consistently paying him 12 million + tax every single year.

Kaka's transfer would've been a great hit (like Ronaldo's) if he had been atleast a moderate success because then you would be paying him to, you know, actually do his job, which is to help the team win with a big contribution.

I think you just have to write this off as a flop transfer, can't be worse than Barca and Zlatan that's for sure.
 
Last edited:

Aryagorn

Improvin' Perfection!!
friendlies, VIP lounges is a sorprisingly big figure... I remember Barca had to pay back 2m or something just because Messi wasn't fit enough to play the friendly, I think it was 2 years ago. And that's one fcuking match and we still had superstars like Xavi, Iniesta and Pique on!!

Apart from regular freindly matches, clubs like Barca and Real move to specific countries to play a series like friendly tournament... These tournaments are organized specifically to milt money. Why do you think they go to countries like Korea, Japan,etc. to play the friendly tournaments?
 
Last edited:

footyfan

Calma, calma
It's also for the exposure, they don't always earn a fortune from these tournaments. Besides they would've got the same deals even if they didn't sign Kaka.
 

S7_MUFC

New member
friendlies, VIP lounges is a sorprisingly big figure... I remember Barca had to pay back 2m or something just because Messi wasn't fit enough to play the friendly, I think it was 2 years ago. And that's one fcuking match and we still had superstars like Xavi, Iniesta and Pique on!!

Apart from regular freindly matches, clubs like Barca and Real move to specific countries to play a series like friendly tournament... These tournaments are organized specifically to milt money. Why do you think they go to countries like Korea, Japan,etc. to play the friendly tournaments?
I'd really like to see a source for that story because the maximum revenue a club earn in a match-day from all the ticket sales is around 3-4m so, It sounds unlikely that Barca had to pay back 2m when messi wasn't fit........Even clubs like Milan and Inter are invited to play friendly tournaments and they don't have superstars that Real have...
 

Aryagorn

Improvin' Perfection!!
I'd really like to see a source for that story because the maximum revenue a club earn in a match-day from all the ticket sales is around 3-4m so, It sounds unlikely that Barca had to pay back 2m when messi wasn't fit........Even clubs like Milan and Inter are invited to play friendly tournaments and they don't have superstars that Real have...
I couldn't find the one I was talking about but found another one...
Hamburg to withhold €1.2m payment from Barcelona if Messi does not play in friendly

I was talking about another one... Messi was injured and hence wasn't available.

So this example should atleast serve as a jist to the concept... When a club arranges friendly they agree with the fee but then they separate it into the number of stars that are gonna play the match. Like for example, if a match is agreed for a total of 1.2M like in this case, the oppoenent would refuse to pay all of it if one of the stars fail to appear. So it goes
 
Last edited:

Home of Barca Fans

Top