ALL Ronaldo's future/comments/speculation

Status
Not open for further replies.
1. We would not know how successful we would have been without Ronaldo in the team.

2. It is impossible to know how much less merchandise we would have sold without Ronaldo in the team.
 
Feedingseagulls said:
They wouldn't really have to be guesstimates I don't think - it's just that they could only ever be partial answers - you would have to evaluate them over time to see if they helped to predict trends.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't be (partial) answers, as it is impossible to answer those questions.
 
Im with Cnut on this.

Kid wants United top. Thinks: What shall I get on the back? Situation A: Ronaldo in team - kid gets Ronaldo. Situation B: Ronaldo not there - kid gets Rooney.

I reckon the majority of the time that's how it works.
 
CnutOfAllCnuts said:
Wouldn't be (partial) answers, as it is impossible to answer those questions.
Click to expand...

I think you are being too absolutist tbh. Just because the questions are too complex or intangible to allow full quantification doesn't mean that models cannot be produced using existing stats to help predict them. If there is a notable trend in the figures reflecting different circumstances then you may have some idea of the factors that influence the figures, in what way, & to what extent.

A somewhat off-beat comparison might be the comparatively simple equations used to model apparently chaotic phenomena - no one pretends that the simplistic maths adequately reflects the many variables at work but the maths does do the job of prediction.
 
Simon Adebesi said:
Im with Cnut on this.

Kid wants United top. Thinks: What shall I get on the back? Situation A: Ronaldo in team - kid gets Ronaldo. Situation B: Ronaldo not there - kid gets Rooney.

I reckon the majority of the time that's how it works.
Click to expand...

Agreed - yet there will be a proportion who are only interested in a Ronaldo top no matter where he is - there will be others who are only interested in a Utd top because it is a team that has achieved what it has with Ronaldo's help, or has an overall image enhanced by Ronaldo... etc. etc.

As I say - a very complex situation to monitor.

Yet it may still be possible to determine trends. We cannot predict where a roulette ball lands - yet we know the house has a defined percentage edge.
 
I wouldnt pay too much attention to models. They are never more than a guess. Take the financial markets at the moment. All these clever bankers modeling risk, sure they were safe and making billions in free money. Then suddenly it transpires the models are horseshit and everyone is haemorrhaging money. I imagine there were more brilliant mathematicians working for the banks than there are number crunching and trying to work out marketing projections.
 
Feedingseagulls said:
I think you are being too absolutist tbh. Just because the questions are too complex or intangible to allow full quantification doesn't mean that models cannot be produced using existing stats to help predict them. If there is a notable trend in the figures reflecting different circumstances then you may have some idea of the factors that influence the figures, in what way, & to what extent.

A somewhat off-beat comparison might be the comparatively simple equations used to model apparently chaotic phenomena - no one pretends that the simplistic maths adequately reflects the many variables at work but the maths does do the job of prediction.
Click to expand...

What's the point? You might as well let a monkey throw a dart to figure out a number.

No mathemathical model can figure out we would have done last year without Ronaldo, hence there is no answer how the revenue based on performance would have been affected.

Likewise, there is no mathemathical formula which can figure out how much of the merchandise revenue is based on having Ronaldo at the club.

Beckham left after 2002/03 season.

It is impossible to gather whether that's the reason we did worse (football-wise) in 2003/04.

We still sold out "every" game, so the matchday income per game was the same (actually higher, due to price increases).

And it is impossible to gather whether (if that actually happened) a drop in merchandise revenue was a result of Beckham leaving or because the club performed worse.
 
Simon Adebesi said:
I wouldnt pay too much attention to models. They are never more than a guess. Take the financial markets at the moment. All these clever bankers modeling risk, sure they were safe and making billions in free money. Then suddenly it transpires the models are horseshit and everyone is haemorrhaging money. I imagine there were more brilliant mathematicians working for the banks than there are number crunching and trying to work out marketing projections.
Click to expand...

The same book that talks about the irrational tendency to credit reports that fit your existing belief patterns points out that market experts do less well than chance.

However, you can get around the incredibly poor predictive traits of induction interviews by replacing them with mathematical models (originally derived purely from correlations against later performance) - interestingly these tend to function best on the criteria that the experts believe they apply - they just aren't very good at judging those criteria.

It is perfectly possible that some limited predictive models would be possible for our intangibles - experts were reluctant to believe that mathematical models did a better job than their interviews as well.
 
CnutOfAllCnuts said:
What's the point? You might as well let a monkey throw a dart to figure out a number.

No mathemathical model can figure out we would have done last year without Ronaldo, hence there is no answer how the revenue based on performance would have been affected.

Likewise, there is no mathemathical formula which can figure out how much of the merchandise revenue is based on having Ronaldo at the club.

Beckham left after 2002/03 season.

It is impossible to gather whether that's the reason we did worse (football-wise) in 2003/04.

We still sold out "every" game, so the matchday income per game was the same (actually higher, due to price increases).

And it is impossible to gather whether (if that actually happened) a drop in merchandise revenue was a result of Beckham leaving or because the club performed worse.
Click to expand...

There is no mathematical model that can predict all the variants in a chaos-system - yet a simple formula does model the result.

Most of your reply concerns the general 'trophy recorded' success of the team as related to a given player - the very thing I suggested we probably could not model.

Sales etc are recordable, so are offers for sponsorship.

Since we always have a full house regardless (unless things really go pear-shaped - we haven't always) you ignore that as a factor. People might be interested in whether the waiting list increases or not though.

What you do is produce stats that might well be relevant and then look for correlation. You'd expect to find it in certain areas - eg. Ronaldo branded products would have increased in sales total as he improved and his image within the team became greater - that's a reflection of his sales value.
 
Feedingseagulls said:
There is no mathematical model that can predict all the variants in a chaos-system - yet a simple formula does model the result.

Most of your reply concerns the general 'trophy recorded' success of the team as related to a given player - the very thing I suggested we probably could not model.

Sales etc are recordable, so are offers for sponsorship.

Since we always have a full house regardless (unless things really go pear-shaped - we haven't always) you ignore that as a factor. People might be interested in whether the waiting list increases or not though.

What you do is produce stats that might well be relevant and then look for correlation. You'd expect to find it in certain areas - eg. Ronaldo branded products would have increased in sales total as he improved and his image within the team became greater - that's a reflection of his sales value.
Click to expand...

Pointless, as it doesn't give any answers.
 
CnutOfAllCnuts said:
I'd be VERY surprised if Ronaldo has a P-R team. He has an agent/agency, who will benefit greatly if Ronaldo make a big money move to another club.

Ronaldo's utterings will have no impact on his commercial deals.
Click to expand...
Anyone in the public eye, especially one who is so big into marketability, that does not have a publicist or PR firm, is an absolute idiot. Doesn't have to be a full time person, but Jorge Mendes should not be tasked with managing his press.
 
MiamiSpartan said:
Anyone in the public eye, especially one who is so big into marketability, that does not have a publicist or Page Ranking firm, is an absolute idiot. Doesn't have to be a full time person, but Jorge Mendes should not be tasked with managing his press.
Click to expand...

The club and his agency manage different aspects of his press.
 
The University of Navarra has a department they call the Economics, Sport and Intangibles Research Group (ESIrg) and they do try to put cash values on media presence etc.

In Roo and Ron United have the perfect marketing double act - they cover all the bases. United, in fact, have 4 players in ESIrg's top 20 (Ron at 1, Roo at 3, Tevez at 13, Giggs at 20), Barcelona have 4, but Madrid only has 1 (Raul at 14).

It doesn't affect their short term revenues - the Spanish fan base is secure, the overseas fanbase has been developed over years but it does affect their wow factor. Fact is - they haven't got a Youtube player. Robben, Robinho etc have great skill but they just don't have "it" - and the next generation of revenue supplying overseas (convertible) fans may be being won on the playing fields of Youtube and PES :D

The Youtube generation watches United and Barca and when one of the ultimate Youtube players, looks like he was delivered by a Hollywood teen movie casting director and happens to be Europe's top scorer - you've got all the "it" in one handy multilingual package. The fact that they'd be taking him off United makes him even more attractive. The fact that he might even help them win stuff (and get Calderon reelected) means that you go to the bank and ask for a loan.

ESIrg values him at around 80 to 85m Euros - which oddly enough is the figure that Madrid talked to their bank about.

ESIrg are at:
http://www.unav.es/econom/sport/index.php?section=1

And their last general football report (subtitled Manchester United Strikes Back) is downloadable - all 53 pages of it, at:
http://www.unav.es/econom/sport/fil...6fb6e9a/1212750385_R09_MV_Football_June08.pdf
 
jojojo said:
The University of Navarra has a department they call the Economics, Sport and Intangibles Research Group (ESIrg) and they do try to put cash values on media presence etc.

In Roo and Ron United have the perfect marketing double act - they cover all the bases. United, in fact, have 4 players in ESIrg's top 20 (Ron at 1, Roo at 3, Tevez at 13, Giggs at 20), Barcelona have 4, but Madrid only has 1 (Raul at 14).

It doesn't affect their short term revenues - the Spanish fan base is secure, the overseas fanbase has been developed over years but it does affect their wow factor. Fact is - they haven't got a Youtube player. Robben, Robinho etc have great skill but they just don't have "it" - and the next generation of revenue supplying overseas (convertible) fans may be being won on the playing fields of Youtube and PES :D

The Youtube generation watches United and Barca and when one of the ultimate Youtube players, looks like he was delivered by a Hollywood teen movie casting director and happens to be Europe's top scorer - you've got all the "it" in one handy multilingual package. The fact that they'd be taking him off United makes him even more attractive. The fact that he might even help them win stuff (and get Calderon reelected) means that you go to the bank and ask for a loan.

ESIrg values him at around 80 to 85m Euros - which oddly enough is the figure that Madrid talked to their bank about.

ESIrg are at:
http://www.unav.es/econom/sport/index.php?section=1

And their last general football report (subtitled Manchester United Strikes Back) is downloadable - all 53 pages of it, at:
http://www.unav.es/econom/sport/fil...6fb6e9a/1212750385_R09_MV_Football_June08.pdf
Click to expand...

Tee Hee


Or, more relevantly, have their evaluations shown any predictive capablity or correlation with other interesting factors?
 
Feedingseagulls said:
Except he'd made something of a point about not commenting except when doorstepped.

Once again I ask - does the delay necessarily mean that the worst case interpretations of what he said were true - as opposed to the better ones he may have seen. Does it invalidate the basic need to always know the actual question to which the respondent replies in order to evaluate the answer fairly?

Unless people have already decided the person's character and views before they have even spoken.
Click to expand...
My post history on him clearly indicates that I was giving him the benefit of the doubt before he agreed with Blatter, so his comments went a long way to forming the thoughts that I have on his character.

No, the delay does not NECESSARILY mean that the worst case interpretations of what he said were true. But IMHO, it does make it at least 90% certain that he was using his comments agreeing with Blatter (however it was meant or interpreted) to try to get some movement on the standoff. Unless someone have an agenda for his words to have some sort of effect, I just don't see how any person would let themselves be portrayed as such an ignorant spoiled little brat. Especially if everyone misunderstood the question that he was asked. Perhaps he is only guilty of being a thoughtless, clueless, immature brat, with clueless ignorant advisers. At most, a 10% chance of that, IMHO.
 
MiamiSpartan said:
My post history on him clearly indicates that I was giving him the benefit of the doubt before he agreed with Blatter, so his comments went a long way to forming the thoughts that I have on his character.

No, the delay does not NECESSARILY mean that the worst case interpretations of what he said were true. But IMHO, it does make it at least 90% certain that he was using his comments agreeing with Blatter (however it was meant or interpreted) to try to get some movement on the standoff. Unless someone have an agenda for his words to have some sort of effect, I just don't see how any person would let themselves be portrayed as such an ignorant spoiled little brat. Especially if everyone misunderstood the question that he was asked. Perhaps he is only guilty of being a thoughtless, clueless, immature brat, with clueless ignorant advisers. At most, a 10% chance of that, IMHO.
Click to expand...

You may remember that I described Ronaldo's agreement with Blatter as somthing like 'the only abhorrent thing I'd heard him say' - it's the one sticking point with those who might like to forgive him as well - so it's rather KEY.

My condemnation was based on a translation of the question via a Scandinavian website as asking if he agreed Utd were enslaving players. If that is accurate then he really should have done much better.

All subsequent attempts to get a 2nd opinion from Weaste or Julissa have been in vain - annoying given how important thsi could be in our attitudes towards Ron.
 
Feedingseagulls said:
Rephrase as 'do we have any indications as to how much Ronaldo affects the revenue of the club in various ways?' and you may get usable answers.

Demanding the moon may not be an optimal strategy.
Click to expand...

No point rephrasing it.

It it all leads down to what the revenue sources are, and how they are affected short- and long term by success, personell etc.

Football is far too intangible to apply mathemathical models in that respect.
 
CnutOfAllCnuts said:
:lol:

Don't you think you are taking it a bit too serious?
Click to expand...

Actually, no.

I'm not the only one who sees that remark as a major sticking point on how we will view him as a person from now on.

Nothing else that he said (or didn't) deserved the 'c*nt' label thrown at him by many (including yourself) - so it's the only real basis for any negative feeling towards him - everything else is either media generated or a problem inside the person themselves.

Therefore, knowing whether he deserves this opprobrium is very important to me.
 
Feedingseagulls said:
Actually, no.

I'm not the only one who sees that remark as a major sticking point on how we will view him as a person from now on.

Nothing else that he said (or didn't) deserved the 'c*nt' label thrown at him by many (including yourself) - so it's the only real basis for any negative feeling towards him - everything else is either media generated or a problem inside the person themselves.

Therefore, knowing whether he deserves this opprobrium is very important to me.
Click to expand...

And I get called boring...
 
CnutOfAllCnuts said:
That's rubbish.

There is no mathemathical formula in the world which could give us any indications on how successful we would have been last season without Ronaldo, for example.
Click to expand...

You are claiming we cannot produce a formula for your point 3 - refer back where I state this will be the case.

However, we can produce correlations to help us predict points 1 & 2 - we may not be able to produce all-encompassing formulae there either - but we can (quite possibly) provide mathematical insight and predictive capacity that informs decisions in these areas in a valid way.

To summarise - if you ask for total modelling you'll be f*cked - doesn't stop you getting something useful though if you'll accept merely guidance instead.
 
Feedingseagulls said:
You are claiming we cannot produce a formula for your point 3 - refer back where I state this will be the case.

However, we can produce correlations to help us predict points 1 & 2 - we may not be able to produce all-encompassing formulae there either - but we can (quite possibly) provide mathematical insight and predictive capacity that informs decisions in these areas in a valid way.

To summarise - if you ask for total modelling you'll be f*cked - doesn't stop you getting something useful though if you'll accept merely guidance instead.
Click to expand...

God you are dull...

Of course you can get certain indications. My point is that these indications are so few and so uncertain that they are of very little help, i.e. pointless.

If United's revenue was 100 last season, no one can put a % figure on how much of that was down to Ronaldo.
 
This thread just keeps going and going....

Energizer%20Bunny%20Medium%20Web%20view.jpg
 
CnutOfAllCnuts said:
God you are dull...

Of course you can get certain indications. My point is that these indications are so few and so uncertain that they are of very little help, i.e. pointless.

If United's revenue was 100 last season, no one can put a % figure on how much of that was down to Ronaldo.
Click to expand...

My point is that these indications will be enough to be helpful - they will be useful - not pointless.

If you keep harping on about the idea we can't work out how much of the team's success is down to Ronaldo (see above) then I'm going to keep repeating myself about how irrelevant that is to the issue at hand. Sorry if that is then boring Boring - but it's determined by your remarks tbh.
 
Feedingseagulls said:
My point is that these indications will be enough to be helpful.

If you keep harping on about the idea we can't work out how much of the team's success is down to Ronaldo (see above) then I'm going to keep repeating myself about how irrelevant that is to the issue at hand. Sorry if that is then boring Boring - but it's determined by your remarks tbh.
Click to expand...

No, they would not be helpful.

Of course it is asking how much of the team's success is down to said player is relevant, because that a large chunk of the revenue is determined by it.

Anyway, as I originally said, tabloids and it's readers are very much over-estimating how much one individual player effects the income of a club of the stature of United or Real Madrid.

Good night.
 
CnutOfAllCnuts said:
No, they would not be helpful.

Of course it is asking how much of the team's success is down to said player is relevant, because that a large chunk of the revenue is determined by it.

Anyway, as I originally said, tabloids and it's readers are very much over-estimating how much one individual player effects the income of a club of the stature of United or Real Madrid.

Good night.
Click to expand...

Tbh we've seen the RM estimates on Beckham's worth whether spun due to club needs or not - it suggests the impact is considerable.

I've suggested that we can get stats to indicate the impact of one player's sales and the variance of sponsorship with squad composition. I've suggested these would help us assess the impact of certain players.

You keep complaining that we can't give an exact figure on how much 'X' is woirth to the club or how much of our success is down to him. My point is that we do not need to do so since these questions cannot be answered. Use the ansers we can get in the ways they can be used - neither pointless nor useless.
 
CnutOfAllCnuts said:
Hehe, ok

Go read some research on football and sports marketing, not only tabloid press, and then come back to me...The bigger and more famous a club is, and the more developed the marketing of said club is, the less impact does individual players have on the revenue.

They don't come any bigger and more famous than Manchester United and Real Madrid, and both clubs have well developed marketing strategies in place and already carried out.

Of course such big clubs need star players to carry out it's marketing. Both clubs have huge stars, with or withour Ronaldo.
Click to expand...

Dosen’t it appear oxymoronic? On one side you claim football is too knotty to deduce the marketing impact of a single individual whilst you also agree every top club has a strong marketing structure - a sound business model to handle the finanacial side. If a club has a strong business model its apparent they micromanage things. United and Real Madrid have strong reasons in sticking to their stance.

Unless Ronaldo's departure means a sudden reverse of on-pitch fortunes, no less tickets will be sold. No less games will be televised. No less money will come in from sponsors. Those are the three main revenue sources; match-day income, broadcating revenue and commercial deals.
Click to expand...

For United the third part commercial deals which is directly proportional to the marketing value of individual players along with the success on the pitch might get a whipping. Real Madrid can gain more through broadcasting revenue and commercial deals.
 
vijay said:
Even without Ronaldo we are certainly a great team.

As for Beckham its obvious he played his best football ONLY at United.

In Ronaldo's case we are letting him off the hook too soon.
Click to expand...

Are we letting him off the hook? He has developed into the player he is not just because of his fancy skills but as a team player. It was the same with Beckham and many others.
When he goes to Madrid, not if, he will find a completely different set up. Look how long it took Beckham to play any sort of football when he went there.
Ronaldo has been surrounded by players who have supported him in his play, he will not get that sort of service at RM.
Just look at when he plays for Portugal, he does not play the same as he does for United. He does not even play that well in the CL either.
The PL suits him down to the ground, I really do not think he will be the same in Europe.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.