Barcelona: Charged with corruption .... again!

Tom Cato said:
They're an assesment of many factors all encompassin Messis sporting contribution to FC Barcelona. No one are saying he's out on the streets of Barcelona selling cake and haircuts.

But here someone already did the legwork, sources included.

Click to expand...

To be blunt, that work is simplistic garbage. Saying sources are included is generous, given that it amounts to them stating that their sources are Navigate Data Analysis and Forbes, without providing any links to actually substantiate their claims and the figures used.

They present 2 million Messi shirts sold as Messi generating 2 million shirt sales, which obviously isn't true. A number of those sales would have been made regardless, just with other players on the back. How many? We don't know, which is why it's impossible to say how much of the revenue is solely attributable to Messi.

And even with them doing their misguided and generous math, they end up with him generating €145m in revenue, over the €138m he's paid, stating this as a massive difference (while failing to factor in taxes.)
 
Tom Cato said:
Go ahead, you can call people whose job it is to understand financial mechanics dumdumbs.Go for it.
Click to expand...

It's not necessarily a case of them being dumbdumbs.

People aren't denying that Messi does generate a lot of money for Barcelona. What many question is how big a difference maker he actually is.

It's the old problem - we know (roughly) what Barca + Messi generates, but we don't know what Barca + no Messi would generate, hypothetically.

You have people who actually seem to think that shirt sales would drop by 80% if he left - which says something about the tendency to immensely exaggerate the importance of an individual player.

To most, it's obvious that he does make a difference - but not obvious precisely how much of a difference we're talking about. A difference big enough to justify statements like "he brings enough revenue to easily cover his wages"...? I'd say that sounds outlandish, nothing less.
 
Halftrack said:
To be blunt, that work is simplistic garbage. Saying sources are included is generous, given that it amounts to them stating that their sources are Navigate Data Analysis and Forbes, without providing any links to actually substantiate their claims and the figures used.

They present 2 million Messi shirts sold as Messi generating 2 million shirt sales, which obviously isn't true. A number of those sales would have been made regardless, just with other players on the back. How many? We don't know, which is why it's impossible to say how much of the revenue is solely attributable to Messi.

And even with them doing their misguided and generous math, they end up with him generating €145m in revenue, over the €138m he's paid, stating this as a massive difference (while failing to factor in taxes.)
Click to expand...

I agree. I haven't scrutinised the sources as much as you seem to have done, but Forbes has had some shockers when it comes to reporting wages. In this case, the 2 m number that was cited is risible. I'm not sure Barcelona as a club sold 2m tops this year. But as you pointed out, even if they did, that's the wrong number to cite.

To accurately describe how much a player brings to a club in terms of revenue, you'd need to compare shirt sales with and without said player. Attributing all shirt sales to the man whose name is on the back of the shirt is just lazy.
 
Ladron de redcafe said:
To accurately describe how much a player brings to a club in terms of revenue, you'd need to compare shirt sales with and without said player.
Click to expand...

Yes.

That should be possible to do accurately enough for Real Madrid/Ronaldo - which would be a very good indication.

It was published all over the place that a huge amount of Juventus/Ronaldo shirts were sold within 24 hours of him joining his new club. Which sounds great. Potentially, however, it simply means that the fans who would've bought a new shirt (for the new season) anyway a) did so earlier than they would've otherwise and b) had Ronnie's name printed on the back (rather than whoever they would've gone for if he had remained in Spain).

Whether they actually sold significantly more shirts that season (and the following seasons) on the whole compared to previous seasons (before Ronaldo joined) - is the only relevant question. And it should be possible to establish whether this is the case or not.
 
VanKenny said:
If your common sense tells you that Beckham in United can be in anyway whatsoever compared to Lionel Messi in Barca, then i kind of get whats going on in here :lol:

Messi is 10x as popular than Beckham ever was. You didnt even have social media back then.
Click to expand...
You seem to be confusing being known for footballing ability with popularity. Beckham was the face of half of the high fashion labels in existence, alongside a plethora of household brands, and was literally on billboards in every corner of the world. He completely transcended the world of football, saying that Messi is x10 more popular is a hilarious statement.
 
Conor said:
You seem to be confusing being known for footballing ability with popularity. Beckham was the face of half of the high fashion labels in existence, alongside a plethora of household brands, and was literally on billboards in every corner of the world. He completely transcended the world of football, saying that Messi is x10 more popular is a hilarious statement.
Click to expand...

Let’s see if Messi turns up on the next Friends Reunion or Ellen Degeneres, or erm, at the fecking White House….

Michelle_Obama_with_David_Beckham_2013.jpg


But hey, we “didn’t even have social media then”.

Kin ell.
 
Ladron de redcafe said:
I agree. I haven't scrutinised the sources as much as you seem to have done, but Forbes has had some shockers when it comes to reporting wages. In this case, the 2 m number that was cited is risible. I'm not sure Barcelona as a club sold 2m tops this year. But as you pointed out, even if they did, that's the wrong number to cite.

To accurately describe how much a player brings to a club in terms of revenue, you'd need to compare shirt sales with and without said player. Attributing all shirt sales to the man whose name is on the back of the shirt is just lazy.
Click to expand...

does Barcelona keeps the money with jersey sales? Normally a team gets a yearly payout from Adidas/Nike/??? and they keep the money from jersey sales.
 
barros said:
does Barcelona keeps the money with jersey sales? Normally a team gets a yearly payout from Adidas/Nike/??? and they keep the money from jersey sales.
Click to expand...
Of course, they don't. It could be argued that their Nike contract would have been lower without Messi, but then, the contract is signed till 2026.
 
giorno said:
Unless they were stupid enough to negotiate deals that hinged on Messi playing for them...
Click to expand...
It was reported that is actually the case. As in „the yearly payment decreases by xx% should Messi not be part of the team“.
I obviously don’t know how many contracts are set up like this (or if any) but it does make sense from an economical point of view fo the sponsor.
 
Acrobat7 said:
It was reported that is actually the case. As in „the yearly payment decreases by xx% should Messi not be part of the team“.
I obviously don’t know how many contracts are set up like this (or if any) but it does make sense from an economical point of view fo the sponsor.
Click to expand...
I really doubt it, especially for the Nike deal that goes to 2026. Messi won't be playing there by that time, so it would have been absurd for Barca to negotiate such a deal with Nike,
 
Conor said:
You seem to be confusing being known for footballing ability with popularity. Beckham was the face of half of the high fashion labels in existence, alongside a plethora of household brands, and was literally on billboards in every corner of the world. He completely transcended the world of football, saying that Messi is x10 more popular is a hilarious statement.
Click to expand...

Im not confusing anything. You simply cant compare the impact Beckham had on its club in 2000's to the impact Messi has in the 2020s. Its a whole different world, two decades apart. The money involved in football deals is much higher due to the impact marketing has on everything nowadays. Social media and the impact the internet has had in the last few years has been huge, you didnt see twelve year old kids getting millions of dollars a year for being good at videogames two decades ago, now you do.

Messi has almost 300M followers on social media, that alone guarantees him millions per year to any brand that signs with him, and due to relation, Barcelona gets benefitted too. Beckham was popular, yes, but 1) wasnt nearly as influential as Messi on the pitch and 2) wast as world wide known as Messi. Beckham had sponsorships too, featured in commercials, sold shirts etc, but Messi has that too, only multiplied for an X number due to the increase in media in general that we have had in the last few decades.

You open tiktok and you see Messi, you see Adidas, watch youtube and you see an ad of Ronaldo etc. Thats why wages have increased tenfold in the last two decades while you keep paying relatively the same for a dozen of eggs that you did a few decades ago. There's much more money on football now.

There is nothing "hilarious" about saying Messi is 10x more popular than Beckham was. The exposure that the showtime business and sports have nowadays literally is that much higher than back on the cable TV days. Hilarious is to post pics of Beckham with Michelle Obama as an argument, as if anybody ever said Beckham isnt popular or influential on 2021.


I know some of you are just throwing some old-men banter, but still, for anyone else that wants to discuss this seriously, the social media impact is very important to note.
 
OmarUnited4ever said:
Woodward is a banker, he would dismantle this bloated squad and do anything to cut costs, he wouldn't care about on the pitch success, he would even sell or lease their stadium to make an extra buck.
Click to expand...
Maybe that's what they need. Making stupid decisions just to appease fans so they keep their presidency obviously isn't working.
 
VanKenny said:
Im not confusing anything. You simply cant compare the impact Beckham had on its club in 2000's to the impact Messi has in the 2020s. Its a whole different world, two decades apart. The money involved in football deals is much higher due to the impact marketing has on everything nowadays. Social media and the impact the internet has had in the last few years has been huge, you didnt see twelve year old kids getting millions of dollars a year for being good at videogames two decades ago, now you do.

Messi has almost 300M followers on social media, that alone guarantees him millions per year to any brand that signs with him, and due to relation, Barcelona gets benefitted too. Beckham was popular, yes, but 1) wasnt nearly as influential as Messi on the pitch and 2) wast as world wide known as Messi. Beckham had sponsorships too, featured in commercials, sold shirts etc, but Messi has that too, only multiplied for an X number due to the increase in media in general that we have had in the last few decades.

You open tiktok and you see Messi, you see Adidas, watch youtube and you see an ad of Ronaldo etc. Thats why wages have increased tenfold in the last two decades while you keep paying relatively the same for a dozen of eggs that you did a few decades ago. There's much more money on football now.

There is nothing "hilarious" about saying Messi is 10x more popular than Beckham was. The exposure that the showtime business and sports have nowadays literally is that much higher than back on the cable TV days. Hilarious is to post pics of Beckham with Michelle Obama as an argument, as if anybody ever said Beckham isnt popular or influential on 2021.


I know some of you are just throwing some old-men banter, but still, for anyone else that wants to discuss this seriously, the social media impact is very important to note.
Click to expand...

How old are you if I may ask?
 
VanKenny said:
Im not confusing anything. You simply cant compare the impact Beckham had on its club in 2000's to the impact Messi has in the 2020s. Its a whole different world, two decades apart. The money involved in football deals is much higher due to the impact marketing has on everything nowadays. Social media and the impact the internet has had in the last few years has been huge, you didnt see twelve year old kids getting millions of dollars a year for being good at videogames two decades ago, now you do.

Messi has almost 300M followers on social media, that alone guarantees him millions per year to any brand that signs with him, and due to relation, Barcelona gets benefitted too. Beckham was popular, yes, but 1) wasnt nearly as influential as Messi on the pitch and 2) wast as world wide known as Messi. Beckham had sponsorships too, featured in commercials, sold shirts etc, but Messi has that too, only multiplied for an X number due to the increase in media in general that we have had in the last few decades.

You open tiktok and you see Messi, you see Adidas, watch youtube and you see an ad of Ronaldo etc. Thats why wages have increased tenfold in the last two decades while you keep paying relatively the same for a dozen of eggs that you did a few decades ago. There's much more money on football now.

There is nothing "hilarious" about saying Messi is 10x more popular than Beckham was. The exposure that the showtime business and sports have nowadays literally is that much higher than back on the cable TV days. Hilarious is to post pics of Beckham with Michelle Obama as an argument, as if anybody ever said Beckham isnt popular or influential on 2021.


I know some of you are just throwing some old-men banter, but still, for anyone else that wants to discuss this seriously, the social media impact is very important to note.
Click to expand...

You have no idea just how popular Beckham was. The only reason why Messi or Ronaldo seem to be more popular is that because they're getting more exposure from social media and football is getting more popular in asia and united states nowadays. Here are my real life stories about Beckham in his peak popularity: My older sister who had no affection to football whatsoever put Beckham's poster on her bedroom's wall, and i bet million other girls in the world done the same and let me tell you this, Beck's hairstyles were such a big thing at that time that males would go to their barber and ask for "Beckham's cut". Also thanks to Beck, Madrid became the second most popular club in asia overnight (2003), and i lived in backwater region called southeast asia where most didnt even have TV till mid 2000's.
 
krentz said:
You have no idea just how popular Beckham was. The only reason why Messi or Ronaldo seem to be more popular is that because they're getting more exposure from social media and football is getting more popular in asia and united states nowadays. Here are my real life stories about Beckham in his peak popularity: My older sister who had no affection to football whatsoever put Beckham's poster on her bedroom's wall, and i bet million other girls in the world done the same and let me tell you this, Beck's hairstyles were such a big thing at that time that males would go to their barber and ask for "Beckham's cut". Also thanks to Beck, Madrid became the second most popular club in asia overnight (2003), and i lived in backwater region called southeast asia where most didnt even have TV till mid 2000's.
Click to expand...

Well... thats kind the point. Its not "only" social media, that little detail generates billions and billions every year. Internet media is consumed worldwide instantly, everyone carries a screen on their pocket, thats why modern players have so much more reach.

Thats why you cant compare Beckham in early 2000's to Messi in 2020, when talking about the money they generate. Im not only comparing their popularity or their football ability, but the money they can each generate with the tools at their disposals. Messi had every single thing Beckham had in the early 2000's except more, but also has the internet as a way to reaching to customers.

Thats why worldwide superstar Beckham was sold for 35M to Madrid, yet any mediocre/goodish player can be sold for 50M nowadays, and superstars go for 200M or more. There's much more money on football nowadays.

So no, you cant compare Beckham leaving United to Messi leaving Barcelona. Its just laughable. Unless someone finds a pic of Beckham with Jordan or someone super important, if so i stand corrected and im completely wrong.
 
VanKenny said:
Im not confusing anything. You simply cant compare the impact Beckham had on its club in 2000's to the impact Messi has in the 2020s. Its a whole different world, two decades apart. The money involved in football deals is much higher due to the impact marketing has on everything nowadays. Social media and the impact the internet has had in the last few years has been huge, you didnt see twelve year old kids getting millions of dollars a year for being good at videogames two decades ago, now you do.

Messi has almost 300M followers on social media, that alone guarantees him millions per year to any brand that signs with him, and due to relation, Barcelona gets benefitted too. Beckham was popular, yes, but 1) wasnt nearly as influential as Messi on the pitch and 2) wast as world wide known as Messi. Beckham had sponsorships too, featured in commercials, sold shirts etc, but Messi has that too, only multiplied for an X number due to the increase in media in general that we have had in the last few decades.

You open tiktok and you see Messi, you see Adidas, watch youtube and you see an ad of Ronaldo etc. Thats why wages have increased tenfold in the last two decades while you keep paying relatively the same for a dozen of eggs that you did a few decades ago. There's much more money on football now.

There is nothing "hilarious" about saying Messi is 10x more popular than Beckham was. The exposure that the showtime business and sports have nowadays literally is that much higher than back on the cable TV days. Hilarious is to post pics of Beckham with Michelle Obama as an argument, as if anybody ever said Beckham isnt popular or influential on 2021.


I know some of you are just throwing some old-men banter, but still, for anyone else that wants to discuss this seriously, the social media impact is very important to note.
Click to expand...
Well you can, it’s called Manchester United and Beckham was every bit as important to building that brand as the success, Sir Alex and Cantona etc

The difference is that ronaldo and Messi play in the digital media age where as Beckham didn’t. But he would be there or equivalent with Ronaldo in terms of popularity and exposure if he played now.

That doesn’t make them more marketable.
 
Did this thread beckham all about who of Messi and Beckham was/is the bigger starlet?
Pretty sure Beckham and Messi are/were comparable popular and well known in the Western world, Asia and Africa. But the spanish speaking world is huge and Id expect Messi to have a messive edge there.
 
Messi is a football icon known globally whereas Beckham was/is a cultural icon.

My Japanese father in law probably knows Messi from some crazy dribble he saw in a news clip. Whereas he'll genuinely talk about Beckham and how cool he is etc.

Maybe it's different in Latin America?

I've never seen Messi in an interview, never seen him speak or know his personality.
 
VanKenny said:
Well... thats kind the point. Its not "only" social media, that little detail generates billions and billions every year. Internet media is consumed worldwide instantly, everyone carries a screen on their pocket, thats why modern players have so much more reach.

Thats why you cant compare Beckham in early 2000's to Messi in 2020, when talking about the money they generate. Im not only comparing their popularity or their football ability, but the money they can each generate with the tools at their disposals. Messi had every single thing Beckham had in the early 2000's except more, but also has the internet as a way to reaching to customers.

Thats why worldwide superstar Beckham was sold for 35M to Madrid, yet any mediocre/goodish player can be sold for 50M nowadays, and superstars go for 200M or more. There's much more money on football nowadays.

So no, you cant compare Beckham leaving United to Messi leaving Barcelona. Its just laughable. Unless someone finds a pic of Beckham with Jordan or someone super important, if so i stand corrected and im completely wrong.
Click to expand...

Well actually Becks was sold £25M but the most expensive transfer in British football at that time was only £29M, also comparing players fee from almost 2 decades ago is just foolish, here i give you example Maradona was sold for £5M in the mid 80's, you think he was a lesser player than Beckham?
 
VanKenny said:
Im not confusing anything. You simply cant compare the impact Beckham had on its club in 2000's to the impact Messi has in the 2020s. Its a whole different world, two decades apart. The money involved in football deals is much higher due to the impact marketing has on everything nowadays. Social media and the impact the internet has had in the last few years has been huge, you didnt see twelve year old kids getting millions of dollars a year for being good at videogames two decades ago, now you do.

Messi has almost 300M followers on social media, that alone guarantees him millions per year to any brand that signs with him, and due to relation, Barcelona gets benefitted too. Beckham was popular, yes, but 1) wasnt nearly as influential as Messi on the pitch and 2) wast as world wide known as Messi. Beckham had sponsorships too, featured in commercials, sold shirts etc, but Messi has that too, only multiplied for an X number due to the increase in media in general that we have had in the last few decades.

You open tiktok and you see Messi, you see Adidas, watch youtube and you see an ad of Ronaldo etc. Thats why wages have increased tenfold in the last two decades while you keep paying relatively the same for a dozen of eggs that you did a few decades ago. There's much more money on football now.

There is nothing "hilarious" about saying Messi is 10x more popular than Beckham was. The exposure that the showtime business and sports have nowadays literally is that much higher than back on the cable TV days. Hilarious is to post pics of Beckham with Michelle Obama as an argument, as if anybody ever said Beckham isnt popular or influential on 2021.


I know some of you are just throwing some old-men banter, but still, for anyone else that wants to discuss this seriously, the social media impact is very important to note.
Click to expand...
You're delusional. Messi's a great footballer but Beckham's a cultural icon like the likes of MJ and Ali. There's a reason why Beckham is still contracted with Adidas despite retiring long ago.
 
elmo said:
You're delusional. Messi's a great footballer but Beckham's a cultural icon like the likes of MJ and Ali. There's a reason why Beckham is still contracted with Adidas despite retiring long ago.
Click to expand...

Seems a bit hyperbolic to me. He‘s very popular, but never Ali/MJ levels. They‘re the biggest (and outstanding) icons for their whole industry, while Beckham clearly isnt
 
We'll take Pedri or FDJ off their hands to make it easier for them. About time we start looking out for the little guys.
 
People saying Messi brings in more money via shirt sales than his salary need to understand that the money from such sales don’t go straight to Barca funds and despite that he takes up the majority of the money in wages.
So without him, even if the shirt sales are halved, it will be a net positive on the revenue.


Womp said:
We'll take Pedri or FDJ off their hands to make it easier for them. About time we start looking out for the little guys.
Click to expand...

de Jong is on 400k a week mate. Not sure if he’s worth those wages and it will wreck the wage structure.
 
krentz said:
Well actually Becks was sold £25M but the most expensive transfer in British football at that time was only £29M, also comparing players fee from almost 2 decades ago is just foolish, here i give you example Maradona was sold for £5M in the mid 80's, you think he was a lesser player than Beckham?
Click to expand...

Again, thats my point. Football generates much more money nowadays in the social media era than it did 20 years ago. The money Beckham generated for Manchester United isnt comparable to the money Messi generates for Barcelona, because Messi is able to reach a far bigger audience than Beckham could in 2000

This entire argument started because someone stated that if United were perfectly fine after Beckham left, then Barcelona would be too after Messi. No, its not comparable, Messi generates a far higher sum of money for Barcelona than Becks did for Utd back then. Lets not even get into their performances on the pitch.



elmo said:
You're delusional. Messi's a great footballer but Beckham's a cultural icon like the likes of MJ and Ali. There's a reason why Beckham is still contracted with Adidas despite retiring long ago.
Click to expand...

CR7 is a modern Beckham, just much more popular than he was, and three times the football player too. And still, for whatever reason, Messi is paid much more than CR7.

Its laughable to me to compare Beckham to Messi but hey, to each their own.
 
Beckham transcended the sport in a way very few players have since or before him and in a era before social media. Whether it was deserved or not is debatable. He was probably better known for his antics off the pitch than on i.e. his fashion. Which is different to Messi and CR7 who are better known for what they do on the pitch.

I know its going off on a tangent but players who transcend the sport are rare. Beckhams influence was massive, off the pitch. He became a household name that even non football followers knew. Compared to his footballing ability (a very good wide right sided midfielder) Beckhams influence was disproptional. He was a phenomena that football has never seen before off the pitch.
 
The people claiming that Barcelona aren't hurt because they pay Messi 150 mil a year are not serious.

Football is a business, if they would've paid him 50 mil a year, they'd profit 100 mil more, no matter how much money they make off him afterwards. There is no god damn real life scenario in which an employee would deserve to be paid 150 milion a year post tax, it's batshit crazy.

On the other hand though, I just want to see Leo and his camp's faces when Barcelona agreed to pay him those amounts, what the actual feck.
 
VanKenny said:
Again, thats my point. Football generates much more money nowadays in the social media era than it did 20 years ago.
Click to expand...
This makes no sense, if every aspect of football revenue etc. has changed, then of course you can compare, just because they aren't the same figures, doesn't mean the impact is any different. Again, you are either delusional or 17 years old if you think that Messi is x10 more popular than Beckham.
 
Conor said:
This makes no sense, if every aspect of football revenue etc. has changed, then of course you can compare, just because they aren't the same figures, doesn't mean the impact is any different. Again, you are either delusional or 17 years old if you think that Messi is x10 more popular than Beckham.
Click to expand...
I believe his point is with newer streams of commercial revenue and Football being more globalized now than it was 20 years ago, the money Messi brings into the club as a % of total income of the club is greater.
 
VanKenny said:
CR7 is a modern Beckham, just much more popular than he was, and three times the football player too. And still, for whatever reason, Messi is paid much more than CR7.
Click to expand...
The reason is that Messi is important to Barcelona for emotional reasons in a way that Cristiano Ronaldo wasn't for Real Madrid.
 
anant said:
I believe his point is with newer streams of commercial revenue and Football being more globalized now than it was 20 years ago, the money Messi brings into the club as a % of total income of the club is greater.
Click to expand...
That has nothing to do with his popularity in the world, that is just new advertising avenues that allow for the same people to be targeted in different ways. Everyone and their mother saw David Beckham on whatever media vehicle was available at the time he was popular, just because the equivalent person today is seeing Messi on a phone, in 3 different apps, doesn't mean he is x10 more popular than Beckham. 20 years ago was not Victorian times, you could still reach the majority of the world with advertising campaigns, the only difference now is that they are more targeted, and can in turn be calculated more accurately, from a reach perspective. Advertisers today can say with certainty that 50m people saw an Instagram ad Messi was in, but the same amount of people could have seen Beckham billboards in Beijing, Mumbai, Rio and various other places, the only difference is the data we have these days to support the exposure.
 
Who wouldve guessed that when you spent money in the future that you can't know for certain if you do or do not have it available by the time, it could cause problems?

The entire far of paying off players over years was bound to become a major issue. If it's not for covis then something else could have caused it. Anything that does economic damage to the Region and/or worldwide. The question never saw if this will become a problem, but when.

All Barcelona can do now is either doing a drastic cut and selling everyone they can (which they are too late now) and replace them with a new, young and way cheaper squad that will right against Relegation OR find a big Investor of some sort. Or bankruptcy.
 
Conor said:
That has nothing to do with his popularity in the world, that is just new advertising avenues that allow for the same people to be targeted in different ways. Everyone and their mother saw David Beckham on whatever media vehicle was available at the time he was popular, just because the equivalent person today is seeing Messi on a phone, in 3 different apps, doesn't mean he is x10 more popular than Beckham. 20 years ago was not Victorian times, you could still reach the majority of the world with advertising campaigns, the only difference now is that they are more targeted, and can in turn be calculated more accurately, from a reach perspective. Advertisers today can say with certainty that 50m people saw an Instagram ad Messi was in, but the same amount of people could have seen Beckham billboards in Beijing, Mumbai, Rio and various other places, the only difference is the data we have these days to support the exposure.
Click to expand...
Not arguing whether Beckham is more popular or Messi. I think both are equally popular. However, when Beckham was popular, the sport wasn't this commercialized as it is now. Hell, Football started becoming more mainstream in large parts of Asia after 2002 WC (not to say Beckham was unknown before that). The billboards, TV adverts, etc. existed then and existed now. However, with the companies getting a higher ROI on their association with these players today, the sponsorship Messi is able to drive today is obviously higher than what Becks could.

I dont agree with all points of his, but having arguably the GOAT in the side, does have significant financial benefits
 
anant said:
Not arguing whether Beckham is more popular or Messi. I think both are equally popular. However, when Beckham was popular, the sport wasn't this commercialized as it is now. Hell, Football started becoming more mainstream in large parts of Asia after 2002 WC (not to say Beckham was unknown before that). The billboards, TV adverts, etc. existed then and existed now. However, with the companies getting a higher ROI on their association with these players today, the sponsorship Messi is able to drive today is obviously higher than what Becks could.

I dont agree with all points of his, but having arguably the GOAT in the side, does have significant financial benefits
Click to expand...

Most responses regarding Beckham are responding to the point that Messi is a lot more popular. He's not.
 
Beckham was a lot more popular when the media wasn't as fractured. The actual media was his social media, thats how huge he was.
 
Last edited:
The Boy said:
If there is a fire sale, which is looking very likely, the very last people to go would be the likes of Pedri, Fati and Moriba.

They are more likely to try and push on Griezmann, Dembele and Coutinho first, but Couthinho and Dembele are injured and Griezmann has said he is not leaving. So if that doesn't work it's likely you could see ter Stegen and De Jong up for sale , there's plenty who would like to buy one of those two and I can't help but think that Messi will have to go. Imagine Grealish, Kane and Messi all signing for City!
Click to expand...
Pedri, Fati and Moriba? According to TransferMarkt, all 3 contracts currently end next year
 
You must log in or register to reply here.