Jadon Sancho | £72.9M fee agreed

Status
Not open for further replies.
How? You don’t earn money from engagement with Tweets at all. He literally earns £0 from his Twitter account.

You cannot earn money through engagement with Tweets, he does this all for free & as part of his job.

The act of Tweeting earns him £0 no matter how many people engage with him.

As far as I know he doesn’t sell merch too and even that is different to football fans foaming at the mouth to want to know who their club is gonna sign
Do you understand the concept of building a brand? And the importance of social media engagement?
 
Umm .. If I replied he would just say I dislike him but I really can't resist not having a laugh .. damn. :lol:
 
I am fully aware of how building a brand works thank you

1) Personally I have never seen Fab link off to an article or a publication in his tweets. Have you even read or even seen an article from Fabrizio Romano? You have to physically search for his articles.

2) Why would you want to read an article when 95% of the information that Fab would put out would go in to the Tweet. For a start no one would actually click the link and the very few that do would be so minute in comparison to the amount of engagement the tweet gets.

3) Ask yourself this. How often do you either go searching for Fab's articles to read them or click on a link from someone like Ornstein or Howard Nurse?

4) Romano has worked for Sky since the age of 19 (according to Wiki) & one would assume he gets a salary from Sky Italy. So can't demand anything off his employer for his 'services' as he is working for them. Now, he also reports for The Guardian, so you could assume as freelance, so he could charge more for 'his services' but again, I have not seen him link to any of his articles via his Twitter account. Why not? Because he is getting 0 benefits from his Tweets! He works for the Guardian because he's a bloody good journalist and not just because he tweets according to the CAF, inflammatory Tweets to get more clicks about transfers.

Here is his article from The Guardian about Gattuso close to be signing for Tottenham as manager. Here are his Tweets regarding Spurs/Gattuso.

Tweet 1, Tweet 2, Tweet 3, Tweet 4

In exactly NONE of these tweets did he A) @ The Guardian or Sky Sports. B) Link off to the original article. He has also NOT written a follow up article about talks breaking down or them re-engaging with Gattuso.

5) If you want to talk brands, he has a podcast called the "Here We Go Podcast" that has 18K followers on the Twitter account for that podcast. Compared to his own Twitter account, it has 3.2M followers. So not even 10% of his followers listen to his podcast. So I'd go as far as saying he earns very little from that podcast.

So yes, he is essentially Tweeting for free and would see little to no financial benefit from his Tweets.

feck me, have a think lad. The more popular he is on twitter, the more clicks his articles get, the more money the publications make, the more money he can demand for his services.

“Does it for free”.

Clearly not.
“Does it for free” :lol:

Do you understand the concept of building a brand? And the importance of social media engagement?
 
I am fully aware of how building a brand works thank you

1) Personally I have never seen Fab link off to an article or a publication in his tweets. Have you even read or even seen an article from Fabrizio Romano?

2) Why would you want to read a tweet when 95% of the information that Fab would put out would go in to the Tweet. For a start no one would actually click the link and the very few that do would be so minute in comparison to the amount of engagement the tweet gets.

3) Ask yourself this. How often do you either go searching for Fab's articles to read them or click on a link from someone like Ornstein or Howard Nurse?

4) Romano has worked for Sky since the age of 19 (according to Wiki) & one would assume he gets a salary from Sky Italy. So can't demand anything off his employer for his 'services' as he is working for them. Now, he also reports for The Guardian, so you could assume as freelance, so he could charge more for 'his services' but again, I have not seen him link to any of his articles via his Twitter account. Why not? Because he is getting 0 benefits from his Tweets! He works for the Guardian because he's a bloody good journalist and not just because he tweets according to the CAF, inflammatory Tweets to get more clicks about transfers.

Here is his article from The Guardian about Gattuso close to be signing for Tottenham as manager. Here are his Tweets regarding Spurs/Gattuso.

Tweet 1, Tweet 2, Tweet 3, Tweet 4

In exactly NONE of these tweets did he A) @ The Guardian or Sky Sports. B) Link off to the original article. He has also NOT written a follow up article about talks breaking down or them re-engaging with Gattuso.

5) If you want to talk brands, he has a podcast called the "Here We Go Podcast" that has 18K followers on the Twitter account for that podcast. Compared to his own Twitter account, it has 3.2M followers. So not even 10% of his followers listen to his podcast. So I'd go as far as saying he earns very little from that podcast.

So yes, he is essentially Tweeting for free and would see little to no financial benefit from his Tweets.
big day today
 
I am fully aware of how building a brand works thank you

1) Personally I have never seen Fab link off to an article or a publication in his tweets. Have you even read or even seen an article from Fabrizio Romano? You have to physically search for his articles.

2) Why would you want to read an article when 95% of the information that Fab would put out would go in to the Tweet. For a start no one would actually click the link and the very few that do would be so minute in comparison to the amount of engagement the tweet gets.

3) Ask yourself this. How often do you either go searching for Fab's articles to read them or click on a link from someone like Ornstein or Howard Nurse?

4) Romano has worked for Sky since the age of 19 (according to Wiki) & one would assume he gets a salary from Sky Italy. So can't demand anything off his employer for his 'services' as he is working for them. Now, he also reports for The Guardian, so you could assume as freelance, so he could charge more for 'his services' but again, I have not seen him link to any of his articles via his Twitter account. Why not? Because he is getting 0 benefits from his Tweets! He works for the Guardian because he's a bloody good journalist and not just because he tweets according to the CAF, inflammatory Tweets to get more clicks about transfers.

Here is his article from The Guardian about Gattuso close to be signing for Tottenham as manager. Here are his Tweets regarding Spurs/Gattuso.

Tweet 1, Tweet 2, Tweet 3, Tweet 4

In exactly NONE of these tweets did he A) @ The Guardian or Sky Sports. B) Link off to the original article. He has also NOT written a follow up article about talks breaking down or them re-engaging with Gattuso.

5) If you want to talk brands, he has a podcast called the "Here We Go Podcast" that has 18K followers on the Twitter account for that podcast. Compared to his own Twitter account, it has 3.2M followers. So not even 10% of his followers listen to his podcast. So I'd go as far as saying he earns very little from that podcast.

So yes, he is essentially Tweeting for free and would see little to no financial benefit from his Tweets.
Fab post.
 
I am fully aware of how building a brand works thank you

Are you sure? You really don’t appear aware.

Do you understand that the more popular he becomes, the more opportunities he will receive within his profession? The more he can demand from Sky with regards to wages? The more he can demand from the Guardian AND cbs and other opportunities that come his way due to how famous twitter has made him?

I mean, you really seem to be misunderstanding why the bloke uses twitter and why he is building he brand, even incorporating catch-phrases such as “Here We Go”.
 
You're simply not understanding.

Why would a company employ him, if no one can read his articles? He literally NEVER links off to them.

If this was the case there'd literally be a clause in this contract that says he MUST link off to The Guardian/Sky Sports/Wherever in each of his Tweets.

Are you sure? You really don’t appear aware.

Do you understand that the more popular he becomes, the more opportunities he will receive within his profession? The more he can demand from Sky with regards to wages? The more he can demand from the Guardian AND cbs and other opportunities that come his way due to how famous twitter has made him?

I mean, you really seem to be misunderstanding why the bloke uses twitter and why he is building he brand, even incorporating catch-phrases such as “Here We Go”.
 
You're simply not understanding.

Why would a company employ him, if no one can read his articles? He literally NEVER links off to them.

If this was the case there'd literally be a clause in this contract that says he MUST link off to The Guardian/Sky Sports/Wherever in each of his Tweets.
Twitter alone, and his catch phrase "here we go" has made him on of the most well known football journalists out there.
He’s also mostly regarded as a tier one (shrugs) journalist solely because of all his tweets.
Of course he is building a brand, and I’m pretty sure most companies/papers/sports-sites would employ him given the chance.
 
They employ him because they know he’s respected and extremely popular. He’s also used twitter on the regular to prove he is very good at his job and a genuine ITK.
Yeah but you don’t understand, he doesn’t link anything to his tweets. It doesn’t matter that 90% of football fans know him for his catchphrase ‘here we go’ which he uses on… Twitter! :lol:
 
Not gonna bother trying to explain it again, clearly both have an agenda and whatever I say isn't going to change your minds.

The guy has a catchphrase must mean £££ surely. :boring::wenger::rolleyes:

Yeah but you don’t understand, he doesn’t link anything to his tweets. It doesn’t matter that 90% of football fans know him for his catchphrase ‘here we go’ which he uses on… Twitter! :lol:
 
I am fully aware of how building a brand works thank you

1) Personally I have never seen Fab link off to an article or a publication in his tweets. Have you even read or even seen an article from Fabrizio Romano? You have to physically search for his articles.

2) Why would you want to read an article when 95% of the information that Fab would put out would go in to the Tweet. For a start no one would actually click the link and the very few that do would be so minute in comparison to the amount of engagement the tweet gets.

3) Ask yourself this. How often do you either go searching for Fab's articles to read them or click on a link from someone like Ornstein or Howard Nurse?

4) Romano has worked for Sky since the age of 19 (according to Wiki) & one would assume he gets a salary from Sky Italy. So can't demand anything off his employer for his 'services' as he is working for them. Now, he also reports for The Guardian, so you could assume as freelance, so he could charge more for 'his services' but again, I have not seen him link to any of his articles via his Twitter account. Why not? Because he is getting 0 benefits from his Tweets! He works for the Guardian because he's a bloody good journalist and not just because he tweets according to the CAF, inflammatory Tweets to get more clicks about transfers.

Here is his article from The Guardian about Gattuso close to be signing for Tottenham as manager. Here are his Tweets regarding Spurs/Gattuso.

Tweet 1, Tweet 2, Tweet 3, Tweet 4

In exactly NONE of these tweets did he A) @ The Guardian or Sky Sports. B) Link off to the original article. He has also NOT written a follow up article about talks breaking down or them re-engaging with Gattuso.

5) If you want to talk brands, he has a podcast called the "Here We Go Podcast" that has 18K followers on the Twitter account for that podcast. Compared to his own Twitter account, it has 3.2M followers. So not even 10% of his followers listen to his podcast. So I'd go as far as saying he earns very little from that podcast.

So yes, he is essentially Tweeting for free and would see little to no financial benefit from his Tweets.

PARKLIFE!
 
Not gonna bother trying to explain it again, clearly both have an agenda and whatever I say isn't going to change your minds.

The guy has a catchphrase must mean £££ surely. :boring::wenger::rolleyes:
An agenda to explain how branding works? :lol: I’m not even sure what agenda you think I have. Have a good weekend buddy.
 
Yeah but you don’t understand, he doesn’t link anything to his tweets. It doesn’t matter that 90% of football fans know him for his catchphrase ‘here we go’ which he uses on… Twitter! :lol:
When can I start making bank off my catch phrase?
 
Your interpretation is weird. What’s not to understand about a bid (an offer) being a bid.
If it isn’t accepted and you bid (offer) again then that’s another bid (another / different offer). The same as bidding at an auction or on eBay, how can it possibly be confusing to anyone?

A negotiation can include dozens of differently constructed offers / different bids - you can therefore have many bids as part of a negotiation but each bid is in the form of an offer and each different offer is another bid.

It's all semantics however you decide to explain it which is the point and highlights how absolutely ridiculous it is that people are splitting heirs over the terminology being used by different journalists.

United and Dortmund are negotiating over the deal. It's that simple.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.