Lionel Messi’s Obscene Contract

[Pep's Suit]

Interestingly one could argue Messi astronomical wages could be one of reason preventing Barca to afford as many other star players in their team. With lack of star attraction under current Barca squad, there would be the lack of interest of sponsorship deal too should Messi decide to leave. Imagine if Neymar , Suarez are still in the team, or we go back to Xavi and Inesta era, hardly would Barca loss as many sponsorship deal if only Messi is leaving.

You mean playing like Griezmann, Coutinho and Dembele?

 

[RedRonaldo]

You mean playing like Griezmann, Coutinho and Dembele?

They are more closer to what people would consider as "flops" rather than "star" players at current standings. Its similar to Lukaku, Sanchez, and Martial for us, I don't think they would attract big interest.

 

[RedRonaldo]

Yes and no. I don't think Messi's contract hampers Barca's ability to sign star players from a budgeting perspective. The 555m over 5 years are paid continuously, not in advance. Most parts of the wage are paid monthly and you see an almost immediate return on it. So if anything, the investment actually enables them to pay a higher total salary since they're making money from it.

However, Messi's presence in the team obviously outshines that of everyone else. Neymar left Barca because he wanted to step of of Messi's shadow. That's not just an ego thing. PSG can get much more out of Neymar's popularity than Barca could since they have Messi and you can't put two players in the limelight at the same time. For one club's marketing, Neymar was the icing on the cake for the other he is the cake.

Anyway, there's no player who could replace Messi from a marketing perspective. Neymar for instance also earns 90m € a year and is nowhere near as marketable as Messi. Cristiano would be a possibility but it's practically impossible for obvious reasons - not even considering his age here. So if Messi leaves, Barca probably loses a few hundred millions in profit (not revenue) over the next few seasons. They'll inevitably do anyway once he calls it quits. That's the reality for them.

Sure I am not denying Messi values in marketing perspective, he has one of the biggest followings in football ever, probably only match by Ronaldo and Beckham in terms of magnitude in marketability. But I'd say its rather poor business model for Barcelona to rely too heavily on Messi for their commercial incomes. For example, when we loss Beckham and Ronaldo, 2 of the biggest football icon ever in terms of commercial values, it didn't really hurt us as much in earnings.

 

[Zehner]

Sure I am not denying Messi values in marketing perspective, he has one of the biggest followings in football ever, probably only match by Ronaldo and Beckham in terms of magnitude in marketability. But I'd say its rather poor business model for Barcelona to rely too heavily on Messi for their commercial incomes. For example, when we loss Beckham and Ronaldo, it didn't really hurt us as much in earnings.

The lack of diversification in their marketing incomes could definitely a point worth criticizing but in all honesty, it's just natural if you have a player of that magnitude in your club. What should they have done differently regarding him? Let him go when you can employ him for a wage that still is lower than the income he generates? After all, the club developed into the one with the highest revenue in the world.

I believe they did the right think by getting the most out of him for as long as he's there. What they got wrong is how they invested the wealth he brought them. They spend seriously crazy money, starting with the Neymar and Suarez transfers. They've signed eight players over 80m € since 2013, four of them were above 100m € investments in fee alone. They probably made half of the transfers above 100m € in fee in history and the majority turned out a catastrophe.

Their marquee signings were probably attempts to diversify their income streams and become more independent of Messi. They tried to install a second star alongside him but their signings ended up underperforming. Not enough emphasis on intelligent squad management.

 

[Daysleeper]

They are more closer to what people would consider as "flops" rather than "star" players at current standings. Its similar to Lukaku, Sanchez, and Martial for us, I don't think they would attract big interest.

You are insanely wrong on those points. Griezmann was far bigger than any of those players mentioned. I don't think Haaland or Mbappe would turn down a chance playing at Barca because of Messi or his wages.

 

[Daysleeper]

Barcelona is a brand in itself messi or no messi.

Real Madrid or Manchester United didn't start getting no sponsors when Ronaldo left.

And don't think Juventus are getting equal sponsors even with Ronaldo.

Also Messi required the Barcelona brand as well which has made his brand stronger.

Yes they helped each other but tons of tourists go to the matches for messi and messi alone. Compare Barca's trophy count and revenue before and after Messi it is night and day. See @Zehner posts.

 

[Daysleeper]

I don't even think Messi deserves criticism. I also don't agree that Messi is responsible for a third of Barca's revenue. Barca were already a top team when he started making a name for himself. Commercial and broadcast revenues have grown exponentially in the last 15 years. Nearly every top club is worth 2/3 times what they were 15 years ago. You can't simply say Barca would be worth a third less if Messi left in 2017. Apart from that Barca have in the last 15 years had some incredible players.
Risking your financial position for one player is never justified. What's worse. They gave that kind of contract to a player who was already showing signs of fading albeit from an insane peak. Is anyone surprised by the situation? The money he's on is simply unsustainable for a club that does not depend on a benefactor.
It's not even about him being worth it. Barca could simply not afford it for the direct and indirect impact it had on their financial position. Absolutely no non-oil club would have taken him on on such numbers.

You really need to read the Athletic article. It's no a fluff piece, they've raked Barca over the coals. Giving underperforming players like Griezmann, Coutinho, and Umtiti those contracts hurts Barca far more than Messi's contract. As again, taking Messi's contract in a vacuum the club has made a healthy profit off him. It's the other poor signings that the problem.

 

[Daysleeper]

Absolutely it's PR. Neither party looks good here. Messi looks a cnut because, let's face it, you don't get that kind of money without bending the club over and forcing them into it, and Barcelona look completely incompetent for bowing down to it.

People are acting as if Barcelona were single-handedly dragged up from the lower leagues by Messi to the pinnacle of football. They were one of the best teams in the world or thereabouts before Messi even step foot into the team, and when he did so he was surrounded by some of the best players of the last 20 or 30 years. Has Messi been good for brand Barcelona? Of course he has, but no where near enough to justify risking bankruptcy and ****ing yourselves over in the long term. As I said, it's incompetency from the board that's led them here.

No it's not "PR" ffs read the Athletic article, compare the trophy count and revenue before Messi arrived vs after and it's night and day. The board's incompetency came from all the other signings, Messi's contract was one of the few things they got right. If you actually read that article, which has nothing to do with "PR" you'd see Messi generates far more profit for them than what they paid him.

 

[Daysleeper]

He'd just won twelve leagues by that point, two UCL, multiple FA Cups, and League cups and changed the team from the biggest in England to one of the biggest in the world. Two effing right.

I think this is PR from Barca that he brings in more than he costs. You made less actual profit from what he makes you (by paying him a higher percentage of that profit, eating into the margin) than if you paid him €300m over four years.

They gave that money to a player, on the decline because....he is good for your brand? You're a football club firstly, the money could have been spent on better players to keep you winning trophies or revamping La Masia, or driving down debt. You've also pumped huge money into a declining, depreciating asset.

Besides, if the entire team's identity and brand are based on one player then they are likely to implode when he retires/leaves.

No, it's not. The Chicago Bulls did the same thing with Michael Jordan in the 90's. He was the highest paid athlete in history, took up nearly 65% of the team's salary cap but they still made money hand over fist. Messi is a player we won't see for another 50 years at least. Tourists come from all over just to see him play. 95% of the people in Barcelona wear his jersey. Actually read the Athletic article, he does 30% of their income (this from the Athletic's research, not some fluff piece as you claim) and they've made over 300M euro in profit compared to what they pay him. The issue for barca was the other signings not Messi. They got that one absolutely right.

 

[Daysleeper]

That's madness. Barcelona should sack their commercial team if they accept shit like that. A contract is a contract. Did Real Madrid have their deal cut when Ronaldo left?
If Rakuten plan on renegotiating the deal, it probably has more to do with their financial position or Corona than Messi.

The problem isn't actually renegading on a deal, it's that many sponsors refuse to re-up if Messi isn't there. That makes total sense. Messi is what gives th sponsorships far more appeal.

After Ronaldo left, Madrid attendance went down around 10% and they fell to #2 for revenue generated behind Barca for 2020. Not a huge drop, but a drop nonetheless.

 

[Zen86]

No it's not "PR" ffs read the Athletic article, compare the trophy count and revenue before Messi arrived vs after and it's night and day. The board's incompetency came from all the other signings, Messi's contract was one of the few things they got right. If you actually read that article, which has nothing to do with "PR" you'd see Messi generates far more profit for them than what they paid him.

PR

 

[MU655]

When a club/company have increased their wage bill to a point where they have trouble/cannot pay it, they have made the wrong decision. It puts the club's existence at jeopardy and with the coronavirus, who knows how many more months they will fail to meet wage demands.

Certainly, the decision was really bad to keep him this season.

 

[NoPace]

Man Utd were bought for 700m around the time Messi broke into the first team and are now worth over 3-4bn. Who is responsible for that?
To attribute and arbitrary figure Messi has brought to Barcelona is silly imo.

Yeah, for sure. I think Ferguson, Beckham and Cristiano are probably the 3 guys who have had more than say a 50M difference on our valuation, to ballpark a number.

 

[VanKenny]

When a club/company have increased their wage bill to a point where they have trouble/cannot pay it, they have made the wrong decision. It puts the club's existence at jeopardy and with the coronavirus, who knows how many more months they will fail to meet wage demands.

Certainly, the decision was really bad to keep him this season.

Just read the last page before this one and you will change your mind. Media is just manipulating everyone and making Messi seem like a pirate or something. In reality Barcelona keeping Messi in their club is probably the one good thing they have done in the last decade, other than Ter Stegen's signing.

 

[Murder on Zidane's Floor]

No, it's not. The Chicago Bulls did the same thing with Michael Jordan in the 90's. He was the highest paid athlete in history, took up nearly 65% of the team's salary cap but they still made money hand over fist. Messi is a player we won't see for another 50 years at least. Tourists come from all over just to see him play. 95% of the people in Barcelona wear his jersey. Actually read the Athletic article, he does 30% of their income (this from the Athletic's research, not some fluff piece as you claim) and they've made over 300M euro in profit compared to what they pay him. The issue for barca was the other signings not Messi. They got that one absolutely right.

Cool, so they could have made more profit if they paid him less?

Your point regarding The Bulls; they won six Championships but they needed other players in their team to facilitate this and didn't plan for life post Jordan. They also haven't won a championship for twenty-three years, no one buys their jerseys or meaningfully supports them, they're a nothing team now.

Succession planning is key here, spunking every available dime on a single player has its upsides in terms of "we generating loads of profit", but it collapses when the human athlete's performance drops and no one wants to watch your team. This by the way is the only inevitability in professional sports!

Do also bear in mind Phil Jackson went on to win another three-peat after the Bulls and five titles overall, did they spend 65% of the teams revenue on him? Did the Lakers spend 65% on Kobe?

 

[Murder on Zidane's Floor]

Just read the last page before this one and you will change your mind. Media is just manipulating everyone and making Messi seem like a pirate or something. In reality Barcelona keeping Messi in their club is probably the one good thing they have done in the last decade, other than Ter Stegen's signing.

Suarez and Neymar signing and winning the treble?

 

[Daysleeper]

Cool, so they could have made more profit if they paid him less?

Your point regarding The Bulls; they won six Championships but they needed other players in their team to facilitate this and didn't plan for life post Jordan. They also haven't won a championship for twenty-three years, no one buys their jerseys or meaningfully supports them, they're a nothing team now.

Succession planning is key here, spunking every available dime on a single player has its upsides in terms of "we generating loads of profit", but it collapses when the human athlete's performance drops and no one wants to watch your team. This by the way is the only inevitability in professional sports!

Do also bear in mind Phil Jackson went on to win another three-peat after the Bulls and five titles overall, did they spend 65% of the teams revenue on him? Did the Lakers spend 65% on Kobe?

lakers spent a TON of money on Kobe and Shaq. They had the highest payroll in the nba. Shaq made 23 million in 2003 when the salary cap was just 43.5 million that year. The lakers spent well over half their salary cap on just two players. And was it worth it? Of course

could the bulls have made more profit if they paid Jordan less? Of course but it’s a dumb argument because Jordan wasn’t taking less. Hell, if anything he was still underpaid considering the revenue he brought to Chicago. Chicago hasn’t won a title in ages but they did everything right with Jordan. The last dance documentary was still a massive hit. When you get a player like a Jordan or a Messi you
Max it out as much as you can. Phil Jackson is an amazing coach but even he fell off a cliff when the players weren’t as good judging by his final seasons with the lakers and his piss poor job with the Knicks. Coaches are great but there’s a reason why the players always make far more money. The fans come to see the players not the coaches. Messi accounts for over 30% of Barca’s revenue, it they still make nearly a third of a billion in euros PROFIT then it is absolutely worth it to give him that money. Giving poor contracts to players who don’t perform nearly as well is the issue

 

[Sara125]

Will he really? Ahead of Maradona, Pele and Cruyff?

Yes? He’s almost unanimously seen as the greatest player in history let alone Barcelona.

 

[Daysleeper]

PR

don’t be thick, actually read the article.You
Sound like one of those fake news Trump fans

 

[Pocho]

No matter the numbers, the articles you show, they'll keep saying it's insane and it's Messi's fault the Barcelona's debt. Waste of time.

 

[Daysleeper]

No matter the numbers, the articles you show, they'll keep saying it's insane and it's Messi's fault the Barcelona's debt. Waste of time.

I could understand the PR argument if the club released a statement saying "we made $$$$ off of Messi giving us a profit" but the Athletic has zero allegiance to the club and have bashed them many times over the years and rightfully so. The discussion on this boards can be as bad as the Sports Bible facebook comments section at times from some people.

 

[MU655]

I don't get how you guys can retain that opinion given what information is being revealed.

Apparently, Barca's sponsors have Messi clauses in their contracts with Barca that at times see 50% cuts in sponsoring money if Messi leaves the team next season. .

9 out of 10 shirts sold have his name on them. Sponsors pay less if Messi misses a game.

Rakuten apparently only renewed for one season last year after the Messi rumors and lowered the deal by 45%. Beko will cut the deal by 50% if Messi isn't there next season. Preseason tours in Asia, US and Africa will earn them half as much without Messi in the team.

And yes, every club has grown but none has reached Barca figures. There's a reason the club has climbed to the top spot regarding revenues. And it is obvious who's responsible for that.

Manutd shirt sales 18/19 - 3.25m

Barcelona shirt sales 18/19 - 1.925m

Manutd average annual shirt sales 11-16 - 1.75m

Barcelona average shirt sale 11-16 - 1.27m

I think the growth of football has been ignored in terms of kit sales. Despite Manutd not being as successful, they are selling almost 1.5m more shirts than they did on average back when they last won the PL. In 18/19, what star players did we really have? Pogba? That is about it. There were no other big names in the team. Manutd shirts sell more than when even Ronaldo played for them and they won the CL.

I'm not saying that Messi wouldn't be their most popular name on a shirt, but how much of that growth in shirt sales would have seen anyway? It sort of brings into question how much not having his name available would affect shirt sales. Would they just buy then nameless if he wasn't there? There is a massive assumption here of no Messi = no shirt sale.

What this is also saying is that (according to 18/19 revenues) Barcelona, without Messi, would have dropped to 6th in revenue of club from 1st. It will be below R Madrid, Manutd, Bayern, PSG, Man City, and Liverpool. They wouldn't have much more revenue than Tottenham Hotspur. This doesn't make a lot of sense considering Barcelona have been successful recently and have the estimated third-biggest fanbase in the world. Have they really tied so much of their revenue to one player? Would they really have lost 30% without him?

If this was true that they tied so much revenue to him, that sounds like short-term management thinking to me.

 

[Daysleeper]

Manutd shirt sales 18/19 - 3.25m

Barcelona shirt sales 18/19 - 1.925m

Manutd average annual shirt sales 11-16 - 1.75m

Barcelona average shirt sale 11-16 - 1.27m

I think the growth of football has been ignored in terms of kit sales. Despite Manutd not being as successful, they are selling almost 1.5m more shirts than they did on average back when they last won the PL. In 18/19, what star players did we really have? Pogba? That is about it. There were no other big names in the team. Manutd shirts sell more than when even Ronaldo played for them and they won the CL.

I'm not saying that Messi wouldn't be their most popular name on a shirt, but how much of that growth in shirt sales would have seen anyway? It sort of brings into question how much not having his name available would affect shirt sales. Would they just buy then nameless if he wasn't there? There is a massive assumption here of no Messi = no shirt sale.

What this is also saying is that (according to 18/19 revenues) Barcelona, without Messi, would have dropped to 6th in revenue of club from 1st. It will be below R Madrid, Manutd, Bayern, PSG, Man City, and Liverpool. They wouldn't have much more revenue than Tottenham Hotspur. This doesn't make a lot of sense considering Barcelona have been successful recently and have the estimated third-biggest fanbase in the world. Have they really tied so much of their revenue to one player? Would they really have lost 30% without him?

If this was true that they tied so much revenue to him, that sounds like short-term management thinking to me.

Please read the athletic article if you can

Manutd shirt sales 18/19 - 3.25m

Barcelona shirt sales 18/19 - 1.925m

Manutd average annual shirt sales 11-16 - 1.75m

Barcelona average shirt sale 11-16 - 1.27m

I think the growth of football has been ignored in terms of kit sales. Despite Manutd not being as successful, they are selling almost 1.5m more shirts than they did on average back when they last won the PL. In 18/19, what star players did we really have? Pogba? That is about it. There were no other big names in the team. Manutd shirts sell more than when even Ronaldo played for them and they won the CL.

I'm not saying that Messi wouldn't be their most popular name on a shirt, but how much of that growth in shirt sales would have seen anyway? It sort of brings into question how much not having his name available would affect shirt sales. Would they just buy then nameless if he wasn't there? There is a massive assumption here of no Messi = no shirt sale.

What this is also saying is that (according to 18/19 revenues) Barcelona, without Messi, would have dropped to 6th in revenue of club from 1st. It will be below R Madrid, Manutd, Bayern, PSG, Man City, and Liverpool. They wouldn't have much more revenue than Tottenham Hotspur. This doesn't make a lot of sense considering Barcelona have been successful recently and have the estimated third-biggest fanbase in the world. Have they really tied so much of their revenue to one player? Would they really have lost 30% without him?

If this was true that they tied so much revenue to him, that sounds like short-term management thinking to me.

from the athletic:

Then there is the income that Barca get from merchandising and match day each year. The club’s most recent accounts are from the 2018-19 season, before the COVID-19 crisis hit. That year saw them earn €60 million from merchandising, including replica jersey sales, and €93.7 million from match days — including tickets and hospitality in the stadium’s VIP areas.

“Barca have to look at all their business activities and calculate how much they will lose by not having Lionel Messi in their squad,” Menchen said. “Of the €60 million they gain each year from merchandising, how many are jerseys with Messi’s name on them? Or how many are jerseys without a name on the back that people have bought as they come to the Nou Camp for the unique experience of watching a Barca team featuring the best player in the world?”

That is again difficult to know but Barca’s official 2018-19 accounts do give a breakdown between money that comes into the club from members (socios) and from one-off ticket buyers for each game.

Barca received €71.6 million from “normal” ticket sales for games, which was up 17.6 per cent on the previous year, when visitor numbers to the Catalan capital were affected by a terrorist attack in August 2017. They also took in €22 million from VIP and hospitality, a rise of 16 per cent on 2017-18, with Barca themselves claiming that more than 250 companies brought over 35,000 guests to the stadium to see games. Each “normal” year, they sell 900,000 tickets for games and 15,000 VIP packages.

This combined €93.6 million from match days is much higher than the €60.88 million which Barca took in from their club socios in 2018-19, of which just over €40 million was for season tickets. Overall, it means that the 900,000 one-off visitors who bought a ticket for just one game are more valuable to Barca financially than their 110,000 socio members, who are very unlikely to buy a new shirt every time they visit the stadium.

Maybe not that many socios would decide against renewing were Messi to leave but how many of the day-trippers making a once-in-a-lifetime pilgrimage might decide to change their destination should their favourite player now be performing elsewhere?

Barca’s kit supplier deal with Nike is not immediately under threat should Messi leave. Running from 2018-19 until 2025-26, it is worth around €155 million a year to the club — money that became more important than ever when other revenue streams shut down due to COVID-19. With Messi being an Adidas player and Barca themselves having taken a lot of their merchandising in-house in recent seasons, Nike “will not be that worried” by this week’s events, says Menchen.

A recent survey had Barcelona ranked fourth in the world when it comes to shirt sales, with just under two million sold. By contrast Real Madrid — even after Cristiano Ronaldo had left — sold just over three million. Top of the pile were Manchester United with 3.25 million, even during a 2018-19 season in which they finished sixth in the Premier League and were trophyless for a second consecutive year. More than anything, this suggests that Barca were not making the best use of having Messi in their team when it came to selling shirts, so would drop even further down the rankings without him.

 

[VanKenny]

So in short, Messi is both the player that brings the most revenue to the club and the player that by far performs the best of the club (has more MOTM's than the rest of the team combined) and people still make him seem like he's the bad guy.

Not only is he expected to dribble past entire defenses and score against elite defenses even when his own team has conceded goals due to stupid defensive mistakes (like against Liverpool), but he is also expected to cut his salary in order to let Barcelona's board (who are as corrupt as can be) have more cash in hand so they can waste it in stupid and sketchy signings.



There has never been a player in history that has been held to the standards that Messi is.

 

[Someone]

Of course he deserves every bit of the money he earns. Barcelona owe him huge for what he has achieved for the club on the pitch, off field revenue and establishing their image and reputation as a club.

This is a club which had won 1 European cup in their history. He won them 3 and had some part to play in a 4th. That's the same as United's entire European legacy and largely down to one player. No matter how good Xavi and Iniesta were they wouldn't have been nearly as successful as a team without this guy. These achievements are difficult to appreciate owing to them being recent events. If Barcelona don't win another CL for the next 10 years(which is entirely plausible) maybe people will begin to comprehend the magnitude of Messi's contributions.

Whatever he earns is already justified by his footballing achievements. But on top of that he helps the club earn shitloads of money off of his name. There are intangible factors like how much he helped boost Barcelona's youth academy credentials, how important he was to the evolution of a style of football that has seen the the game change during his career. And he will continue to make the club money after he's gone, he will continue to inspire millions of kids who have watched him play. There will be generations of kids who will idolise him and want to play for Barcelona. It's impossible to put a price on the impact he has had on football and on that club. The closest analogy someone has come up with so far is SAF with United. But Messi has clearly been more influential to his club, won more during his time and his long term impact will definitely be more significant.

He's the best player of all time, but he wasn't the only reason behind their success, they had a great generation of absolutely world class players, without them barcelona wouldn't have won anything. That's why they're struggling now, and that's why he wasn't able to achieve much with Argentina.

Football clubs just don't make the kind of money that justifies that type of contract. But why would he care.

 

[littleman]

Barca wasn’t forced to make him this deal

Let’s not pretend Messi bullied Barca on this

 

[RedRonaldo]

You are insanely wrong on those points. Griezmann was far bigger than any of those players mentioned. I don't think Haaland or Mbappe would turn down a chance playing at Barca because of Messi or his wages.

I am afraid Barca couldn’t to afford Neymar and Mbappe anymore, even PSG is willing to sell at 50% cut price.

Also, Lukaku scored more goals for us (42 goals in 96 games) than Griezmann for Barca (25 goals in 76 games). And apart from their poor display, they both won feck all for United/Barca.

So there you go, totally wrong in both.

 

[Harry190]

You are insanely wrong on those points. Griezmann was far bigger than any of those players mentioned. I don't think Haaland or Mbappe would turn down a chance playing at Barca because of Messi or his wages.

If there's no money, it's all moot.

As an aside, it really doesn't matter what Messi gets paid. He is Barcelona. He is 70% responsible for the team's success.

 

[MackRobinson]

lakers spent a TON of money on Kobe and Shaq. They had the highest payroll in the nba. Shaq made 23 million in 2003 when the salary cap was just 43.5 million that year. The lakers spent well over half their salary cap on just two players. And was it worth it? Of course

could the bulls have made more profit if they paid Jordan less? Of course but it’s a dumb argument because Jordan wasn’t taking less. Hell, if anything he was still underpaid considering the revenue he brought to Chicago. Chicago hasn’t won a title in ages but they did everything right with Jordan. The last dance documentary was still a massive hit. When you get a player like a Jordan or a Messi you
Max it out as much as you can. Phil Jackson is an amazing coach but even he fell off a cliff when the players weren’t as good judging by his final seasons with the lakers and his piss poor job with the Knicks. Coaches are great but there’s a reason why the players always make far more money. The fans come to see the players not the coaches. Messi accounts for over 30% of Barca’s revenue, it they still make nearly a third of a billion in euros PROFIT then it is absolutely worth it to give him that money. Giving poor contracts to players who don’t perform nearly as well is the issue

Basketball is different. In the NBA, squad depth is less important and contracts are transferrable. For this and other reasons, there is less inherent risk in large NBA contracts than in football contracts.

 

[RedRonaldo]

Please read the athletic article if you can



from the athletic:

Then there is the income that Barca get from merchandising and match day each year. The club’s most recent accounts are from the 2018-19 season, before the COVID-19 crisis hit. That year saw them earn €60 million from merchandising, including replica jersey sales, and €93.7 million from match days — including tickets and hospitality in the stadium’s VIP areas.

“Barca have to look at all their business activities and calculate how much they will lose by not having Lionel Messi in their squad,” Menchen said. “Of the €60 million they gain each year from merchandising, how many are jerseys with Messi’s name on them? Or how many are jerseys without a name on the back that people have bought as they come to the Nou Camp for the unique experience of watching a Barca team featuring the best player in the world?”

That is again difficult to know but Barca’s official 2018-19 accounts do give a breakdown between money that comes into the club from members (socios) and from one-off ticket buyers for each game.

Barca received €71.6 million from “normal” ticket sales for games, which was up 17.6 per cent on the previous year, when visitor numbers to the Catalan capital were affected by a terrorist attack in August 2017. They also took in €22 million from VIP and hospitality, a rise of 16 per cent on 2017-18, with Barca themselves claiming that more than 250 companies brought over 35,000 guests to the stadium to see games. Each “normal” year, they sell 900,000 tickets for games and 15,000 VIP packages.

This combined €93.6 million from match days is much higher than the €60.88 million which Barca took in from their club socios in 2018-19, of which just over €40 million was for season tickets. Overall, it means that the 900,000 one-off visitors who bought a ticket for just one game are more valuable to Barca financially than their 110,000 socio members, who are very unlikely to buy a new shirt every time they visit the stadium.

Maybe not that many socios would decide against renewing were Messi to leave but how many of the day-trippers making a once-in-a-lifetime pilgrimage might decide to change their destination should their favourite player now be performing elsewhere?

Barca’s kit supplier deal with Nike is not immediately under threat should Messi leave. Running from 2018-19 until 2025-26, it is worth around €155 million a year to the club — money that became more important than ever when other revenue streams shut down due to COVID-19. With Messi being an Adidas player and Barca themselves having taken a lot of their merchandising in-house in recent seasons, Nike “will not be that worried” by this week’s events, says Menchen.

A recent survey had Barcelona ranked fourth in the world when it comes to shirt sales, with just under two million sold. By contrast Real Madrid — even after Cristiano Ronaldo had left — sold just over three million. Top of the pile were Manchester United with 3.25 million, even during a 2018-19 season in which they finished sixth in the Premier League and were trophyless for a second consecutive year. More than anything, this suggests that Barca were not making the best use of having Messi in their team when it came to selling shirts, so would drop even further down the rankings without him.

I think it’s wrong to assume that those who bought Barca jersey with Messi name on it, would all just stop buying Barca jersey should Messi leave. For example I used to only buy Cantona jersey back in his playing days, but after Cantona retired, it didn’t just stop me from buying other Man Utd jersey, I would still buy Giggs/Scholes/Beckham etc and then Ronaldo, Rooney, Ruud, RVP etc. even they had all left/retired, fans would still keep buying Pogba/Rashford/Bruno ones etc. a

But sure it may still affect some of those who are purely Messi fans with absolutely no support/interest of following Barca.

Point being, fans would always prefer buy the jersey of their favourite player at the club they support (if I support Barca of course I would buy Messi jersey rather than Dembele). After such player left, they would find another favourite ones to buy. Some of them would just stop buying if they didn’t support the club as much, or all of the remaining players are just some hopeless deadwood not worth buying at all.

 

[Galactic]

Why not? He is worth it really. No doubt about it. He is Barca.

 

[alexthelion]

Yes? He’s almost unanimously seen as the greatest player in history let alone Barcelona.

Only by those who've never seen anyone pre 2000.

 

[Daysleeper]

Only by those who've never seen anyone pre 2000.

bs

https://www.listerious.com/quotes-on-messi-by-legends/

 

[Daysleeper]

I am afraid Barca couldn’t to afford Neymar and Mbappe anymore, even PSG is willing to sell at 50% cut price.

Also, Lukaku scored more goals for us (42 goals in 96 games) than Griezmann for Barca (25 goals in 76 games). And apart from their poor display, they both won feck all for United/Barca.

So there you go, totally wrong in both.

no, you’re completely wrong.

griezmann is a much much bigger player than lukaku which is my point. Barca has no issue attracting star players. Lukaku is a second tier player. If Barca clear salary they can afford anyone but there is a lot of bad contracts they’d need to offload. The concept that Barca won’t be able
To attract elite players anymore is laughable. They’ll well be in the mix for haaland once the elder players leave

 

[Daysleeper]

Basketball is different. In the NBA, squad depth is less important and contracts are transferrable. For this and other reasons, there is less inherent risk in large NBA contracts than in football contracts.

Squad depth is absolutely important you’ll often need to go 8 deep especially with load management being more popular than ever now. Basketball has a salary cap, if a player takes up too much of it it doesn’t matter how rich you are unless you want to go into luxury tax you can’t spend more. In football different teams have different thresholds. It’s easier for united to survive while handing out terrible contracts than it is for burnley. And the point of the argument was that massive performing players do take up a ton of salary costs and a big chunk of revenue. Shaq and Kobe taking up 60% of the laker wages is normal. Messi deserves his contract as well

 

[Daysleeper]

I think it’s wrong to assume that those who bought Barca jersey with Messi name on it, would all just stop buying Barca jersey should Messi leave. For example I used to only buy Cantona jersey back in his playing days, but after Cantona retired, it didn’t just stop me from buying other Man Utd jersey, I would still buy Giggs/Scholes/Beckham etc and then Ronaldo, Rooney, Ruud, RVP etc. even they had all left/retired, fans would still keep buying Pogba/Rashford/Bruno ones etc. a

But sure it may still affect some of those who are purely Messi fans with absolutely no support/interest of following Barca.

Point being, fans would always prefer buy the jersey of their favourite player at the club they support (if I support Barca of course I would buy Messi jersey rather than Dembele). After such player left, they would find another favourite ones to buy. Some of them would just stop buying if they didn’t support the club as much, or all of the remaining players are just some hopeless deadwood not worth buying at all.

you underestimate how much Messi merchandise is sold to tourists and very casual fans who just want a glimpse of him. I hear you in that I’m the same way. If Messi left I usually wear a no name on the back jersey anyway but if I didn’t I’d just get another players jersey from Barca. But there’s a LOT of casual fans who visit Barcelona and get something Messi related as memento. They only watch a handful of football matches a year and grab something while on vacation. This is where the drop off will hurt the most

 

[Tom Cato]

Why are people giving Messi grief for this contract? Barcelona are the ones that offered it to him.

The club chose this investment to keep the arguably best player in history at the club for his career. The income that Messi has helped generate for Barcelona over the course of his career dwarfs his contract, so there's also that.

The contract is enormous and bloated beyond belief, but at some point you really have to blame the financial analysts at Barcelona for giving the go ahead for such a contract to even exist.

 

[fps]

None of this would be an issue if the club was winning big. It’s not and that is due to recruitment.

 

[shahzy]

Dumb take. We use our other money on terrible contracts, Messi has absolutely been worth it. And if you read the athletic article I posted a page back they break down why his contract is definitely worth it.

So your defense to that contract is your boards inability to function correctly? Kinda proving that the contract itself was a bit stupid don't you think. So much so that your club is completely screwed for a few years now as they recover financially when Messi does leave

 

[NotThatSoph]

Please read the athletic article if you can



from the athletic:

Then there is the income that Barca get from merchandising and match day each year. The club’s most recent accounts are from the 2018-19 season, before the COVID-19 crisis hit. That year saw them earn €60 million from merchandising, including replica jersey sales, and €93.7 million from match days — including tickets and hospitality in the stadium’s VIP areas.

“Barca have to look at all their business activities and calculate how much they will lose by not having Lionel Messi in their squad,” Menchen said. “Of the €60 million they gain each year from merchandising, how many are jerseys with Messi’s name on them? Or how many are jerseys without a name on the back that people have bought as they come to the Nou Camp for the unique experience of watching a Barca team featuring the best player in the world?”

That is again difficult to know but Barca’s official 2018-19 accounts do give a breakdown between money that comes into the club from members (socios) and from one-off ticket buyers for each game.

Barca received €71.6 million from “normal” ticket sales for games, which was up 17.6 per cent on the previous year, when visitor numbers to the Catalan capital were affected by a terrorist attack in August 2017. They also took in €22 million from VIP and hospitality, a rise of 16 per cent on 2017-18, with Barca themselves claiming that more than 250 companies brought over 35,000 guests to the stadium to see games. Each “normal” year, they sell 900,000 tickets for games and 15,000 VIP packages.

This combined €93.6 million from match days is much higher than the €60.88 million which Barca took in from their club socios in 2018-19, of which just over €40 million was for season tickets. Overall, it means that the 900,000 one-off visitors who bought a ticket for just one game are more valuable to Barca financially than their 110,000 socio members, who are very unlikely to buy a new shirt every time they visit the stadium.

Maybe not that many socios would decide against renewing were Messi to leave but how many of the day-trippers making a once-in-a-lifetime pilgrimage might decide to change their destination should their favourite player now be performing elsewhere?

Barca’s kit supplier deal with Nike is not immediately under threat should Messi leave. Running from 2018-19 until 2025-26, it is worth around €155 million a year to the club — money that became more important than ever when other revenue streams shut down due to COVID-19. With Messi being an Adidas player and Barca themselves having taken a lot of their merchandising in-house in recent seasons, Nike “will not be that worried” by this week’s events, says Menchen.

A recent survey had Barcelona ranked fourth in the world when it comes to shirt sales, with just under two million sold. By contrast Real Madrid — even after Cristiano Ronaldo had left — sold just over three million. Top of the pile were Manchester United with 3.25 million, even during a 2018-19 season in which they finished sixth in the Premier League and were trophyless for a second consecutive year. More than anything, this suggests that Barca were not making the best use of having Messi in their team when it came to selling shirts, so would drop even further down the rankings without him.

Right, lets look at the actual numbers mentioned.

- They mention that Barca have to look at how many jerseys have Messi's name on them, without mentioning the fact that only the shirts sold with Messi's name on them that wouldn't have been sold with another player's name on them actually count for a calculation like this. This is a big red flag, and if they haven't taken this super obvious point into account then the whole process is very dubious in my opinion. Unboubtedly Barcelona sells more shirts with Messi than without, but how big is this factor as a share of Messi shirts sold? I don't know.

- They mention the 17.6 % growth in ticket sales, but also that this was on the back of lower visitors due to a terrorist attack. Why did they mention this growth then, and did they calculate the growth in Messi's favour when clearly there were very relevant outside forces at play as well? How much of the growth can be attributed to the continuing growth of football at large? Here you'd compare the growth with other teams.