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.
I believe you're making some very valid arguments. Especially the part with the numbers suggesting Barca's revenue would drop to Tottenham levels got me reconsidering. However, I still think there are some dynamics you're missing.
According to the Deloitte Football Money League, Barca generated 690m € in 2019 (#2 behind Real Madrid (750m) and ahead of United (666m). If Messi accounted for 30% of that revenue, this would mean he generated 207m €. The leak suggests Messi earns max. 555m € over the course of 5 years. Assuming he gets paid the full sum, this would mean roughly 111m € per year.
Now, if you'd subtract those 207m from the overall revenue of 690m, you'd be at 483m €. This would mean Barca would drop to #8, between Arsenal (439) and Chelsea (506).
This seems very harsh. Even without Messi, Barca should comfortably outperform those clubs. However, what you're not considering is the annual budget of 111m € reserved for Messi's wages. Basically, you assume they'd spent those 111m € on something else but get nothing in return. Just by considering a terrible return on investment of 100% (revenues equal costs), it would elevate Barca to 594m €, earning them the 4th spot between Bayern (629) and City (568). Assuming that they can invest those 111m € more profitably, they probably even beat Bayern for 3rd - even without him.
This seems very reasonable to me and is more in line with the shirt sales figures you posted above. After all, Barcelona was comfortably behind Real Madrid and Manchester United in pre-Messi days.
So the key are opportunity costs. If Messi generates 207m and costs 111m, he promises an return on investment of 186%. That's gigantic. Barca would have a hard time finding another investment opportunity in which they can dump 111m € and get 207m out of it. Moreover, the conditions in terms of scheduling of payments and returns are very favorable for them. In many scenarios a company invests such sums at the start of a project and hope to generate a profit on their investments over the course of multiple years. Those 111m € on the other hand are largely due on a monthly basis and the returns are flowing in week after week after week. In cash flow context, they don't really have to go into "prepayment". Especially regarding things like the liquidity, this is an immense advantage. If they'd sign a player for 80m and pay him 30m over 3 years, it would strain their liquidity much more.
This means he's an incredible cash cow for them. One they should milk for as long as possible. Considering those numbers it even makes sense that they kept him against his will.
And what's also to consider: Barca's brand grew incredibly during Messi's career. They got to where they are because they capitalized on having one of the best players in history at their club for 15 years. United's growth IMO is much more sustainable because the philosophy "nobody is greater than the club" is ingrained much more deeply. I believe a huge part of Barcelona's international following actually consists of Messi fans. This cult is also somewhat representative of their club philosophy. They always admired individuals and usually had this one star player who outshone everybody else: Cruyff, Maradona, Laudrup, Ronaldo, Rivaldo, Romario, Ronaldinho, Messi.
I have read the article and I will say it again. Attributing an arbitrary figure as the amount of Money X player has brought in is foolish. Even more foolish when the said player has been there 15 years.
Saying that, there is no doubt Messi has had an impact on Barca's value. He is arguably the GOAT. For me, this is all about finance and accounting.
€550,000,000 over four years is beyond what is reasonable imo. Not because Messi isn't worth it but because it is quite obvious a club that looks to live within its means can simply not afford it.
Yes, you can't say Messi's contract has cratered Barca but is is a contributing factor. Messi is a big reason why the others earn such inflated amounts.
I believe the above also covers your points, so feel free to address
