- This topic has 19 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
India’s barefoot world cup withdrawal.
The real reason India did not participate in the 1950 world cup was because of the cost of travelling and the IFA valued the Olympics more important. Nothing to do with Fifa banning them playing barefoot.
Shirt sales contribute to transfer fee.
Shirt sales play little part in what a club gets in return. The companies who create the shirts do. Clubs usually get about 10-15% from the shirt sales money.
Denis Law relegated Manchester United
No matter what result Manchester United got that day, they were going down anyway.
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
net spend with transfers
why can teams only use the money they generate from player sales to buy more players? football clubs have endless streams of income.
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Financial Fairplay Rules? They’re a myth for sure…. π
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Footballers are gods…
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Shirt sales play a major part in transfer fees, the bigger the club the more shirts they sell, the greater the 85-90% the manufacturer gets is worth, thatβs why the top teams get Β£40-60m a season from Nike/Adidas and Scunthorpe donβt.
As for Dennis Law,he did actually play more than the one game for Man City, their gains for the last couple of months of the season was Man Unitedβs loss, the effect was cumulative.
As for India, the expense side is incorrect as the organisers wanted India there as the sole Asian representatives, and were willing to pay most of their expenses, however they deemed the Olympics more important as you say and concentrated on that.
So in summary, not quite up to Meat Loafβs standards as he got two out of three, and that ainβt bad….Pagan
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Pagan
Shirt sales bring very little income for clubs when fans claim such such shirt sales means the club will make up for the fee. For example United sold 2m shirts with Pogba on the back, United only get a small percentage of that. You’re right if a club sells more shirts then the more sponsor money they will get next time round. Using the Pogba example, 2m shirts were sold with his name on the back, that is roughly 140m, the club only gets 14m from that, Adidas get the rest. 14m does not obviously repay the 90m transfer fee.
In regards to Denis Law, it has nothing to do with how much he helped City. It is to do with the goal he scored against United on the final day of the season not relegating them. United were relegated regardless of the result on that day.
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
How much a season do Adidas pay Manchester United a season to wear their kit, somewhere between Β£50 and Β£60 million, or doesnβt that count, they wouldnβt spend that amount if they couldnβt recoup it in shirt sales.
The amount of shirts you sell is directly linked to the amount a kit manufacturer will pay you to wear it.
Dennis Law is half myth, but had he stayed at the red half of Manchester they may not have gone down,l.
Still not up to old Meatyβs standard…. Pagan
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Pagan-
I think you’re missing the point. Paying a club x amount a year for a sponsorship deal is different to fans saying the club will recoup the money from shirt sales after spending an atrocious amount. There is a difference between how much a club makes from a sponsorship deal to how much they make from selling shirts.
The Law goal is not half a myth because it does not say what may have happened if he stayed and has nothing to do with that, the myth has nothing to do with that. It is about if his goal that he scored that day sent United down, which it didn’t, that is the myth.
What may have happened if Law did not join City, stayed or moved to someone else other than City is a whole different debate.
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
My myth in 1992 that led me to embarrassing myself after losing some kind of a sporting event at secondary school: The wind was blowing in the wrong direction – I remind a tiny bit of myself in Jose! “The Referee was Man Of The Match” hahaha π π
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
“Next Year will be OUR year” π π
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Next youβll be telling me that it a myth that kit manufacturers donβt influence who teams buy, and as such are willing to include a higher percentage of shirt sales with that name on. And itβs s myth that they will contribute to the transfer and increase the amount they sponsor the club by.
15% of the best part of 2 million shirts a season is still a awful lot of money…Pagan
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Sean, predicting Liverpool will lose every football match could be a myth – I’ve been on football message boards for 10 years and it’s the same old story hahaha. π
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Pagan, don’t have the faintest idea what you’re talking about.
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Pagan-
Would 15% cover the transfer fee and would the club make the money back from the transfer fee? That is the myth some fans are led to believe is true.
United sold just over 2m Shirts with Pogba’s name on it. United made 21m from them sales if 15% is accurate. How far is that from 89m.
The myth is fans saying selling shirts pays for transfer fees, when it is further from the truth. The only company that truly benefits high number of shirt sales is Adidas or any other kit manufacturer, not the club, a misconception made by fans. Only gods know how who kit manufacturers tells a club to buy has got to do with this.
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Β£21m in shirt sales, in his first season, and then thereβs the shirt sales for the remainder of his contract…. Pagan
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Utd will not revive 15% of the money from shirt sales. They have to sell a certain amount first – which is a huge amount to begin with before any bonus kicks in.
Complete myth that shirt sales covers transfer fee.
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Well said Alfie.
Pagan-
So United will have to sell at least 10m shirts with Pogba’s name on it in order to get the money back if the 10-15% agreement is true. How realistic is that target considering they sold just over 2m in 18 months, along with players like Sanchez joining the club.
I have never seen a club official come out and say we have recouped the transfer fee by selling x amount of shirts.
People have come out and said it is 1 of the biggest myths in football, you obviously think otherwise. You’re entitled to your opinion.
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
Go back to your first comment, contribute is the word you used, I think Β£21m is quite a contribution….Pagan
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
And I elaborated what I meant further.
_____________________________
React below π
*hover/click on the number below the reaction to see who reacted
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.