Tweet
...according to NewsNowQPR,worth £5.6m which equates to around £108k a week.If we are genuinely interested in him,will various sponsorships,merchandising etc be enough to cover this sort of outlay? Just asking.
-
-
How do we know? Only TF and Phil Beard could answer that, Im sure they wouldnt make a serious move unless they had worked out that we would profit from it.You should never underestimate the predictability of stupidity. -
Great reporting
Good to see the Sun are upto their usual high standard of reporting by calling Tony Fernandes a "billionaire"...You should never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.Comment
-
-
Cant even begin to imagine the sums that could be earned using the "QPR / Beckham" relationship in Malaysia alone. Big big money to be earned.Originally posted by Nodge70 View Post
Saying this though, IMO, theres no way we will be seeing Beckham in a QPR shirt. A bid made by TF, maybe. But it being succesful and him joining, no way.You should never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.Comment
-
Really Nodge ? Would you care to elaborate please ?
Sure we'd sell a fair few shirts, but enough to make more than £500k each month ?
Bearing in mind, presumambly Beckham would have a high percentage of image rights going into his sky rocket, not the Clubs.
I'm guessing, but even if we sold 10,000 shirts with his name on, that would be £500k - cost (peanuts admittedly), - Becks cut.
So even if we sold 20,000 shirts (more than our highest home gate for 30+ years, it would barely cover 2 months wages (assuming the quote is true of course !)
Our support base is not on a level with Man Ure, Spurs, so I'm wondering where else we might make it pay and turn a profit, without relying on TF and the Board ?Comment
-
Course we will reply on them; its their job to geenrate income and, using various paths in Malaysia, i have no doubt whatsoever we would be in the profit easily with Bekcham on board.Originally posted by QPR1976 View Post
As i mentioned before, our owners are very sucesful business men and no bid would be made for him unless they had strategies in place that they were sure would generate a profit.You should never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.Comment
-
Nodge think 1976 has a point - so many of these players demand to keep the lion's share or even all of their image rights (which incidentally are often channelled through off shore companies, as its not classed as earnings so they can get away without paying tax on it). Am not doubting you are right that it might be possible to gain money from it - eg the team's sponsorship would increase massively - but this is big, big money. Hard to justify on footballing terms I would have thought but perhaps the money men could find a way to make it stack up.Comment
-
How much do you think a sponsor (either naming partner for shirts/stadium or lower tier deals like official bookmakers, beer, bank, camera, car etc) would pay the club if David Beckham was on board? Huge amounts. Top level brands still fall over themselves to throw money at anything to do with David Beckham - and David Beckham back in the UK, in the most watched football competition in the world (EPL) - name your price. Shirt sales are a spot in the ocean for a club of our size, you're right - but even Madrid's shirt sales don't cover Kaka or Ronaldo's salary for a couple of months.
Image rights carry lower tax impact on both employer and employee so you never lose as much as any headline amount would seem and Beckham's image rights are spectacularly well handled by his people. You pay the image rights up front as part of the overall package and work out what the tax implications are, it's not as if you hive off portions of wages week by week or month by month. It's also not all about the images used (i.e. Beckham doesn't really promote ANYTHING in MLS or LA Galaxy kit - most of his image deals are completely seperate save adidas). You pay a lower image rights fee for brand association.
All about immediate brand value and the residual brand value when a player "like" Beckham would depart. The economics of signing a marquee player like Beckham work - it's the football side of things where you have more questions. I'm still not 100% convinced he'll come back to the UK - if he does they'll be a few clubs wanting his services. If it wasn't for the Olympics, I think he'd already have signed his extension or gone up to Vancouver.Last edited by Guest; 12-09-2011, 10:41 AM.Comment
-
Just hope "The QPR Film" fiasco doesn't jeopardise any R's bid for Beckham. From what I've seen of it,it would put me off if I were him.Comment
-
Agreed. Could put off a huge number of potential partnerships. I really hope it's pulled. If not, we'll need Amit, Tony and Phil to really turn on the charm.Originally posted by geejaybee View PostComment
-
-
Don't know why we would want a 36 year old over the hill under pants model anywayOriginally posted by geejaybee View PostComment
-
IMO theyll be able to work it perfectly to their favor. The film is before their ownership and therefore theyll use to show what an improvement they have made on the club, the whole "Knights in shining armour" approach will be used to highlight what task they had on their hands to take the club to where we are now from such a shambolic ownership regime.Originally posted by Nodge70 View PostYou should never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.Comment
-
You should never underestimate the predictability of stupidity.Comment
Comment