Jump to content
Join Talk Chelsea and log in to join the CFC discussion! ×

Lionel Messi

Myself

By Myself,
in Transfer Archives

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Starman60

Starman60 1,343

Posted
Posted

Much and all as I admire Messi and his unbelievable talent, I do not want him at Chelsea. Yes I know, you all think I'm nuts. But if you spend 200 million on a player and pay him 300 thousand a week I think that what you end up with is a ruined club. Messi would be "the star man", who would command a starting place every game no matter who the manager was.Other players would become disillusioned with the set-up as they would always feel second best.

What we have now at Chelsea is a "team", with no player any bigger than his team mates. I feel Messi would totally destroy this.Any player who has such a major influence in who the manager is , or should be, or who plays and who doesn't, is to me, a danger to the club. So lets steer clear of this guy.

Anyway...........I dont think we need him :cry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rantdeville

rantdeville 195

Posted
Posted

Much and all as I admire Messi and his unbelievable talent, I do not want him at Chelsea. Yes I know, you all think I'm nuts. But if you spend 200 million on a player and pay him 300 thousand a week I think that what you end up with is a ruined club. Messi would be "the star man", who would command a starting place every game no matter who the manager was.Other players would become disillusioned with the set-up as they would always feel second best.

What we have now at Chelsea is a "team", with no player any bigger than his team mates. I feel Messi would totally destroy this.Any player who has such a major influence in who the manager is , or should be, or who plays and who doesn't, is to me, a danger to the club. So lets steer clear of this guy.

Anyway...........I dont think we need him :cry:

I don't think you're as alone in this as you may think. I think I'm more against a purchase of this magnitude in principle than anything else...and the stigma attached to it.

But it just doesn't make sense for the board to allocate the funds for this. It seems like the club have finally begun to dispel of the buy-first-think-later image that identified us over the course of the past decade. It took a serious and much maligned--though innovative--financial strategy from the board in utilizing the loan market to its potential. It seems as though they've reeled in spending in a lot of different areas of business and finally the numbers have begun to back it all up. It was always going to be a long-term strategy, and I think we're only 2-3 years into it. Just seems early to bail on something that has barely begun to come to fruition.

I mean look back, even the attitudes of the supporters has changed. For the most part, the signings we demand are infinitely more pragmatic than ever before. Just flip through some of the transfer pages from only 3 years ago. People were calling for the signings of every top tier athlete in the game, regardless of the feasibility. No fault of their own I think, not entirely at least. Our attitudes were indicative of the club's spending habits.

I digress, anyways. On the slightest of chances that the moons align, with the club's best intentions at heart he would be a signing for the ages. Would be altogether more awesome however, if we built a team and did it sustainably.

sustainable...who likes a tree-hugger anyways :halo:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Muzchap

Muzchap 8,966

Posted
Posted

If we get him - and he performs, we will never question it again.

However - he does go missing in games against us and in the WC - could he handle the transfer? I'm not so sure - so as its a massive fucking gamble - I'm out :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
supporter

supporter 3,088

Posted
Posted

I think there is a very important aspect some're not taking into account: get when you sign a player like Leo Messi you do not pay money, YOU WIN MONEY. That's the difference. Some forum members say that "I prefer fanciest (£ 155.98 million / € 200 million) in Pogba, Varane, Reus and not spend on Messi". I understand this, and is a logical argument, but I think it is not that simple.

For example, if we signed him for £ 15.60 million (€ 20 million), how much money we would recover that amount of money ?. I refer to what would generate advertising revenue in the signing Varane? How we would recover with this operation and how much money would win after making his move ?. I am sure you hardly would recover those £ 15.60 million (€ 20 million) in advertising revenue.

I repeat, do not talk about sports performance, because I'm sure that both Reus, Pogba and Varane they would give us a great athletic performance, but focusing on its economic performance if we invest money in them we never will recover. But if we signed him to Messi, I am sure that not only would recover the amount of money invested, but it also would win money, a lot of money.

I'll give you an example: Real Madrid signed in 2009 two football stars like Cristiano Ronaldo and Kaka. Cristiano Ronaldo was a big success in sport aspects, but Kaka was an absolute failure in sport aspects. Instead he was in the Real Madrid from 2009 to 2013. Why? For Kaka is a machine to generate / produce money. His sports performance was horrible, but Real Madrid kept him on your team because every year they make much money with Kaka although the day was all injured or playing poorly.

The main reason for Real Madrid to keep it in their team was the money he generated each year. I am going to put a link to a website of a Spanish economic newspaper, in which they explained in 2009 that Kaka would generate £ 701.91 million (€ 900 million) in over seven years at Real Madrid. If we consider that football teams will keep 50 % percent of what their players generate publicity, they estimated that Real Madrid would gain 450 million (€ 450 million) in seven years with the signing of Kaka. But Kaka was alone in the Real Madrid 4 and a half years, so that Real Madrid Kaka won with a total of £ 175.48 million (€ 225 million) on advertising in four and a half years and Real Madrid Kaka payment in 2009 for the amount of £ 50.69 million (€ 65 million) for him.

In English. http://translate.google.es/translate?hl=es&sl=es&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eleconomista.es%2Fempresas-finanzas%2Fnoticias%2F1301834%2F06%2F09%2FComo-puede-rentabilizar-el-Madrid-el-fichaje-de-Kaka-por-65-millones-.html

In Spanish. http://www.eleconomista.es/empresas-finanzas/noticias/1301834/06/09/Como-puede-rentabilizar-el-Madrid-el-fichaje-de-Kaka-por-65-millones-.html#.Kku83jrEAgXRPag

In summary.

Signing of Kaka. £ 50.69 million (€ 65 million).

Economic benefits per year for Real Madrid (four and a half years ). £ 39.00 million (€ 50 million).

Total advertising revenue. £ 175.48 million (€ 225 million).

Total final benefit. £ 124.78 million (€ 160 million) profit.

Economically, the signing of Kaka to Real Madrid was a success.

I give you another example. Cristiano Ronaldo cost the Real Madrid £ 74.09 million (€ 95 million). Cristiano Ronaldo has been a success for Real Madrid both in economic terms and in sports terms. Cristiano Ronaldo is a player who generates much more money compared to Kaka. In another economic study the same economic newspaper says Cristiano Ronaldo generates £ 93.59 million (€ 120 million) per year, of which Real Madrid won £ 46.79 million (€ 60 million) each year. Obviously, Critiano Ronaldo is a player which generates much more money than Kaka. He has already six seasons at Real Madrid.

In summary.

Signing of Cristiano Ronaldo. £ 74.09 million (€ 95 million).

Economic benefits per year for Real Madrid (four and a half years). £ 46.79 million (€ 60 million).


Total advertising revenue. £ 280.76 million (€ 360 million).

Total final benefit. £ 230.07 million profit (€ 295 million).

Economically, also the signing of Cristiano Ronaldo to Real Madrid was a another success.

Finally, I give a third example. When the playoffs for the classification of to World Cup was played in 2009, Cristiano Ronaldo was injured, but Real Madrid let him to force him to play the playoffs with Portugal. Why? Because Real Madrid won, only with the participation of Cristiano Ronaldo in to World Cup 2010, over £ 77.99 million (€ 100 million) in advertising revenue through various agreements with several companies. In short, regardless of the £ 46.79 million (€ 60 million) that Real Madrid won the year Cristiano Ronaldo, they have been achieving certain advertising deals like these £ 77.99 million (€ 100 million) Cristiano Ronaldo go to to World Cup 2010. And many others which will give Real Madrid a lot of money each year just to have Cristiano Ronaldo in your team.

Only with the participation of Cristiano Ronaldo in to World Cup economically Real Madrid won the amount of £ 77.99 million (€ 100 million) with the economic benefits by advertising .

What I pretend to say is that if we signed to Messi, apart from their sports performance (which I think would be spectacular, Messi Mourinho would become the best player in history no one can doubt) Also Messi would give us a spectacular economic performance, possibly the best business in the history of football. If Kaka gave Real Madrid annually to the amount of £ 39.00 million (€ 50 million) in advertising ingress and if Cristiano Ronaldo gives Real Madrid annually to the amount of £ 46.79 million (€ 60 million) euros in advertising revenue ... How many money would give us each year to us the signing of Messi in advertising revenue ?.

I believe that, as a minimum, Messi would generate in the same amount of money (£ 46.79 million (€ 60 million)) than the amount of money generated each year Cristiano Ronaldo by advertising revenue. Messi will meet this year 28 years. If he were with us at Chelsea at least six years (until 34 years fulfilled), we would win £ 280.76 million (€ 360 million) for advertising revenue in those years.

Sign a player like Kaka, Cristiano Ronaldo or Messi is not only a sports signing, is also a BIG BUSINESS.

I apologize to all forum members for the large extension of my message I wrote (was very long, I'm sorry), but I think this example may be interesting. And I apologize to everyone for my English, it's very confusing.

I hope for you it will be interesting.

Regards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RoyalBlues

RoyalBlues 4,050

Posted
Posted

If we get him - and he performs, we will never question it again.

However - he does go missing in games against us and in the WC - could he handle the transfer? I'm not so sure - so as its a massive fucking gamble - I'm out :)

If Torres with only 50m transfer get that huge pressure, imagine Messi with 200m. I would not be surprised if he is 'flop' in here, if we do sign him. The whole world pressure in one man shoulder is too heavy for anyone.

At Barcelona he is playing without pressure this whole time. While playing for Argentina, when he get the pressure from his nation, he is become a little bit 'nervous', and most of the time couldn't perform his best. If he come here, it will be much bigger pressure than 'just that'.

In other words, if we do sign Messi somehow, yes he is a marketing magnet, but no guarantee at all he will succeeded what he has done at Barca in here (different league, different team style of play, etc). Yup, it's a huge gamble, no matter from where you see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • 0 members are here!

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

talk chelse forums

We get it, advertisements are annoying!
Talk Chelsea relies on revenue to pay for hosting and upgrades. While we try to keep adverts as unobtrusive as possible, we need to run ad's to make sure we can stay online because over the years costs have become very high.

Could you please allow adverts on this website and help us by switching your ad blocker off.

KTBFFH
Thank You

Sure, let me in!
Enter