Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
At the time he was our star striker and we didn't have RvP. United are not stupid and will have done so on the basis of the value he added to the team for £250,000 odd a week. CL football covers his salary and more. His commercial appeal at home and abroad is probably worth more than his salary/week.
I'm pretty sure that Real Madrid have said on a number of occasions that they made their money back on Ronaldos transfer fee in the first year alone.
I think you might be underestimating how much City would have loved to sign Uniteds talismanic striker at the time. It would have signalled a shift in power and their ability to steal 2 star strikers from a rival in every sense of the word. He again would have held massive appeal to the marketing and sponsorship departments at City.
You're massively over estimating any single players draw. Rooney was worth 30+% of Utd shirt sales, then RVP joined and shops were selling closero to 50% RVP shirts and 6% Rooney shirts. The simple fact is the club is the draw and WHOEVER is the "main" player ends up being the most popular, the main player changed and in an instant Rooney was relegated to runner up in terms of popularity at the club.
When Ronaldo signed was around the time Real/Barca were doing their tv contracts and around the years when shirt sponsorship was going from 15mil a year to 30mil a year, with kit sponsors, and training kit sponsors, and condom sponsors,etc, etc. Those deals would have been done anyway regardless, Ronaldo more than most might boost those deals a bit more than another star, but not hugely, no whay 80millions worth in the first year. If they hadn't got him for 80mil they would have bought someone else for 60mil and another 20mil player. AFAIK Real's turnover is around 500mil now, it was always high, it in no way went up 80mil, and in no way did their profits increase 80mil(or simply break even after spending 80mil) because they signed Ronaldo, its twaddle. Almost everything you hear from the "presidents" at Barca and Real is, well they are politicians and as such you can know everything they say is rubbish.
Its like saying after Arsenal FINALLY got a decent shirt sponsorship deal that it was because of Giroud, or Santos, or Gervinho... people can say what they want, doesn't make it true. We got a massive increase in sponsorship and tv money and a higher up could come out next year and say "selling RVP and buying Giroud led to a 50million revenue increase, Giroud has paid us back 3 times over".... still nonsense.
Fact is Rooney is not worth 250k a week, if Utd can cover the wages is utterly irrelevant to the discussion here. The fact is almost certainly Rooney was going nowhere and you caved in to a greedy **** who thinks he's better than he is. At worst you would have loaded a lazy overpaid, overated player onto City making it harder for them to fit in another world class talent, while Utd could have gone and bought, Falcao or whoever else with the money from Rooney's sale.
There is always a great player available and usually great deals on everything from backup to starters, giving Rooney 250k a week contract because he threatened to leave was bad in every possible way. He simply isn't worth that much, and there are better players available, and giving in to player demands when they make threats is just not good as it encourages everyone else to. Pogba made demands and ended up leaving, Welbeck thought he could demand 85k a week and Utd caved to that one as well.
Perhaps if Utd told Rooney where to shove it, Welbeck would be on 40k a week right now.