Soldato
Maybe it's a long game. Play him, take the heat, sell him in the summer.
Zouma - bit of a ****
- Thread starter fez
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,310
It's very simple - Adidas make money from the sale of merchandise with their name on it. This is why they pay to have their name on players' kit, or have the players wear their products.
If West Ham gets a bad rep for fielding an unpopular player, sales will go down, and if Adidas are sponsoring said player the value of their name also goes down through association. In that regard, they'd lose not only the sales that Zouma would bring, not even the sales that West Ham would bring, but all their merchandise sales would suffer because their name was associated with someone who delighted in beating up animals.
West Ham may have paid out a lot more than the £100k it cost Adidas to sponsor Zouma, but only because they hoped to make even more than that back as a result.
The minute Zouma's video went public, that £30m was effectively a write-off and dropping him to safeguard their good name (thus protecting their resulting income from their remaining players) is really their only option.
Because it's not about the money, it's about the name and the reputation - I'd never heard of Zouma before this thread... but I'd certainly heard of West Ham and Adidas.
In a year's time I doubt I'll even remember who Zouma was without having to review this thread... but I'll likely still remember that West Ham and Adidas were names once associated with some footballing **** that abused animals for a laugh.
Adidas may have dropped Zouma, but two of the club's other sponsors have pulled their funding, while another of their sponsors (Umbro, I believe) has spoken quite strongly on the matter which suggests they have enough clout to exert pressure and threaten with that alone.
It's different groups with money in the game, but it hinges on more than just money.
As mentioned, West Ham's money from Zouma is already lost to them. They stand to lose far more by keeping him around.
I honestly have no idea what you're talking about now. Please go back and look at the initial post of mine, which you replied to and let me know if you can figure out how any of this is relevant to it.
You commented on the fact that it's not just about money for sponsors but it is. Whether it's a sponsor or West Ham, they will look at what it will cost them to sack him or terminate any contract with him and they will look at what they stand to lose by standing by him. Adidas stand to lose next to nothing by dropping him so the potential reputational damage from standing by him, which will lead to commercial damage, means it makes financial sense to drop him. West Ham however stand to lose a huge amount from sacking him, far more than they'll lose in commercial revenue from standing by him and are therefore taking the decision to not sack him.
It's really simple and given that I have no idea what you're going to come out with next, I'll leave it here.
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Oct 2017
- Posts
- 1,221
I refuse to watch it. I can handle watching most things but not animals being abusedTo do it in front of your child, your brother film it and you both laugh and then post it online says worrying things about him. Of course I am going on what has been written about this video. MET say they aren't going to do anything, I hope the RSPCA will be knocking on his door later today.
As someone who owns 2 kittens I couldn't watch it either.
I'm glad the cats have been taken away from him, but I wish there was a harsher punishment.
He's not been banned from owning animals yet has he?
Not a chance, they just don't want to lose a valuable asset. Football clubs have as few morals as they think they can get away with.
Soldato
I think France are gearing up to get him when he returns.
Didier Deschamps, the French National coach was apoplectic when he saw the video, he strongly lambasted Zouma, and hinted that he might not pick him for the 2022 World Cup in November and December, but we’ll see.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,310
And yet you still reiterated what I said, albeit with greater focus on the subsequent financial, rather than the reputational aspect that governs the financials.
I said I have no idea what you're talking about because you began this debate by saying it wasn't all about money and then went on to explain why it was about money
Jesus Christ!
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,310
Like I said, money is a factor... but as I also said and you just reiterated - It's not ALL about money.I said I have no idea what you're talking about because you began this debate by saying it wasn't all about money and then went on to explain why it was about money
Seriously, what's so challenging about this?
Caporegime
Lol, you two are still at it I see
Like talking to a wall Rob. We've gone full circle from it's not about money to him explaining why it's about money. I'm off to bed.Lol, you two are still at it I see
Did you watch what Carragher said or just read a nonsense tweet? He wasn't defending him, he was speculating why he decided to drop out of the game today at the last minute.
Allegedly Zouma became unwell during the warm-up, maybe Moyes sent him for a CAT scan?
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 Sep 2013
- Posts
- 12,310
Yeah, sleep on it, and maybe decide whether you don't get it, or just don't want to get it?
Your posts are there for everybody to see but we're not going to go round in circles (literally with you) anymore and derail the thread.
Soldato
This is superb from Squires.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/ng-interactive/2022/feb/15/david-squires-on-kurt-zouma-west-ham
https://www.theguardian.com/football/ng-interactive/2022/feb/15/david-squires-on-kurt-zouma-west-ham
Yeah thats pretty hilarious. Last slide really got me.
Caporegime