The "How Can they Justify Beck's Pay?" thread

Re: The 'let's financially justify 4 yr/36m for Beckham' thread

good catch, fixed my post.

 

Re: The 'let's financially justify 4 yr/36m for Beckham' thread

It's a building block. A new step. It will raise the reputation of the league in the American sports audience. As someone else pointed out, the effect is almsot impossible to be measured, all the way down to kids now knowing that they can earn a good deal of money playing soccer in the US. This is an important step in upping the league's presence, and thus upping it's sponsorship revenue, attendance, etc. This will then have a positive impact on attracting more good players. We may get to a point where, while we will always have a salary cap, we could have 4 or 5 designated players per team, or what may be even better, we could simply raise the salary cap of the team, as well as the minimum wage salaries of players so the bottom end can stop working 2 jobs and just play soccer.

 

Re: The 'let's financially justify 4 yr/36m for Beckham' thread

You know what I have trouble justifying financially? I have trouble justifying the league staying at its current size, with its current fanbase, making the same amount of revenue off the same people. The ONLY way this league continues to prosper is to grow, and to grow we've got to attract new fans - new fans to come to games (for ticket/concession revenue), new fans to watch on TV (for ratings, and therefore tv contract revenue), new fans to buy into the league brand (for shirt & stadium sponsorship revenue).

The question should not be "why spend $36 mil on Becks", it should be "what else could you spend $36 mil on and get this much bang for your buck in the American sports landscape?" (oh, and by the way, if you come up with a good answer to my re-stated question, we should do that in addition, not instead of, getting Becks).

 

Re: The 'let's financially justify 4 yr/36m for Beckham' thread

Good point, but a couple of things. First, Al Ittihad probably will sell a few more shirts because of Figo.

Still, you are absolutely correct. If RM sold an additional 10 million Beckham shirts worldwide, then it does not stand to reason that LA can pencil in 10 million as well.

Still there are some differences. First, MLS is more and more becoming an exporting league. People do recognize that McBride, Convey, Dempsey, Wolff etc. not only came from MLS but were developed in MLS. The wealthy ME leagues simply import washed up stars.

That is significant for a couple of reasons. First, when SUM goes out to peddle the tv rights for Beckham games, they can sell the league as an up and coming league that produces some real talent. Second, given the summer schedule, it can be an attractive package for countries with winter leagues. For example, What better does Sky have to run on its 6 networks in July for the football crazy fan.

Same with asia. This feeds into shirt sales from the tv exposure that will likely be out there from this deal. Finally, Los Angeles is seen as a hip destination and something that people in other countries would wear for that reason, at least in comparison to a Figo Patch of Sand FC shirt.

 

Re: The 'let's financially justify 4 yr/36m for Beckham' thread

I looked it up:

Per the Wizards' website "Propelled by Jordan's comeback, the Wizards led the NBA in regular season attendance. The team had a team-record 41 home sellouts and 38 road sellouts."

Link

Then later: "The Wizards were once again the most watched team in the league as they led the league in attendance for the second straight year. The team averaged 20,173 for the 41 home games and 19,311 for 41 road games."

I found from another site that the home attendance dropped to 15,741 the next season, which is roughly the same as it was before Jordan. Quite a significant change for the NBA if you ask me.

Link to that site

Also, you need to look at jersey sales, and TV viewership.

 

Re: The 'let's financially justify 4 yr/36m for Beckham' thread

I'm baffled by your response. I think perhaps you misinterpreted my post. I'm making the case that spending the money on Becks makes good sense. Which, I think, is your point, too, no?

 

Re: The 'let's financially justify 4 yr/36m for Beckham' thread

I think the better analogy would be Gretzky to LA. He had already won several Stanley Cups, he was probably 2 years past his prime physically, but still with lots of gas left in the tank. He was going to LA where hockey had been a major after thought (if any thought at all) and his presence there boosted attendance and the hip factor of the Kings and hockey. It also raised the profile of hockey in this country leading to bigger tv contracts etc.

The effect was sustained while he was still playing and raised the overall profiles of Lemieux and Messier and other stars in this country.

Of course, there is a cautionary tale here as well as the NHL has seriously stumbled by overspending, labor strife and its inability to create stars of the magnitude of the old guys. MLS could certainly fall into the overspendin trap by expanding the DP availability. Labor who knows. The advantage soccer has in the most important category is that there is a planet of stars to replace current players, and they get major exposure every four years in an event that is watched in this country.

EDIT -- and of course, the Kings are now owned by AEG (although they were not at the time they acquired The Great One). Also, after looking it up Gretzky was only 27 at the time of the trade although Beckham at 31 still has plenty of mileage left.

 

Re: The 'let's financially justify 4 yr/36m for Beckham' thread

Many like to compare and contrast MLS with the NFL but in all this, what I really think the powers that be in MLS are really trying to do is compete with Major League Baseball.

The seasons parallel each other, there is no conflict with NFL/NCAA Football until September, and the NBA is just getting going in October.

MLB is not what it used to be as far as "America's Pasttime." The 18-34 demographic (and those on the younger end of the 35-54 demographic), are not the diehard baseball fans that their parents and grandparents were, many more of them played soccer or watched it, and are more open to becoming fans of the league. Add in the fact that it takes 3-4 hours most of the time to watch a single baseball game you have a traditional game that is not conducive to today's short-attention-span society, and you have a grand opportunity for MLS to benefit.

In MLS you get lots of action neatly packaged into a nice, neat, 120 minute package -- perfect for the "always-on" society to take in a game without wasting their whole day.

Add Beckham to the mix and hopefully grab some Pele/NASL-like attention (without the end effect that had on that league) and you've got a league ready to burst onto the scene like it never has to date.

 

Re: The 'let's financially justify 4 yr/36m for Beckham' thread

Isn't the next television deal a long way off? I forget how long the current ESPN one lasts.

Ted Turner was notorius for coming to board meetings with horribly thought out ideas. At one point, he joked that he's really only had three good ideas in his whole career. He was lucky that they turned out to be TBS, CNN and TNT.

Just because St. Phil is good with money does not mean he is immune from the brain fart. Although bringing Becks now is a good idea. Two years from now, not so much.

What I like most about this is that a lot teams are now in SSSs, which means in many markets, you stand a good chance of not being able to see Becks the first time he comes around. That creates demand for tickets.

Sachin

 

Re: The 'let's financially justify 4 yr/36m for Beckham' thread

Interesting, very interesting.

It looks like there is a bump then after Jordan left, things returned to where they were. If the correlation between the two holds true, they will have to make their money back while he is here. There won't be a ton of risidual interest after he leaves.

 

Re: The 'let's financially justify 4 yr/36m for Beckham' thread

The Gretzsky analogy is far more relevant here than the Jordan analogy. Internet in the NBA already had peaked around the time of his second retirement. It has been on a slow and intermittent decline ever since.

Sachin

 

Re: The 'let's financially justify 4 yr/36m for Beckham' thread

It also didn't help that the Bullets couldn't win jack shit with or without Jordan (37 wins isn't impressive) until Agent Zero came to DC and that had an effect on attendance as well.

 

Re: The 'let's financially justify 4 yr/36m for Beckham' thread

I would think that Dallas, Columbus, etc. will try to make fans buy a ticket to another game in order to buy a ticket to see the Gals. Especially the Eastern teams, where Becks will only be there once.

 

Re: The 'let's financially justify 4 yr/36m for Beckham' thread

A poster above mentioned that aswell.

I hear ya. One analogy might be better than another, but I am sure there is something to be taken from each.

I am really torn on my feelings about this one. There is tons of potential upside that's coming at a pretty high price (if 36mil is correct).

We are talking about packed houses, bigger TV contracts, putting the league and the sport on the map, better ad dollars and higher priced corporate boxes. That's ALOT to to ask even from David Beckham.

Anyway, it will be fascinating to watch this unfold. It's like some sort of sociological experiment.

 

Re: The 'let's financially justify 4 yr/36m for Beckham' thread

Perhaps in the grand scheme of the Anschutz empire, this isn't really a big thing, and perhaps Phil isn't getting too personally involved in it. But I think this would probably be THE most significant thing to happen to MLS in its entire existence. I would think Phil would be very involved in this call.

 

Re: The 'let's financially justify 4 yr/36m for Beckham' thread

I was not clear in my statement, if that's how you read it. The poster I responded to talked about how St. Phil is better than money than s/he is. That may or may not be true, but merely being in possession of more money does not guarantee you immunity from brain farts. That's all.

Sachin

 

Re: The 'let's financially justify 4 yr/36m for Beckham' thread

The Bullets/Wizards used to do this a lot during the 80s and 90s when their team sucked most of the time. I remember the commercials were along the lines of "Buy the 10 game plan and get to see the Bulls, Knicks, Lakers and Pistons". Their strategy was to try and sell out most of those tickets to the season ticket holders and mini season ticket holders to produce scarcity for the big games.

It would make sense for a Dallas, Columbus to have maybe a 4 game pack with LA, DC, Chicago and NYRB (if they get someone big). Of course it would probably have a bigger impact next season if people realize that doing the 4 pack would be the only way to get to see LA.

And I agree with you that this is especially true if the Western Conf teams don't travel to each Eastern Conf opponent each season. If LA goes to Columbus only 1 time in the next two seasons then there is a better chance to hook his one road game there to the purchase of other games.

 

Re: The 'let's financially justify 4 yr/36m for Beckham' thread

Red Bull ticket rep already mentioned this.

 

Re: The 'let's financially justify 4 yr/36m for Beckham' thread

There is potential value to the sport and the league from the potential Becks deal that is hard to measure..
One might be young talented players seeing the attention he gets and choosing to stick with the sport so that someday they can "Spend it like Beckham.".

 

Re: The 'let's financially justify 4 yr/36m for Beckham' thread

most important fact.

Beckham has no financial impact for YOU. It does not matter how much he costs. period.

Why the hell do people even care how much he costs? It has zero effect on the rest of the roster since he doesn't coutn against the CAP. It doesn't stop other players on the roster from getting more or less money, it won't raise or lessen ticket prices...what's the issue?

the only person this money has an effect on is Phillip Anshutz, who decided to add another assett to his portfolio.

And make no mistake, he belongs to AEG. Not MLS.

 

Re: The 'let's financially justify 4 yr/36m for Beckham' thread

one of the reasons Penn State fans think nothing of not playing Pitt is that the last time we played them in Pittsburgh, Pitt made PSU fans buy a ticket to some stupid game like Citadel along with the PSU - Pitt ticket.

That's probably the financial impact upon the fans I forgot about.