David Beckham donates PSG salary

Beefy78

MUSEIST wrote: »

Didn't drogba give his entire payment from a commercial a few years back to build a hospidal in the ivory coast. I remember reading about it but not much coverage in the media sadly.

Fair play to becks.

Adebayor and Bellamy have both refused to take pay cuts in the past couple of years when leaving Man City because they both claimed to donate most of their wages to charity.

MUSEIST

MUSEIST wrote: »

Didn't drogba give his entire payment from a commercial a few years back to build a hospidal in the ivory coast. I remember reading about it but not much coverage in the media sadly.

Fair play to becks.

Yeah he donates a lot to charity.

Bellamy is another. He set up a football academy in Seirra Leone afaik

MyBrokenKnees

Fair play to him

dreamers75

rarnes1 wrote: »

Bellamy is another. He set up a football academy in Seirra Leone afaik

Community service? :pac:

daithijjj

rarnes1 wrote: »

Yeah he donates a lot to charity.

Bellamy is another. He set up a football academy in Seirra Leone afaik

Its all about brand Beckham and future, he has savage advisers.

Beckham brand is worth about 150m i read, he donated about 4.6m with this move. Bellamy donated close to that but without the 'circus'.

Not making any remark towards Beckham in a bad way with this but plenty give money, big money without the press conference to announce it.

EdenHazard

In fairness to Becks, I think the fact he is playing for no money effectively would have come up.

RasTa

daithijjj

EdenHazard wrote: »

In fairness to Becks, I think the fact he is playing for no money effectively would have come up.

It wasnt meant like that on my part. I wasnt having a go.

Its win win win for everyone. PSG get the PR, the shirt sales etc. Beckham plays for nothing and that money given to charity doesnt even touch the surface of the increased brand awareness he probably got from today.

The cynic would say that theres even room for charitable donations to be excused from FFP but with the fallback of increased awareness of PSG in terms of the sponsorship clout they can bring in and stick Becks face on it.

Great business for them.

Mars Bar

HAWT.

Ronan Raver77

His next bit of charity is going to play for Aston Villa in the championship for free next season.

Redzer7

Top, top bloke, much respect for him.

citytillidie

Great PR stunt by Brand Becks and everyone has fallen for it.

Giggsy11

Signed for PSG? Beckham is a money whore.
Donated all the wages to Charity? PR stunt.

*facepalm*

Just An Opinion

citytillidie wrote: »

Great PR stunt by Brand Becks and everyone has fallen for it.

Everyone except you clever cloggs, well done

castle

If only all the other rich people did same for publicity then there would be no poor in the world,(you get it) well done Becks

citytillidie wrote: »

Great PR stunt by Brand Becks and everyone has fallen for it.

I hope he didn't say anything about it til after he had the contract signed, milk PSG for everything he could :pac:

Henlars67

As I've already said it's the reaction to it that's ridiculous.

People are absolutely creaming themselves over it.

It's pathetic.

Just An Opinion

Henlars67 wrote: »

As I've already said it's the reaction to it that's ridiculous.

People are absolutely creaming themselves over it.

It's pathetic.

I think people are merely saying fair play rather than creaming themselves, calm down.

greendom

The cynic (not me of course I think its a wonderful gesture) would say that 150k a week to charity would benefit PSG too in their (pretty futile) attempts to comply with FFP.

Sir Gallagher

Nice gesture but the term "brand Beckham" makes me want to vomit.

GLaDOS

Henlars67 wrote: »

As I've already said it's the reaction to it that's ridiculous.

People are absolutely creaming themselves over it.

It's pathetic.

The only people creaming themselves are the people falling over themselves to point out that anyone who sees any good in the gesture is a fool.

StephenHendry

fair play to becks, a very good move form as PSG are going well and they could be the surpise team in the CL this year

Cienciano

PhlegmyMoses wrote: »

That's secondary financial stuff. He is already a sponsor's dream. Not much more he can do to milk that cow. This just seems like a man who loves football who has decided he wants to help out some less fortunate people.

Think it's a bit naieve to think he's purely doing it to help poor people, he just wants to play footie and he can't possible promote himself any more.
He'll probably be retiring soon, so brand beckham will be all he has, this charity donation has got him back in most newspapers in the world for a very positive reason. Look at the reaction in this thread alone? His brand value has gone up again, and more sponsors will be looking to use him and existing ones will be renewing contracts.
And before anyone calls me a "begrudger", I still think it's a great move. Becks wins, charity wins and his sponsors win. And he does come across as a decent bloke, which I doubt is put on for the cameras, it does seem to be genuine.

Colonialboy

Fair play to Mr Beckham, I do admire him for this gesture.

But dont fall into the trap people . One gesture does not a philosophy make. The salary is a pittance in the scale of the package hes walking into Im sure, Brand Beckahm hits the Champs D'Elysee.

My mind is on both sides of the fence on this ...
I really really do admire him for this gesture , it shows some redeeming charachter in the man and I applaud it
but at the same time I wish him and his missus and all their ****e and all they represent would fk off..
I love soccer but I still think theres a debate needed on the stupid wages they are on and the stupid cars they drive and they ridiculous lifestyles and value systems they project onto impressionable younger people

Wasnt there some cyclist sometime who did loads of work for charity too ...

lifes complicated who knows whats going on, but I hope it starts a trend.
Theres been plenty other soccer players have made great guestures like this, without the PR machine .

Cienciano

Colonialboy wrote: »

Fair play to Mr Beckham, I do admire him for this gesture.

But dont fall into the trap people . One gesture does not a philosophy make. The salary is a pittance in the scale of the package hes walking into Im sure, Brand Beckahm hits the Champs D'Elysee.

My mind is on both sides of the fence on this ...
I really really do admire him for this gesture , it shows some redeeming charachter in the man and I applaud it
but at the same time I wish him and his missus and all their ****e and all they represent would fk off..
I love soccer but I still think theres a debate needed on the stupid wages they are on and the stupid cars they drive and they ridiculous lifestyles and value systems they project onto impressionable younger people

Wasnt there some cyclist sometime who did loads of work for charity too ...

lifes complicated who knows whats going on, but I hope it starts a trend.
Theres been plenty other soccer players have made great guestures like this, without the PR machine .

I agree with you on most points. But there's no real "trap" here. All you'll do is come out of it thinking Becks is a great guy, no harm really. About Lance doing the same, the difference was that he cheated, conned, bullied and bribed his way to the top. Becks didn't, and I would be very very surprised if loads of becks team mates came out and said he was a wánker.

Optimalprimerib

It doesn't matter a jot the benefits beckham or psg gain from this gesture. The bottom line is the kids who will benefit. So I tip my hat to them

kingtubby

I don't like Beckham. I tend to associate him heavily with the celebrity culture that goes hand in hand with football these days.
But I'll give him credit for this one, that money will do a lot of good.

Mr Whirly

Fair play to Beckham, the last time the kids in Paris got something back from football three national team players ended up on charges.

Colonialboy

hang on a minute ... do I smell a rat here ...

Isnt there a wealth tax in France ....75% or something.. and if your in the French tax system are your earnings in other jurisdictions eligible for taxation ...
so if a person isnt taking a salary but donating it all to charity does that mean they are not eligible to be part of the French tax system ....

so when is Becks taken out Russian citizenship... maybe Im all wrong on the above ..who knows, who cares ... is that my bus .. must go .

The_Kew_Tour

ScienceNerd wrote: »

The only people creaming themselves are the people falling over themselves to point out that anyone who sees any good in the gesture is a fool.

And these words have been proven more and more correct in last 18 hours

smcelhinney

This is in no way cynical, but with his recent work around the Olympics and the World Cup bid, I think he's trying to set himself up for a knighthood. Absolutely nothing wrong with that either, I've no opinion one way or the other. If he gets it, he's well entitled to it.

Seaneh

Colonialboy wrote: »

hang on a minute ... do I smell a rat here ...

Isnt there a wealth tax in France ....75% or something.. and if your in the French tax system are your earnings in other jurisdictions eligible for taxation ...
so if a person isnt taking a salary but donating it all to charity does that mean they are not eligible to be part of the French tax system ....

so when is Becks taken out Russian citizenship... maybe Im all wrong on the above ..who knows, who cares ... is that my bus .. must go .

You're wrong.

About ALL of the above.

Colonialboy

Seaneh wrote: »

You're wrong.

About ALL of the above.

maybe Becks feels guilty about having spent the last five years promoting a Ponzi pyramid scheme that prays on low-income and particularily the hispanic community in California.

I could be wrong about that too.
Seaneh do us a favour drop the FTC a note, to tell them they are wrong .

Neil3030

People have a right to be cynical about the ulterior motives behind charitable gestures. Charity has been abused by charlatans and frauds on countless occasions. Agnes Bojaxhiu, Lance Armstrong, even Hamas do plenty of charity work. There is also a certain social hierarchical distaste about large scale charity donations, particularly if you support a more fabian-like political system that doesn't render the care of the poor to the whims of the wealthy.

Here we have a past-it footballer, who has clearly both extended his professional sell-by-date and increased his post-football earnings by a calculated and ruthless PR machine. He signs for a club in a city that very much suits his wife's business dealings, and takes the first opportunity to then blabber about giving his wages to charity. Bear in mind that he is not anywhere near the standard to play for this team and he may well have ended up getting punitively taxed at any rate. Short term, he will also secure alternative sources of revenue through sponsorship, long term, his brand value continues to strengthen. Meanwhile, the team will benefit from boosted merchandising revenue and a ~€5m tax write-off.

So yeah, on several levels, this "charitable" gesture completely reeks of self-interest and profiteering. Call me a cynic all you want.

andrew241983

Its a great gesture alright but in the back of my mind i have a feeling its part of a PR stunt and is another step towards Becks getting his Knighthood.I dont think he will be happy till he is called "Sir"..Still a very nice gesture all the same

roanoke

Seaneh wrote: »

You're wrong.

About ALL of the above.

I read about the 75% thing too. Is there any articles out there that debunk it as I'd like to read both sides of the theory.

Neil3030

roanoke wrote: »

I read about the 75% thing too. Is there any articles out there that debunk it as I'd like to read both sides of the theory.

The proposition for the 75% tax was thrown out by a French court, but they are apparently looking at ways around this.

IMO, it's bluster by Hollande and it won't be introduced.

Ah that Bill Gates lad with his billions to wipe out diseases, he's just doing it so he can make more money in future.

Thecon21

Jeez, yes it was a great PR move but either way it was a brilliant gesture.

It's not as if he is lying or anything like that, the charity and kids will benefit from all of this and that is always admirable. I say the same for all the footballers who donate considerable amounts to charity, fair play to all of them.

Always like Becks, seems like a top bloke.

Seaneh

roanoke wrote: »

I read about the 75% thing too. Is there any articles out there that debunk it as I'd like to read both sides of the theory.

show me articles that prove it first, you're making the claim it's reality.

roanoke

Seaneh wrote: »

show me articles that prove it first, you're making the claim it's reality.

I'm not making a claim either way. You're the one making the claim that it's "all wrong" and I merely asked you for the information you base your opinion on so I can read it myself and further inform myself.

citytillidie

They wanted to do the 75% tax

http://www.nbcnews.com/business/economywatch/france-wants-slap-rich-75-percent-super-tax-6162197

but it was over turned in the highest court

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-29/french-court-says-75-tax-rate-on-wealthy-is-unconstitutional.html

Colonialboy

why are people hung up on the exact number. wether its 75% or 74.9% or 50% tax hes avoiding .

People should cop themselves on and be looking at the big picture rather than trying to sound intellegint by pointing out spelling mistakes and unimportant numerical inaccuracies simply cos they feel they should contribute to the debate but have little in the way of an original thought to contribute.

EuropeanSon

Neil3030 wrote: »

People have a right to be cynical about the ulterior motives behind charitable gestures. Charity has been abused by charlatans and frauds on countless occasions. Agnes Bojaxhiu, Lance Armstrong, even Hamas do plenty of charity work. There is also a certain social hierarchical distaste about large scale charity donations, particularly if you support a more fabian-like political system that doesn't render the care of the poor to the whims of the wealthy.

Here we have a past-it footballer, who has clearly both extended his professional sell-by-date and increased his post-football earnings by a calculated and ruthless PR machine. He signs for a club in a city that very much suits his wife's business dealings, and takes the first opportunity to then blabber about giving his wages to charity. Bear in mind that he is not anywhere near the standard to play for this team and he may well have ended up getting punitively taxed at any rate. Short term, he will also secure alternative sources of revenue through sponsorship, long term, his brand value continues to strengthen. Meanwhile, the team will benefit from boosted merchandising revenue and a ~€5m tax write-off.

So yeah, on several levels, this "charitable" gesture completely reeks of self-interest and profiteering. Call me a cynic all you want.

Lance Armstrong (and Mother Teresa, to an extent with which i'm less familiar) helped lots of people. That they have flaws, however damning, in other aspects of their lives doesn't change the fact that Lance setting up Livestrong was a great thing for lots of people, or that Teresa helped many people, or that Beckham doing this will lead to many unfortunate people benefiting. That he will benefit too isn't a bad thing. If nobody loses, then this event occurring is fantastic, is it not? Or are you just begrudging?

Also, I'd think that only a person who had no interest in making a real point would refer to Teresa by a name by which almost nobody knows her, rather than the name everyone in the western hemisphere knows.

So I wouldn't call you a cynic. If it weren't against the forum charter, I'd call you a begrudging twat who just wants to appear knowledgeable and wise, but it is, so I won't.

EuropeanSon

Colonialboy wrote: »

why are people hung up on the exact number. wether its 75% or 74.9% or 50% tax hes avoiding .

People should cop themselves on and be looking at the big picture rather than trying to sound intellegint by pointing out spelling mistakes and unimportant numerical inaccuracies simply cos they feel they should contribute to the debate but have little in the way of an original thought to contribute.

Not about the number, really. The fact is it isn't a wealth tax, it's an income tax. And the same tax rate applies in England, if it is 50%.

Neil3030

EuropeanSon wrote: »

Lance Armstrong (and Mother Teresa, to an extent with which i'm less familiar) helped lots of people. That they have flaws, however damning, in other aspects of their lives doesn't change the fact that Lance setting up Livestrong was a great thing for lots of people, or that Teresa helped many people, or that Beckham doing this will lead to many unfortunate people benefiting. That he will benefit too isn't a bad thing. If nobody loses, then this event occurring is fantastic, is it not? Or are you just begrudging?

Also, I'd think that only a person who had no interest in making a real point would refer to Teresa by a name by which almost nobody knows her, rather than the name everyone in the western hemisphere knows.

So I wouldn't call you a cynic. If it weren't against the forum charter, I'd call you a begrudging twat who just wants to appear knowledgeable and wise, but it is, so I won't.

Ha! What an incredibly stupid post. Let it never be said that familiarity with a subject is a prerequisite for expressing an opinion. Have a read of this and if you've time to watch this, I strongly recommend that you do.

I also can't exactly say that I begrudge a bigoted virgin who died foolishly thinking she was destined for sainthood. Nor do I begrudge a man so two-dimensionally evil as to be bordering on the status of stage villain.