Monday, September 3, 2007

No bang for their buck

Off the field, the Galaxy has reaped the benefits of having landed David Beckham. Their investment has yielded tremendous ticket sales, jersey sales and unprecedented media attention (at least among MLS teams).

On the field, though, Beckham has been a bust. He has played a total of 310 minutes over six games and might not play another meaningful match for the Galaxy until 2008.

Beckham will receive $6.5 million for his services, which makes his on-the-field output staggeringly worse.

I was going to do a breakdown of his cost-per-minute for the Galaxy but Steve Davis beat me to it. Steve takes a look at the league's dependence on Beckham and the ramifications of his injury.

As far as the cost-per-minute breakdown...

Games (6): $1,083,333 per game
Starts (4): $1,625,000 per start
Minutes played (310): $20,968 per minute
Goals (1): $6,500,000 per goal
Assists (3): $2,166,667 per assist


Anonymous said...

Bad luck, but what can you do? Hasn't the league profile gotten a lot bigger? The Red Bull game was huge. The DC games were a blast. Disappointing sure. He was going to miss plenty of games even if he was healthy because of England. We'll try again next year. People still haven't seen him live in most places and will want to in 08.

Jess Aguinaga said...

And he deserves every penny. Yes...I'm serious.

Anonymous said...

Does anyone know if the first season salary is prorated at all since he joined the club midway through the season (June 30)

rpm said...

Does anyone know if the 6.5 million is per season or per annum? He will play a minimum of 4 exhibitions that we know of during the close season exactly how has it been established that he is receiving 6.5 million for the period July 1 through Oct 10? 21? whatever date it has been assumed he will be out till? I mean it was announced that the contract was for 5 years and a gauranteed 32.5 million? Just curious. Thanks

jason said...

If this year is paid for, then the Galaxy should be able to benefit again next year from him when he is fit and the team has trained together better.

The Beckham move is proven to have been smart b/c it at least broke even despite this very bad injury.

rpm said...

One other question if David Beckham's pay makes his output staggeringly worse (given there is no evidence provided to indicate that David Beckham will recive 6.5 million for the time period indicated) does the fact that he has generated vastly more revenue than he has been paid make his output stageringly better? Or considering injury doesn't discrimate by pay-check is this whole line of thinking staggeringly pointless?