The mancityfans.net football forum

Does anyone know how image rights work in relation to footballers?

I was reading a piece last week about Ronaldo renewing his madrid contract. It said one of the big stumbling blocks was he wanted 100% control of his image rights, his current contract had a 60/40 split in favour of Ronaldo. It stated that he earned £16m last year from his image rights so that would mean Real Madrid earned over £10m from Ronaldo's image rights, this would surely cover his wages, so in effect it looks like Real Madrid have Ronaldo for free (not too mention shirt sales, tours etc that Madrid benefit from with him in the team.

It got me thinking about our players. What have we done in relation to image rights of our players? Could we in fact be paying high wages but we keep 100% of the players image rights. Obviously we would have no players creating the type of revenue that ronaldo does but it could be a way to really increase our turnover as it would be another source of income and as the team grows so does the commercial contracts for the players and so does our revenue.

This is something that crossed my mind too, but was not sure if this information would publicly available

It's not usually disclosed as far as I can see, but I know it was causing shit with Beckham at the swamp.

The bigger the player, the more they demand from image rights.

This only, ONLY, concerns the most marketable players in the world. Beckham and Zidane before, Messi and Tranaldo now. We don't have anyone like that right now.

I call bullshit on that NQDP. Aguero, Tevez, Edin, Nazzer, Hart. You think he did the Head and Shoulders ad for free?

dazby wrote:I call bullshit on that NQDP. Aguero, Tevez, Edin, Nazzer, Hart. You think he did the Head and Shoulders ad for free?

In the values quoted in the Ronaldo deal, NQDP is obviously right, but you'll find that the majority of top level footballers have image rights deals written into their contract. Instead of the money being paid to the player, it is paid to a company controlled by the player. Corporation Tax rates are lower than Income Tax rates (in the UK at any rate) and so savings can be made by the player arranging his affairs in such a way.

dazby wrote:I call bullshit on that NQDP. Aguero, Tevez, Edin, Nazzer, Hart. You think he did the Head and Shoulders ad for free?

What I meant was the exact opposite. I don't think club gets penny from fucking Head and Shoulders adds unless they feature club badge. The Club gets the money from shirt sales and having their silly faces in official t-shirts sold to complete mugs like me. Only cases where they negotiate the these 60/40 shares or whatever is when there's some true financial value in tapping into individual marketing. They make case that club in question raises the profile of the player and the profile of the player raises the profile of the club.

Image rights definitely exist within football and there are players at City with it in their contracts. There are some players, for example, whose image cannot be used by football clubs to market their own products unless directly approved by the player. As mentioned earlier Beckham had these sorts of issues with United as they used his image to sell the club in some way and he made nothing from that.

It all depends on the player and the contract. I bet most of City's arrivals since 2008 have an image rights element to their contract (some of these will spell out exactly when their image can be used and others will be more general). This is another reason why it's better for City to produce home grown players in the long term. City can educate them in a way that is good for the club and, so long as the players are treated fairly and recognise what the club is doing, then everyone should benefit for the long term.

I know that when one of my books was being produced ("The Big Book Of City" in 2009) the aim was to include a modern player as the sole image on the cover but because of image rights issues we were told that we couldn't use the players we wanted. As far as we were told it was a case of 'use player X and he'll demand Y because the book will sell because he's on the cover' - there's inevitably some truth in that, though personally I don't believe the majority of City fans would buy that book simply because a current star was on the cover. In the end we used a classic image of a City legend and only had to pay the standard fees.

gary james wrote:Image rights definitely exist within football and there are players at City with it in their contracts. There are some players, for example, whose image cannot be used by football clubs to market their own products unless directly approved by the player. As mentioned earlier Beckham had these sorts of issues with United as they used his image to sell the club in some way and he made nothing from that.

It all depends on the player and the contract. I bet most of City's arrivals since 2008 have an image rights element to their contract (some of these will spell out exactly when their image can be used and others will be more general). This is another reason why it's better for City to produce home grown players in the long term. City can educate them in a way that is good for the club and, so long as the players are treated fairly and recognise what the club is doing, then everyone should benefit for the long term.

I know that when one of my books was being produced ("The Big Book Of City" in 2009) the aim was to include a modern player as the sole image on the cover but because of image rights issues we were told that we couldn't use the players we wanted. As far as we were told it was a case of 'use player X and he'll demand Y because the book will sell because he's on the cover' - there's inevitably some truth in that, though personally I don't believe the majority of City fans would buy that book simply because a current star was on the cover. In the end we used a classic image of a City legend and only had to pay the standard fees.

Fair enough. I stand corrected.

The level will vary depending on the player, but it's another of those areas where there have been significant changes at City since 2007. I know when Garry Cook arrived he used image rights and related areas, such as public appearances, to help sell the club to potential signings. It was all packaged up to show potential earnings and in some cases it has apparently proved the difference when signing a player.

gary james wrote:The level will vary depending on the player, but it's another of those areas where there have been significant changes at City since 2007. I know when Garry Cook arrived he used image rights and related areas, such as public appearances, to help sell the club to potential signings. It was all packaged up to show potential earnings and in some cases it has apparently proved the difference when signing a player.

I remember him talking about the amazing deal they had lined up for Kaka, with all kinds of 'extras', when Milan 'bottled it' & Kaka decided to sit on the bench at Real.

James Milner is the face of my local labour and pluming company. He makes a fat wedge off it.

MilnersJaw wrote:James Milner is the face of my local labour and pluming company. He makes a fat wedge off it.

Are you sure it's not just some other Yorkshireman ?

MilnersJaw wrote:James Milner is the face of my local labour and pluming company. He makes a fat wedge off it.

Would that be plumage rights? Talk about feathering his nest.