The world publishes the second installment of the multimillionaire contract signed by Barcelona with Messi in November 2017. If this Sunday the Madrid newspaper revealed that Messi's total salary from the date of his signature to the end of it amounts to more than 555 million and an annual maximum of 138 million between fixed and variable, In the second installment, he reveals a contractual clause, according to which the Barça club will pay 39 million to the Argentine star as loyalty. Said payment will be made regardless of whether Barça's '10' stay or go to another club next summer. According to the information, the second term of that loyalty clause expires two weeks after your current contract ends, on June 30, 2021.
Throughout Sunday, the reactions regarding Messi's contract have been continuous. One of those who gave his point of view was Javier Tebas. The president of LaLiga defended the management made by Barcelona and he took advantage of his social networks to ensure that Messi's salary is in line with the income he generates. And he blames the pandemic for the bad economic situation of the Barça club, not Messi's contract: “Barcelona's delicate financial situation (like that of other big clubs) is not Messi's fault but the devastating effect of COVID. Without a pandemic, the income generated by the best in history supports that expense. The yellowing with which the issue is treated is unfair, “the president of LaLiga considers on Twitter.
Another who also spoke out about the leak of Messi's contract was Koeman. The Barça coach was visibly upset and defended his player: “I don't understand that it is said that Messi ruins Barça. I don't understand it. If someone from within has leaked this, he can't have a future at this club. Leave the contract and leave the nonsense … You have to assess what Messi has done for Barça. He's been showing it for years and years He is the best and has made this club bigger. “
Barça reaction
Barcelona took almost twelve hours to react after the publication of Leo Messi's contract in the newspaper The world, but he did it in a forceful way, through a statement, regretting that “a document” of exclusively private scope “has been publicly disclosed” and governed “by the principle of confidentiality between the parties”, and denied “categorically” any responsibility in the publication of this document and announces appropriate “legal actions” against the newspaper that has published this information, “for the damages that this publication may have caused.”