No problems mate.
I mean there is a possibility in the abstract, just as there is a possibility Usmanov might buy him for us. Almost impossible though, a team with no money to get a free transfer in at CB in January, losing money hand over fist is going to reverse it's economic fortunes with grounds empty by the summer.
As for Nike. Basketball is completely different to football. People follow the player. The club structure is different etc etc. Nobody in football has ever done the above with a past it asset never mind a prime one. And even if they wanted him exposed, and were willing to plough money into it, they'd want him going to Madrid anyway, as it's the galitcos club.
Let me tell you what Nike are doing now.
1) They are hammering Liverpool. They signed a huge deal with them, I believe spent a lot on legal fees to get that deal through, on the premise Liverpool deliver shirt sales/commercial revenue. That is not happening. Yes part of that will mean Liverpool's likely total revenue from Nike will probably be broadly siilar to that of the New Balance deals, but I'd imagine certain guarentees were made on milestones, which are not being hit. They are probabaly, with some justification looking to get money back on the deal. Not playing in front of 50k fans every week, and having those images beamed everywhere is also hurting them. Essentially they are hammering Liverpool.
2) They are looking at a huge drop in comsumer spending, and worse to follow and are looking at easy ways to save jobs, and to cut spending. They are trying to save stores from shutting etc. These are the crisis meetings happening across industries currently. One easy way is to heavily negotiate down existing sponsorships, particularly newer ones which have in built mile stones that are being missed. If the figurehead/manager of said company you are sponsoring is acting a plank, it will exacerbate this situation too. United have acknwoledged most of their sponsorship payments have been deferred and they were expecting all monies to be honoured. Thats where we are heading currently.
3) If such a suggestion (as above) is made, I'd pay to be a fly on the wall of that meeting. I am sure Nike will politely point out they went to enormous expense legally, and subsequently in terms of sponsorship to give money to Liverpool to increase sales. Sales that will not have materialised. You will point out, it is their job to deliver the world class, eye catching talents, to broadcast your label across the world, and the top dollar sponsorship they signed sort of implied it would be happening. That it hasn't, and that to rectify it they want you as a sponsor to spend that money would go down like a lead balloon, particularly in this context.
If Mbappe was a 38 year old David Beckham, maybe in a boom market, with a partner you had built a long term relationship with based on trust maybe you pull a stunt like contribute to his wages. You're not going to be paying in a fee probabaly double what the annual sponsorship is though.
It makes more sense he'd go to City, Chelsea, Barca, Madrid etc than Liverpool. And in honesty, he's more likely to end up at Brighton than Nike sign him for Liverpool.
