Romeo Beckham gets £45 grand for a days work.

[Pollyteacakes]

How much does this family need. Burberry have paid 12 year old Romeo £45.000 for one days work modeling. I don't wear Burberry myself but if I did that would probably put me off ever buying it again. How far will this family go for publicity and money. Small change to them though. But isn't there something wrong when a 12 year old gets in one day what it might take most of us a year or two to earn?

Rabbit I answer to anything hehe.

No no... I mean careful investment of money. I don't mean money makes money in business - in fact business will or can be a drain on money. But as far as careful investments, clever tax management and a good accountant, money does make money. The Beckhams could sit on their arses and do absolutely nothing and their fortune could increase year on year with careful management.

I mean... their fortune would increase year on year. (I am related to a IFA, which is why I know this!)

oh and Burberry will be wetting themselves at this thread, all of it

I wonder ...
I would not try to get either of my children into modelling, largely because I don't like the idea of endless auditions and rejections, based purely on looks. But I suppose if someone were to hand one of my children an opportunity on a plate, and they wanted to do it, I probably wouldn't refuse. It's not going to happen because I don't move in those sorts of circles -- but the Beckhams do. And wouldn't it be exploitative if he wasn't paid? Sure it's a large sum of money, but they've got agents who would have negotiated the fee (and taken their cut), and it will be taxed.
I do think he's nice-looking -- and those who say that they see similar every Saturday in football club or whatever must be living in very glamorous places, because my DS and all his friends are all currently growing at strange rates and developing pimples.
A further thing is that both David and Victoria Beckham started out in fields in which they could not guarantee success for an extended period. DB could have had his football career cut short at any time because of injury, and even then he couldn't expect to go on playing for ever. As for VB well who would have imagined the Spice Girls would be more than a one-hit wonder? I'm fairly sure that they had the mentality which perhaps they have not lost, even now that they should grab as much money as they could while the opportunities were there, because they would very soon dry up. Perhaps they're thinking the same for Romeo who won't, after all, remain a cute little boy for very long. He may grow up into a handsome man, but it's by no means guaranteed.

while families in this country have to take their own handsome, polite, ordinary children to food banks to eat, then I think it's long time that the Beckhams stopped taking for fuck bloody all.

The beckhams refusing that deal would have no effect on poor families income. That money would not have gone to a food bank or to every family earning less than a living wage. The beckhams actually provide jobs through their own work. They should stop doing all that just because you think they have 'enough'? Shut down businesses, cut jobs, stop paying large amounts of tax. And i suppose this goes for everyone earning more than you deem necessary? (What is that figure BTW? No-one seems to be able to answer that)

Rousette it's bloody hard work keeping on top of the accountants and advisors and understanding what they want you to do with your money.

It's just a free market. Why am I worth per hour what is the minimum wage per week? It is simply what people are prepared to pay. He's a nice and good looking boy. I suspect Burberry have made a huge amount more than what they paid him - they have had massive publicity and were very wise to hire him. If instead he were getting a percentage of their increased sales he may be making an awful lot more.

I think we tend to divide into two types of people - the jealous green eyed type thinking how awful someone has more than I have and the other half - well done to those who do well (I am with the latter). Envy is not a sin in most religions and moral codes for nothing.

Absolutely, Roussette, they could do bollock all and get a decent return. Instead they choose to work. I don't think that's commendable as such, but I don't think it's bad either. They do provide jobs. Neither praiseworthy nor worthy of condemnation, as I see it. But - and this is the thing that annoyed me about this thread - she clearly works very hard. And I'm afraid I am VERY judgey of those who don't realise this because it shows how limited their understanding of the world is (rather more than not knowing Emmeline Pankhurst's name). I'm also very [hmmm] about people who cavil at other people's pay. I believe that people should command an appropriate fee for the work they do (compared to the income it generates for their employer) BUT that it should be taxed fairly (which in this country, isn't currently the case). High salaries/fees aren't the problem, low taxes are.

Roussette - I'm not related to someone who knows about these things. I know about them my own self. :)

you when communism fails and we have free markets then this is what happens.

^know

I don't mind either David or Victoria Beckham as individuals. I don't know much about her, while he seems to come across as a nice guy. I wish them happiness and health as as human beings. May they know love, and live without pain. May illness be a stranger to their lives, and contentment an old friend.
But money and privilege? No - they don't need any more of those.

Burberry are irresponsible to do this, aggressively driving the culture of greed and status onward, while the Beckhams are shameless to head up their campaign for the cash. They feed into each other like a moral cancer.

Anyway, I've had enough. I can no longer participate in this discussion, because it's too surreal. I feel as though I must be imagining this thread.
This contract and the money involved is indefensible. In order for the world to make sense today, I am respectfully sticking to that.

Rabbit, never in British history have the wealth paid more tax nor a higher percentage of tax. 1% of us pay 30% of all tax. There has never been such a high tax burden on those few of us. The press might suggest higher earners don't pay tax, but that is simply not the case for most. We now have some of the highest taxes in Europe except for France.

Greengow, I'm in that 1%. I don't tell you about law please don't presume to tell me about tax. Thanks.

"I think we tend to divide into two types of people - the jealous green eyed type thinking how awful someone has more than I have and the other half - well done to those who do well (I am with the latter). Envy is not a sin in most religions and moral codes for nothing."

I honestly don't know how you get away with posting this sort of crap greengrow.

Pictish - the cost of the clothes Burberry makes is indefensible. In the context of the prices they charge for their schmutter, the PR fee paid to the model makes sense. I agree that on an absolute scale nothing about the luxury fashion industry makes sense. But that is a different thread.

Nobody in the creative industries should be expected to work for free, even if some people don't regard what they do as work. I have many musician and writer friends who are routinely expected to do stuff for free because 'it's not work really'. Expecting models, whatever their name and whoever their family members are, to work for free is just wrong.

Mintyy - envy isn't a good thing though. It eats you up and spits you out with your life poisoned.

But its not about envy. That is such an unimaginative and trite thing to say. Do I envy the Beckhams? Don't make me laugh!

I think it's fairly obvious that for some posters it is.

I don't think its obvious at all! What makes you say that?

The content of their posts.

Burberry are irresponsible to do this, aggressively driving the culture of greed and status onward, while the Beckhams are shameless to head up their campaign for the cash. They feed into each other like a moral cancer

wow, I requote not because I agree or disagree but find it very interesting what strong emotions this generates

remeber Linda Evangelista back in the 80s saying she would not get out of bed for less than 10,000

Its a but greedy shitty mess, but hey I am complicit- I wear Chanel foundation

I get more upset by the mining industry killing 100s of african workers ever year- but we are all dofferent

The jealousy/envy accusation is facile and only ever seems to be deployed to prevent discussion of social and cultural phenomena. Maybe only the wealthy should be allowed to opine.

When you personalise the conversation rather than talking in general terms it's quite difficult to avoid looking like envy is one of the motivations.

I'm very happy to participate in a conversation about the iniquities of either the fashion industry or the current tax regime or both. I'm not prepared to engage in a conversation that targets bile at specific individuals especially when one of them is a child and some (much) of the bile is clearly ill informed claptrap. In particular the statement that certain people 'do not work hard' is clearly prompted by both ignorance and envy. Make it about generalities rather than individuals and I'll be manning the barricades (metaphorically) with the rest of you.

So you know I'm right then? We have never had the top 1% paying as much as 30% of tax, never had such a high burden on the few. That is very risky for the nation. To depend on so few to pay so much tax is not a good plan. It puts people off basing themselves in the UK and particularly with the huge numbers coming out of the tax (but not NI) net with the Tory plan of a £12,500 annual allowance and increase in 40% tax starting point even fewer of those who are better off will be paying even more tax.

I don't mind people having debates about whether someone should be prettier or slimmer or happier or cleverer or richer than someone else. However I do believe that in terms of your own psychological health it does not make people happy to go around feeling jealous about others. I suspect accepting what you have is better for you. Now of course you could interpret that as "accept your place" and don't entice the masses to revolution or it could just be a way to ensure you are happy. There will always be someone who is better looking or kinder or nicer or with better mental health or richer or with a husband with better erections or whatever the issue is but being cross someone else has more does not tend to make people happy. Also going back to the 1970s 99% highest tax rate is not the answer either. The country was on its knees and those tax rates did not work. They are not working in France at present. We have record numbers of French people moving to London to avoid the various almost confiscatory wealth taxes in France.