are signing on fees just cosmetic?

cause I never fail to renew contracts even if i never pay out any sign on fees.. Maybe you miss out on some signings if you do this though, but slight wage increases to their initial demands seems to have a larger bearing on their decision..

what are your experiences?

I've always removed them and never had it affect any signings

Once or twice, but that's because I'm normally trying desperately to halve their wages at the same time

Well we are supposed to be in an economic crisis!

As cosmetic as fake tits

I hope SI fix this in FM10.

Not cosmetic for me, some players have complained about wanting a signing on fee on contract rejection.

In every single contract renewal so far, I've never included signing on fee (or slashed the fee to 10-20% of what the player requested). No problem at all. So, yes, purely cosmetic. A good way to save cash, though

Not cosmetic for me, some players have complained about wanting a signing on fee on contract rejection.

The OP did specify signing-on fees for players already at your club; no one's reported any exceptions there yet.

You example is different. For me, it wasn't cosmetic in previous versions on FM, but in FM09 I've always set it to $0 whatever they ask and have never been rejected, unless a non-contract player has chosen another club and didn't tell me the reason. I do manage a fairly high-rep club however, and this might make a key difference. Are you managing a lower rep club?

To be fair I've not really noticed, if I want my player to stay then I generally give him the fee he wants if I think its reasonable.