Monthly installments...

Am I the only one who thinks that this option with 48 months payment is a little bit like cheating?:confused:

i mean, come on..you've got 10mil budget, and basically what you can do is buy 4 players that worth..spending actually 40 million! That would cost you 10 million per year in the following 4 seasons and in truth if you are managing a big club 10 million per year isn't exactly that much.

it makes the game much easier, don't you think?..every club is able to spend 4 times more money that they actually have:rolleyes:..it just doesn't feel right to me.

anybody else share these thoughts?

If it feels like cheating - don't use it

Am I the only one who thinks that this option with 48 months payment is a little bit like cheating?:confused:

i mean, come on..you've got 10mil budget, and basically what you can do is buy 4 players that worth..spending actually 40 million! That would cost you 10 million per year in the following 4 seasons and in truth if you are managing a big club 10 million per year isn't exactly that much.

it makes the game much easier, don't you think?..every club is able to spend 4 times more money that they actually have:rolleyes:..it just doesn't feel right to me.

anybody else share these thoughts?

You can only spend 10 million if you have 10 million regardless on length of time. Unless you are a huge club who be expecting that money through champs league etc

If you exploit it to the maximum it can get your club in serious financial trouble, unless these amounts are automatically deducted from future transfer budgets as well (which I didn't see to a full extent on FM09).

Paying in instalments is just realistic, though irl instalments are yearly instead of monthly and most often paid over 24 or 36 months, just rarely over 48.

Of course most transfers IRL are paid over regular intervals rather than as a lump sum, so at least the game reflects that this time.

You can only spend 10 million if you have 10 million regardless on length of time. Unless you are a huge club who be expecting that money through champs league etc

well, i read here that if you pay over 48 months it just takes the quater of your budget:confused:

You can only spend 10 million if you have 10 million regardless on length of time. Unless you are a huge club who be expecting that money through champs league etc

Not true, gamewise. Only the transfer fee instalments due in the current season will be deducted from the budget, i.e. only 25% of the agreed fee if payable over 48 months. Of course, if paid in instalments only a transfer fee will have to be higher, but still, you can agree transfer fees of a 40m total with a 10m budget in FM.

well, i read here that if you pay over 48 months it just takes the quater of your budget:confused:

And that's true.

well, i read here that if you pay over 48 months it just takes the quater of your budget:confused:

Yeah, for the next four years !

So if you buy four players in your first year, all valued at 10mil and for the next three years you get the same budget, you will infact have £0 to spend for the next three years.

It may feel like cheating in the first year, but the following three will be considerably harder since you may well end up with no transfer budget.

just look at what's happened to Portsmouth IRL

Yea, and even if you still get transfer budgets, you will have to be very careful about spending them, bearing in mind the monthly payments you are dishing it from your 48 month deals.

My main complaint about this system is teams bidding for your players. When a team like Arsenal wants to pay a relatively small fee like £5m for Nani over 4 years, that's a bit ridiculous. The game needs to take into account the size of the bidding club and price they are paying more, when teams are bidding for your players

Yeah, for the next four years !

So if you buy four players in your first year, all valued at 10mil and for the next three years you get the same budget, you will infact have £0 to spend for the next three years.

It may feel like cheating in the first year, but the following three will be considerably harder since you may well end up with no transfer budget.

When purchasing players you need to take into account what may happen in the years to come.

For example, you have £10 million budget this season, but the expectation is a top half finish. You spend £40 million on players spread over the next four years, but end finishing the season in 17th. There's no way you'll get £10 million again the following season (whats needed just to cover your repayments) you may get say only £5 million. This will instantly put you club £5 million in the red because they still need to make those payments.

Playing like this and not planning for the future is a sure fire way to bankrupt your club.

Yea, and even if you still get transfer budgets, you will have to be very careful about spending them, bearing in mind the monthly payments you are dishing it from your 48 month deals.

My main complaint about this system is teams bidding for your players. When a team like Arsenal wants to pay a relatively small fee like £5m over 4 years, that's a bit ridiculous. The game needs to take into account the size of the club and price they are paying more, when teams are bidding for your players

Monthly repayments are taken out of your budget at the beginning of each season. So if you did spend £40 million in the first season over four years, and the following year got given another £10 million, it would be taken straight back by the board because of existing commitments, meaning you don't have to worry about being careful with it because it wouldn't be there for you to spend in the first place.

That never happened to me in FM09 when I payed over 24 months. If anything, I'd still get a decent budget the following season, but I'd have to be careful about spending it because of my monthly repayments. Basically, the club would have allowed me to go into severe debt with the budgets they gave me. I find budgets to simply be based on your current bank balance, and not any existing commitments like monthly transfer payments.

Monthly repayments are taken out of your budget at the beginning of each season. So if you did spend £40 million in the first season over four years, and the following year got given another £10 million, it would be taken straight back by the board because of existing commitments, meaning you don't have to worry about being careful with it because it wouldn't be there for you to spend in the first place.

When purchasing players you need to take into account what may happen in the years to come.

For example, you have £10 million budget this season, but the expectation is a top half finish. You spend £40 million on players spread over the next four years, but end finishing the season in 17th. There's no way you'll get £10 million again the following season (whats needed just to cover your repayments) you may get say only £5 million. This will instantly put you club £5 million in the red because they still need to make those payments.

Playing like this and not planning for the future is a sure fire way to bankrupt your club.

yes, but im talking about big clubs. Juventus for example. You buy 40 million of players with your 1st season 10 million budget, but next year your balance will be like 80 million,or even more..so you will not even feel the effects of your spending. it will just take you another 10 million, but you still have like 70 million in the bank. and that leaves you enough money to go and buy more players.

That never happened to me in FM09 when I payed over 24 months. If anything, I'd still get a decent budget the following season, but I'd have to be careful about spending it because of my monthly repayments. Basically, the club would have allowed me to go into severe debt with the budgets they gave me.

As I understand it, the game takes any existing commitments into account when deciding your budget. But you don't see them actually physically give you it and then take it away. What I meant by this was the game would provisionally provide you with a budget of £10 million, but then take from it any commitments for that year, and after these calculations are done is when you would get the news item telling you what your budget would be. In the example here, it would be a big fat zero.

Again, that's never happened to me. The game doesn't seem to take into account your existing transfer payments when deciding your new budget, I went into administration once because the board kept giving me large transfer budgets every year, which the club couldn't afford because I kept doing 24 month deals (this was despite winning titles and being in the Champions League every season). So in other words, if you're going to pay on monthly installments, you'll have to watch the clubs finances carefully in the following seasons, before deciding how much of your budget to spend.

As I understand it, the game takes any existing commitments into account when deciding your budget. But you don't see them actually physically give you it and then take it away. What I meant by this was the game would provisionally provide you with a budget of £10 million, but then take from it any commitments for that year, and after these calculations are done is when you would get the news item telling you what your budget would be. In the example here, it would be a big fat zero.

yes, but im talking about big clubs. Juventus for example. You buy 40 million of players with your 1st season 10 million budget, but next year your balance will be like 80 million,or even more..so you will not even feel the effects of your spending. it will just take you another 10 million, but you still have like 70 million in the bank. and that leaves you enough money to go and buy more players.

Again, you are banking on success.

If Juventus has a couple of bad seasons, finishing just above relegation for example, or not qualifying for Europe or even being relegated then the following season's balance would be no where near what it was previously.

You have to remember that big clubs rely on Champions League money, or prize money from the league for finishing above certain places. Without this the clubs balances would soon start showing the strain.

Is it cheating to buy a house with a mortgage?

Again, that's never happened to me. The game doesn't seem to take into account your existing transfer payments when deciding your new budget, I went into administration once because the board kept giving me large transfer budgets every year, which the club couldn't afford because I kept doing 24 month deals. So in other words, if you're going to pay on monthly installments, you'll have to watch the clubs finances carefully in the following seasons, before deciding how much of your budget to spend.

It was probably more of an over ambitious chairman than anything else ... anyone remember what happened to Leeds ?

The game does take this into account, which is why the first seasons payments are taken from your budget straight away rather than just decreasing your budget by the monthly amount month on month, i.e If you buy a player for £10 million over 48 months, your budget for that year will decrease by £2.5 million as soon as the transfer goes through. The selling club doesn't receive this all in one go, but rather it's your board taking back the money to make sure they can meet the commitments.

I really don't think the game takes anything into account more than how much is currently in your balance and whether you're in Europe, when deciding your new budgets...otherwise why would I get huge £50m+ budgets in FM09, when I owe like £10m a month in transfer repayments? It's upto you to then say hold on, I've got a £50m+ budget, but I owe so much in installments, I can't spend any of it, unless I want to finanacially ruin myself. Maybe this has changed for FM10 though, we'll have to wait and see.

It was probably more of an over ambitious chairman than anything else ... anyone remember what happened to Leeds ?

The game does take this into account, which is why the first seasons payments are taken from your budget straight away rather than just decreasing your budget by the monthly amount month on month, i.e If you buy a player for £10 million over 48 months, your budget for that year will decrease by £2.5 million as soon as the transfer goes through. The selling club doesn't receive this all in one go, but rather it's your board taking back the money to make sure they can meet the commitments.

I really don't think the game takes anything into account more than how much is currently in your balance and whether you're in Europe, when deciding your new budgets...otherwise why would I get huge £50m+ budgets in FM09, when I owe like £10m a month in transfer repayments? It's upto you to then say hold on, I've got a £50m+ budget, but I owe so much in installments, I can't spend any of it, unless I want to finanacially ruin myself. Maybe this has changed for FM10 though, we'll have to wait and see.

We'll have to agree to disagree then =)

Is it cheating to buy a house with a mortgage?

Your argument is bugged. On here we work with car analogies.

Try it, and then come back to us telling you've feel like you've cheated. In four or five years game time

i don't know how people are managing this i want it :-( because if i have 1k transfer budget under a monthly installed offer the transfer is not allowed to go through :-(. how come this is working for you? and i swear the full amount is always taken from my budget when i do it! even though my bank balance barely changed!

I am using this to full extent in Newcastle, but if I fail, the club could end up in ruin. You have to balance it out, because the game is not about to do that for you as it did before. That's how things work out in real life, and this is a good feature. Now you can buy C.Ronaldo like Real Madrid did it. Do you think they paid about £80M right off the bat? No, they pay with long installments.

Found this post amusing.

What happens in real life when you've got 25k in the bank but you want to buy a house worth 175k. You pay in installments of course!

I don't think I've ever considered my mortgage to be cheating

You guys do know that the true financial side of football (and how clubs report on profits) differs vastly to how the game presents it. Which is fine by me, otherwise it would be a complete confusion of a mess.

Players signed for a particular fee are reported to be worth a different value on a clubs financial report. There was a very detailed geeky thread on a Spurs message board that covered this off and its very tricky to get your head around. I think FM does fine presenting the finances in the manner it does and the lump sum payments is exactly how clubs do business.

i.e. Keane to Liverpool

When purchasing players you need to take into account what may happen in the years to come.

For example, you have £10 million budget this season, but the expectation is a top half finish. You spend £40 million on players spread over the next four years, but end finishing the season in 17th. There's no way you'll get £10 million again the following season (whats needed just to cover your repayments) you may get say only £5 million. This will instantly put you club £5 million in the red because they still need to make those payments.

Playing like this and not planning for the future is a sure fire way to bankrupt your club.

It's known in Hampshire and parts of east London as the "Harry Redknapp" approach.

Makes it all the more comical that he's the "prize" in the GAME promotion - the lucky winner will manage their club into financial ruin within a few seasons, "forshore".

This is a good thing, everybody is crying out for more realism in the game, and this is what happens all the time in real life.

It's not cheating. Cheating is when you offer £0 up front and £40m after 50 league apps, then just sell him after 49 apps...

In the demo there are no negative consequences to paying transfer fees over 48 months so it probably does feel like cheating, but I'd wait to see the impact of doing this in the full game over 4 seasons before really passing judgement. ]

I am using this to full extent in Newcastle, but if I fail, the club could end up in ruin. You have to balance it out, because the game is not about to do that for you as it did before. That's how things work out in real life, and this is a good feature. Now you can buy C.Ronaldo like Real Madrid did it. Do you think they paid about £80M right off the bat? No, they pay with long installments.

I think you'll find Real Madrid did pay £80 million in cash for Ronaldo, it was not done in installments. Kaka's £59 million deal was also done in cash.

I really don't think the game takes anything into account more than how much is currently in your balance and whether you're in Europe, when deciding your new budgets...otherwise why would I get huge £50m+ budgets in FM09, when I owe like £10m a month in transfer repayments? It's upto you to then say hold on, I've got a £50m+ budget, but I owe so much in installments, I can't spend any of it, unless I want to finanacially ruin myself. Maybe this has changed for FM10 though, we'll have to wait and see.

The board take much more than your current balance and whether or not you're in Europe when deciding your budget.

- League prize money, based on where they expect you to finish

- European prize money, if any

- TV money for both domestic and European

- Sponsorship

- Shirts sales and other merchandise

- Season tickets

- Income from transfers where you're owed money

- Current balance

- Bank/Chairman loans

- Wages

- Stadium and facility expansions, if any

- Stadium costs

- Shareholder dividends

(There may be more)

So after taking all this into account the board would then provisionally come up with a figure for your budget. From this they would deduct any existing transfer commitments (i.e. installments) for the next 12 months and after that they would give you the final figure. For example they may provisionally set aside £50 million, but then reduce it to £40 million after taking the transfer commitments into account. You never see the provisional figure, you only see the final one, which is why you might think that existing commitments are not taken into account.

Also, it is quite common for clubs to give bigger budgets than what's in their current balance because as stated above, a lot of other things are taken into account other than the money the club currently has on hand, the biggest one being FUTURE earnings.

probably already been mentioned, but check out the news today on soccernet regarding portsmouth's severely crippling financial problems...

I am using this to full extent in Newcastle, but if I fail, the club could end up in ruin. You have to balance it out, because the game is not about to do that for you as it did before. That's how things work out in real life, and this is a good feature. Now you can buy C.Ronaldo like Real Madrid did it. Do you think they paid about £80M right off the bat? No, they pay with long installments.

Actually in that instance Real paid all of the money up front. However, most deals have part of the fee paid in installments.

ever since i started playin champ man 3 ive always paid upfront or after 30 games but never have i done it over 48 months, i tried this out on the fm10 demo and tbh i prefer to pay for the players that i can afford rite now so it makes the game more interesting because you only have that money to use and thats where u whack in the friendly and a 5% profit on the players value

My point is they don't deduct the transfer payments you owe from the previous season from subsequent season's budgets. I don't believe they do anyway, you are entitled to your opinion.

The board take much more than your current balance and whether or not you're in Europe when deciding your budget.

- League prize money, based on where they expect you to finish

- European prize money, if any

- TV money for both domestic and European

- Sponsorship

- Shirts sales and other merchandise

- Season tickets

- Income from transfers where you're owed money

- Current balance

- Bank/Chairman loans

- Wages

- Stadium and facility expansions, if any

- Stadium costs

- Shareholder dividends

(There may be more)

So after taking all this into account the board would then provisionally come up with a figure for your budget. From this they would deduct any existing transfer commitments (i.e. installments) for the next 12 months and after that they would give you the final figure. For example they may provisionally set aside £50 million, but then reduce it to £40 million after taking the transfer commitments into account. You never see the provisional figure, you only see the final one, which is why you might think that existing commitments are not taken into account.

Also, it is quite common for clubs to give bigger budgets than what's in their current balance because as stated above, a lot of other things are taken into account other than the money the club currently has on hand, the biggest one being FUTURE earnings.

My point is they don't deduct the transfer payments you owe from the previous season from subsequent season's budgets. I don't believe they do anyway, you are entitled to your opinion. The money still comes out of your balance each month obviously, it just isn't taken into account when setting a new season's budget. It's upto you to make sure you don't overspend and put the club in debt.

Why would a club give me £50m+ to spend, when I owe £120million in transfer fee payments, and have a much smaller balance, if this wasn't the case? If it was really deducted like you are saying from future season's budgets, then it would be £0, considering how much I owed.

The board take much more than your current balance and whether or not you're in Europe when deciding your budget.

- League prize money, based on where they expect you to finish

- European prize money, if any

- TV money for both domestic and European

- Sponsorship

- Shirts sales and other merchandise

- Season tickets

- Income from transfers where you're owed money

- Current balance

- Bank/Chairman loans

- Wages

- Stadium and facility expansions, if any

- Stadium costs

- Shareholder dividends

(There may be more)

So after taking all this into account the board would then provisionally come up with a figure for your budget. From this they would deduct any existing transfer commitments (i.e. installments) for the next 12 months and after that they would give you the final figure. For example they may provisionally set aside £50 million, but then reduce it to £40 million after taking the transfer commitments into account. You never see the provisional figure, you only see the final one, which is why you might think that existing commitments are not taken into account.

Also, it is quite common for clubs to give bigger budgets than what's in their current balance because as stated above, a lot of other things are taken into account other than the money the club currently has on hand, the biggest one being FUTURE earnings.

My point is they don't deduct the transfer payments you owe from the previous season from subsequent season's budgets. I don't believe they do anyway, you are entitled to your opinion. It's upto you to make sure you don't overspend

Can you provide any evidence ?

FM claim their financial model is based on how real world clubs operate and this is how they operate.

My point is they don't deduct the transfer payments you owe from the previous season from subsequent season's budgets. I don't believe they do anyway, you are entitled to your opinion. The money still comes out of your balance each month obviously, it just isn't taken into account when setting a new season's budget. It's upto you to make sure you don't overspend and put the club in debt.

Why would a club give me £50m+ to spend, when I owe £120million in transfer fee payments, and have a much smaller balance, if this wasn't the case? If it was really deducted like you are saying from future season's budgets, then it would be £0, considering how much I owed.

See the last paragraph ... it's based on future earnings, which are based on expected performances in the league and in any European competitions you may be in. It's not rocket science.

Why would a club give me £50m+ to spend, when I owe £120million in transfer fee payments, and have a much smaller balance, if this wasn't the case? If it was really deducted like you are saying from future season's budgets, then it would be £0, considering how much I owed.

There's the evidence, sorry I edited that in later in my original post.

Can you provide any evidence ?

FM claim their financial model is based on how real world clubs operate and this is how they operate.

I understand it's based on future earnings mate. What I am saying is, if I had spent that £50million, I'd be in administration, no matter if I won every competition that season. Hence, they can't be taking into account what I already owe when setting my new budget.

See the last paragraph ... it's based on future earnings, which are based on expected performances in the league and in any European competitions you may be in. It's not rocket science.

Who were you ?

How many players was the 120 million over and over what terms ?

I was Middlesbrough, and I owed £10million a month for the next 24 months, it was for a number of players, I can't remember how many. I had to sell a few lesser players each season just to keep my head above water, yet the board kept throwing me £50m+ budgets. This is why I believe there is no way the board take into account future transfer payments when setting your new budgets, as if I had spent what they were trying to give me, I would have bankrupted myself.

I've played with Newcastle and Man Utd also and had very similar experiences. It's up to me alone to make sure I don't overspend, the board are very reckless with transfer budgets.

Who were you ?

How many players was the 120 million over and over what terms ?

I was Middlesbrough, and I owed £10million a month for the next 24 months, it was for a number of players, I can't remember how many. I had to sell a few lesser players each season just to keep my head above water, yet the board kept throwing me £50m+ budgets. This is why I believe there is no way the board take into account future transfer payments when setting your new budgets, as if I had spent what they were trying to give me, I would have bankrupted myself.

I've played with Newcastle and Man Utd also and had very similar experiences. It's up to me alone to make sure I don't overspend, the board are very reckless with transfer budgets.

Your figures don't add up add ... £10 million a month over 24 months is £240 million, not £120 million.

Maybe someone from SI could comment on whether or not existing transfer commitments are taken into account when deciding a seasons transfer budget ?

The only time I allow myself to use monthly installments is when the other team is negotiating a transfer with me and they put it in the transfer. I never request it as it feels like cheating.

Yea I know, I meant for that coming season I owed £120million, ie that's what will be payed over the next 12 months. Yet I was still given a transfer budget of over £50million, which if spent would have put the club into administration, even if I had done the quadruple.

Your figures don't add up add ... £10 million a month over 24 months is £240 million, not £120 million.

Maybe someone from SI could comment on whether or not existing transfer commitments are taken into account when deciding a seasons transfer budget ?

I would think not, don't think the board are that sophisticated to be honest. From my experiences the bigger the balance the bigger the budget!

Yea I know, I meant for that coming season I owed £120million, ie that's what will be payed over the next 12 months. Yet I was still given a transfer budget of over £50million, which if spent would have put the club into administration, even if I had done the quadruple.

I assume at the time you were somewhat into the future, winning regularly domestic titles and competing regularly in Europe ?

I would think not, don't think the board are that sophisticated to be honest. From my experiences the bigger the balance the bigger the budget!

Technically this is correct, because if you have a big balance it suggests you are a successful club, one which could be expected to do well and therefore have higher future earnings which is what my entire argument is based on.

SI claim FM to be the most realistic management sim available, yet if the size of the budget is decided only on the size of the bank balance then it is beyond a joke, and not realistic at all.