'We are distraught and devasted with the state of the club's bank balance'

I'm not one to rant and complain, but this seems seriously unfair. Here's what happened:

So far, I've had a successful career, guiding Caersws to Welsh Premier League glory and winning the English Premier League with Wrexham, I wanted a new challenge so I moved to Killyleagh in the N.Irish Second Division. I'm in season 2020

Now here's the problem. We were 425k in debt when I joined and the board were fine about it, saying they were satisified with the finances. I like to have money to spend so I went about selling players, cutting the wage bill and arranging money spinning friendlies. I'm now in January of my first season there and we're 'only' 300k in debt. However, the board now say 'We are distraught and devasted with the state of the club's finances', the finances bar on the confidence screen is empty and my job now hangs in the balance

There isn't much money in the N.Irish leagues, so thats a massive amount of debt, but why can't they see that I've seriously improved the finances? It took them 14 seasons to get into that much debt, and at this rate we'll be out of debt in about 2 more seasons.

I fully expected the board to grow unhappy with the finances, but I also expected them to see my contribution.

Couldn't SI find a way to stop this happening? Personally, I think making it so the board know how their finances were before you joined and then comparing it to their current finances would be the way forward. That way, they would know how much you've improved the finances and your job wouldn't be on the line.

Has this happened to anyone else? And have you been sacked because of it?

I'm not one to rant and complain, but this seems seriously unfair. Here's what happened:

So far, I've had a successful career, guiding Caersws to Welsh Premier League glory and winning the English Premier League with Wrexham, I wanted a new challenge so I moved to Killyleagh in the N.Irish Second Division. I'm in season 2020

Now here's the problem. We were 425k in debt when I joined and the board were fine about it, saying they were satisified with the finances. I like to have money to spend so I went about selling players, cutting the wage bill and arranging money spinning friendlies. I'm now in January of my first season there and we're 'only' 300k in debt. However, the board now say 'We are distraught and devasted with the state of the club's finances', the finances bar on the confidence screen is empty and my job now hangs in the balance

There isn't much money in the N.Irish leagues, so thats a massive amount of debt, but why can't they see that I've seriously improved the finances? It took them 14 seasons to get into that much debt, and at this rate we'll be out of debt in about 2 more seasons.

I fully expected the board to grow unhappy with the finances, but I also expected them to see my contribution.

Couldn't SI find a way to stop this happening? Personally, I think making it so the board know how their finances were before you joined and then comparing it to their current finances would be the way forward. That way, they would know how much you've improved the finances and your job wouldn't be on the line.

Has this happened to anyone else? And have you been sacked because of it?

I'm a lousy manager when it comes to finance (in FM that is) so I know what you are talking about.

As long as your results on the pitch are good enough you won't lose your job. That's been the case for me at least.

If you're not quite reaching your/the club's expectations and your finances suck arse you might lose your job.

So, it's mostly a matter of performing on the pitch.

Played as england coach for two world cups. Inter offered me a job I accepted, only to see they were 60m above wage budget. Had a cool 80m debt and the most expensive players couldn't be sold as they had too big wage demands and were too poor for other clubs to bother.

On top of that they wanted me to:

A. Stabilize finances in 2 seasons

B. Win the Serie A

C. Semi Final in Champions League

D. Win Copa Internazionale

E. Sign a world-class star

all of this with a budget of -80M. Bloody impossible!

I managed to bring it down to -20M and had to sell Zlatan, Vieira, Chivu, Romeo (turned out great after half a season) and Andrea Pombobolo (or however it's spelled)

And with all those gone I only managed to finish 3rd, right behind Roma and 6 points behind Milan.

Not meeting the insane expectations I was fired.

The board was particularly dissapointed at how I couldn't sign a world-class player....

That really got me frying for a week...

Is that with 8.02?

that was with 8.0.1

I think it's daft that you get penalised for the poor state of club finances anyway. I can understand if you go way over budget and blow all the coffers on 10 crap players, but if you are under budget and don't spend any cash, but the club lose money through natural wasteage, how can the manager be held accountable.

I think this aspect of the game could be tweaked slightly for FM09?

I like that the board care about finances. I think that's a step in the right direction, and in fact I want to meet a board who cares more about their precious profit/loss sheet than the league table.

However, the experiences shown here show us two major problems:

1. The OP's board needs to look at the delta, not the current state.

2. The Inter board needs to adjust their expectations based on the available funds.

Stories about this issue have also indicated one other problem:

3. The board need to recognize that their actions (e.g., constructing a stadium) are not the manager's fault, and not blame him if their choices lead to debt.

I think those are all solvable - I'll post some day soon about the differences between a real business's financial statements and an FM business's financial statements. I think basing board decisions on a true financial picture rather than the current (incorrect) view would help a lot, especially with #1 and #3.

As for #2, I posted in kipfizh's experiment thread that I thought a club with a large financial balance should get a short-term reputation boost as a result, the example of course being the Bandits.

The converse is also true. A club in significant debt should experience a negative reputation impact: expectations for Inter, in this case, should be much much lower than they were for Canabary. Further, it should be tougher to attract players to famous clubs that are struggling financially.

This, again, seems to argue for short-term reputation vs long-term reputation: we still want the game to know that Inter are, well, Inter! Legends! But also that they've fallen on hard times and face a rebuilding process.

I'd have loved to see that board come up with something like "stabilize finances in 3 seasons; earn us a Champions League qualifying position by the 3rd season; win at least one trophy in any competition by the 3rd season." ... followed by another 3-year plan, with "Turn a profit, Sign a world-class star, Win the Serie A" as goals.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I accepted, only to see they were 60m above wage budget </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are you sure about that figure? Don't you mean 60k? If you really mean 60m then thats astonishing. I have never seen that in the game.

trekman, that number may be 60M per-annum, which is how I read it; if that's the case, it would be more like 1.1M per week. Canabary, can you confirm?

I have a game going as Barcelona, in which I started up a second manager for ***** and giggles.

After a sojourn at a weak SPanish team, and a year and a half at Cardiff (league one to the championship, baby ), I was offered a job at Nurnberg in Germany who'd just been promoted, and took them to the top of the league, and just hung in there.

Anyway, 3 or so years, and finishing 1st, 3rd and 2nd, I went to Marseille. I took them to the top of Ligue 1. Basking in my glory, () I embarked on a lavish spending spree, which would have involved spending about 25 million or so.

Anyway, you can't cancel transfers as far as I know in this version, and with a good load of money in my bank, the board decided to upgrade the stadium. Suddenly, we hadn't a penny, and a lot of players about to be bought.

Obvious result - sell players. So off goes my best midfielder to offset my debts.

If I hadn't done that, I'd have stayed in the red, and probably lost my job.

Conclusion remains, confidence feature is brilliant in concept, the implementation leaves a lot to be desired.

I've seen it mentioned here on many occassions, demands are verging on insane. The bloke talking about Inter above hits the nail bang on the head. No-one would be able to deal with that situation, how are they expected to be able to?

Until SI take a look at the feature, and tweak it slightly, it'll be an awful problem. Once they fix it, I genuinely can't wait to see it, it's a brilliant brilliant idea.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Amaroq:

trekman, that number may be 60M per-annum, which is how I read it; if that's the case, it would be more like 1.1M per week. Canabary, can you confirm? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes it's pr annum. But you gotta remember. That's in addition to the 50m basic wage budget.

My predecessor left me in a real mess. Giving Adriano a 2m wage a week.. Worst part is I couldn't sell him. No one wanted him -_-

I'm £30million in debt, and very month it gets worse but my club is satisfied with the finances

I had this sort of problem.

Was West Ham in my second season and were fairly stable in the finances. Was then given my transfer budget, which i proceeded to spend. After this, the balance was in the red and the boardwere unhappy at the state of the finances.

Fair enough, but why give me that transfer budget in the first place. Idiots!!!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Canabary:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Amaroq:

trekman, that number may be 60M per-annum, which is how I read it; if that's the case, it would be more like 1.1M per week. Canabary, can you confirm? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes it's pr annum. But you gotta remember. That's in addition to the 50m basic wage budget.

My predecessor left me in a real mess. Giving Adriano a 2m wage a week.. Worst part is I couldn't sell him. No one wanted him -_- </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Have you psotted this (and save) in bug forum ? Because this is very serious bug.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Canabary:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Amaroq:

trekman, that number may be 60M per-annum, which is how I read it; if that's the case, it would be more like 1.1M per week. Canabary, can you confirm? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes it's pr annum. But you gotta remember. That's in addition to the 50m basic wage budget.

My predecessor left me in a real mess. Giving Adriano a 2m wage a week.. Worst part is I couldn't sell him. No one wanted him -_- </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

£2million a WEEK? Surely you must mean £200,000? That must be a bug to be earning £2m a week - it's over £100 million a year!

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Giving Adriano a 2m wage a week.. Worst part is I couldn't sell him. No one wanted him </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No wonder. No team in the world will spend that kind of money on wages. Definitely a big bug.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Scath:

Conclusion remains, confidence feature is brilliant in concept, the implementation leaves a lot to be desired. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think you've hit the nail on the head there. It's may be great to have a board that cares about certian aspects of the club, but it's all to waste if there opinions are warped and wrong

Amaroq, I agree with you there. I love the fact that you can be dong relatively well, and then the board say 'hang on, we're losing too much money' or 'you're wasting money on poor players'.

Also agree with you on your third point. There are some aspects of the club which you can't control, like money spent on a new stadium or loans taken out. If the club go into debt because of the stadium or the loan payments are too big, why should the manager be held responsible for the boards mistake?

Thinking about it, I wouldn't mind that much if the board did say overspend on a new stadium, but it would have to involve the managers input.

So instead of a news item saying 'We are building a new 50,000 capacity stadium which will cost £75million', you got a message saying 'We are buidling a new 50,000 capacity stadium which will cost £75million. However, if you're willing to have less resources in the coming years and willing to lighten the wage bill, we will consider making a 60,000 capacity stadium for £85million'

The above is just a quick example, but it's just to clarify a point I was trying to make. I wouldn't mind the board judging you on aspects of the club you can't control, if you were able to have some sort of input.

However, as Scath put it, the implementation is wrong but if it can be improved, it'll be awesome

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Canabary:

Played as england coach for two world cups. Inter offered me a job I accepted, only to see they were 60m above wage budget. Had a cool 80m debt and the most expensive players couldn't be sold as they had too big wage demands and were too poor for other clubs to bother.

On top of that they wanted me to:

A. Stabilize finances in 2 seasons

B. Win the Serie A

C. Semi Final in Champions League

D. Win Copa Internazionale

E. Sign a world-class star

all of this with a budget of -80M. Bloody impossible!

I managed to bring it down to -20M and had to sell Zlatan, Vieira, Chivu, Romeo (turned out great after half a season) and Andrea Pombobolo (or however it's spelled)

And with all those gone I only managed to finish 3rd, right behind Roma and 6 points behind Milan.

Not meeting the insane expectations I was fired.

The board was particularly dissapointed at how I couldn't sign a world-class player....

That really got me frying for a week... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again, the board seem oblivious to what you actually did for the club. The board give you impossible targets, but you still finish 3rd with a weakened team and earned the club £60million in just one season.

Let's be honest, any club in the world would be delighted with that.

Admittedly, the part about insane expecations could have been fixed in the patch (I haven't read the change list, so I wouldn't know), but it's still an example of this confidence feature being implemented wrongly and ruining people's games

On the other hand from having no money, my board finance status is 'The club's finances are so healthy at the moment that we are thinking of investing lots of money on tropical fish'.

Thought that was a bit...odd.

Finance is and most likely will not be a realistic part of FM, because most people aren’t interested in balancing the books and SI will therefore lose customers if they will improve player involvement in finance further (IMO make it optional for those who like a more total FM/FC approach). But in FM08 it went wrong when a football manger is now accountable for poor club finance.

So FM must now make a choice:

a) Stop the boards expectations towards finance

b) Let players have more control over the clubs finance

My board are still unhappy with our bank balance in Scottish Division 2 despite the fact we now have £900k which is a very nice sum at that level! We have £1.5 million debts, but they are being repaid over 25 or 30 years at just over 10k p/w so they really shouldn't affect the board's view so much!

Simply board reacting/setting of wage/transber budget is buged, same with to high wages for top players (like 2m per week for one player - WTF ??).

E.q. in my game board alow me 1,2 p/m wage budget, combined with 20m transfers - and I earning cca 800k - 1m/m. And club moneys are cca 50M. Imagine situation if this club will be managed by AI. It will end with very nice loss every year.

I was managing Oldham Athletic, and after being promoted to the Championship and then finishing 10th in the 1st Championship season I was feeling suitably pleased with myself. The club was doing pretty well financially even though I didn't have a large transfer budget, and the board decided that the stadium needed expanding. They began the construction, then they paid themselves a ridiculous dividend, plunging the club into dire straits and leaving me with a 10-point deduction to deal with for the second season in the Championship. Not happy.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by marty_d:

On the other hand from having no money, my board finance status is 'The club's finances are so healthy at the moment that we are thinking of investing lots of money on tropical fish'.

Thought that was a bit...odd. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Think thats probably a tongue in cheek reference to the old Leeds chairman Peter Risdale.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Scath:

Anyway, you can't cancel transfers as far as I know in this version, and with a good load of money in my bank, the board decided to upgrade the stadium. Suddenly, we hadn't a penny, and a lot of players about to be bought.

Obvious result - sell players. So off goes my best midfielder to offset my debts. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The Board seems to ignore commitments you have already made - I had a £32m balance but two players coming in for a total of about £30m but the Board gsve me an extra £7m due to the health of the Bank balance!!