SI need to bite the bullet and make Man City's transfer budget realistic....

Even as a Man Utd fan, I believe SI need to make Man City's transfer budget "unlimited".

This reflects the current real life situation. It could be coded into the game however, that as a new manager, after the first year that budget is toned down, and 2 years trophyless would result in much less money, etc.

One thing is for sure... a £55 million transfer budget for City simply wouldn't be realistic in FM11

somehow i dont think that they have unlimited budget. If they had it in FM you could take over and literally buy every player in the game. Do you really think 'Manchester City sign Kaka for 500 million pounds. This follows previous signing of Torres for 625 million pounds and Messi for 987 million pounds' is realistic? I know i have over exaggerated by a long way but it is potentially what could happen.

No i think 150-200 would do it, with the 'ask for more funds' option pretty loose so you can request a good bit more.

I think more important is making the AI managers less of a bunch of tight bastards. I hardly ever get a really good deal for a player im selling, and when you have a really good player no other teams ever make serious bids like they would in real life.

If you want to increase the appeal of a player,play him regularly prior to sale,.this way you can get 30mil for an 18mil player.

Of course the starting budget is going to be small, they have just spent the summer budget before the game is released.

somehow i dont think that they have unlimited budget. If they had it in FM you could take over and literally buy every player in the game. Do you really think 'Manchester City sign Kaka for 500 million pounds. This follows previous signing of Torres for 625 million pounds and Messi for 987 million pounds' is realistic? I know i have over exaggerated by a long way but it is potentially what could happen.

No i think 150-200 would do it, with the 'ask for more funds' option pretty loose so you can request a good bit more.

Seems reasonable maybe even 100m would be suitable.

You know there's an editor, right?

Unlimited is not really realistic. I don't think anyone on earth has an unlimited amount of money. If you do, please tell me because I would like to know!

But their budget should be around what I got with Real Madrid when I managed them (around US$290 million) or maybe a little more even.

Unlimited is not really realistic. I don't think anyone on earth has an unlimited amount of money. If you do, please tell me because I would like to know!

But their budget should be around what I got with Real Madrid when I managed them (around US$290 million) or maybe a little more even.

The group that have taken over Man City, their whole family together are worth £1.2 Trillion. That is 1,200 Billion. That is 1,200,000 Million

So far City have only spent a tiny fraction of this. Man City are essentially being used as an advert. The money is there. It is quite unlimited. they have billions to spend.

somehow i dont think that they have unlimited budget. If they had it in FM you could take over and literally buy every player in the game. Do you really think 'Manchester City sign Kaka for 500 million pounds. This follows previous signing of Torres for 625 million pounds and Messi for 987 million pounds' is realistic? I know i have over exaggerated by a long way but it is potentially what could happen.

No i think 150-200 would do it, with the 'ask for more funds' option pretty loose so you can request a good bit more.

I think as usual, the things that you talk about are unrealistic. Overexagerated nonsense. Read over your silly post again.. doesnt it sound stupid. 987 million for Messi... your arguement is quite pathetic. you see, I never said spend close to 1billion on Messi. You said this. You throw this random statement in there, as if to somehow weaken my arguement. What a load of random nonsense. If you want to put your point across why not just deal with the facts, instead of childish figures like that.

I think the things that I talk about are more realistic. I am simply proposing that Man City be given a transfer budget that is much more close to the real life scenario.

I think as usual, the things that you talk about are unrealistic. Overexagerated nonsense.

I think the things that I talk about are more realistic.

Read over your silly post again.. doesnt it sound stupid

Are you talking about your own post or am I missing something? :confused:

Anyway it is impossible for a team to an unlimited budget.

Added quotes now, so you can see who I am referring to....

Added quotes now, so you can see who I am referring to....

It looked like you were replying to the post directly above yours which was also yours. That might have just been me that got that impression though.

Anyway what do you think would be a more realistic value for them to have in their transfer budget at the start of the game?

If anything, Man. City's transfer budget will probaby even be lower seen all the purchases they have already made. I guess it will be around 30m in the first season.

It looked like you were replying to the post directly above yours which was also yours. That might have just been me that got that impression though.

Anyway what do you think would be a more realistic value for them to have in their transfer budget at the start of the game?

More Realistic would be around 200million. But with this kind of project.. they dont really have a budget. they will buy will they are sucessful.. thats just the way it is.

I dont think Mancini has a budget, he will buy the players he wants for the prices he wants.

More Realistic would be around 200million. But with this kind of project.. they dont really have a budget. they will buy will they are sucessful.. thats just the way it is.

Either way it's impossible for SI to program any club to have an 'unlimited' budget. They have to set a finite number. I think SI will set a rather high number for their transfer budget at the start of the game with the way they're spending now so I wouldn't worry too much.

Either way it's impossible for SI to program any club to have an 'unlimited' budget. They have to set a finite number.

Well not really, they could always create a flag ("infinite funds"?) on a club or owner such that if the club with this flag essentially has no transfer budget and when they sign a player, it doesn't get deducted from it.

Realistic? Not really - they do have limits. £200m-£300m every season sounds fairly, er, sensible, to me.

The group that have taken over Man City, their whole family together are worth £1.2 Trillion. That is 1,200 Billion. That is 1,200,000 Million

So far City have only spent a tiny fraction of this. Man City are essentially being used as an advert. The money is there. It is quite unlimited. they have billions to spend.

Youe mean the group that own Dubai? Man City isn't their only business investment, so quoting their total wealth is pointless. They're notsitting around with 1.2 trillion in cash and only Man City to worry about: they do have an entire nation to run, and numerous other investments, and the whole family aren;t involved with Man City. They don't have 1.2 trillion in liquid assets (except for the literally liquid oil they've got).

You're quoting that figure for its impressive size, not becausde it has anything to do with how much funding Man CIty can expect.

The Milner deal dragged on for ages because Villa demanded 30m and Man City refused to pay that much.

The Balotelli deal supposedly dragged on because of Balotelli's excessive wage demands.

As was seen with Cheslea, these tycoon clubs start off paying silly money for, and to, every player they buy (Wayne Bridge on 90, 000 a week? - Man CIty; 21m for Shaun Wright-Phillips - Chelsea etc.) but then they realise that letting every club in the world take them for a ride is stupid, so they start to try and stop people ripping them off.

Man City would probably pay whatever it took to outbid anyone competing with them for a transfer, but that doesn't mean they have an unlimited budget.

It's run by businessmen - no matter how much money they have, they don't like to feel that they're being messed around. In fact, like Abramovich, DIC are hugely in support of the FIFA plans to cap spending based on club revenue - their plan is to turn Man City into one of the big international fan-base clubs (like Man Utd, Real etc) before the rules come in place, and then enjoy financial superiority without having to keep pumping money in.

100 - 150m, with maybe upto 200m if you request more from the board, should be the level.

In FM, giving a club 500m would pretty much let you buy the World XI, which would be silly. They've boughr Toure who was looking to leave, Silva who's club was bankrupt, Boateng and Kolarov who are not exactly "World XI"-type players. If they'd actually bought Torres, or actually bought Terry, or actually bought Villa, or Kaka or any of the big names they've linked themselves with, there might actually be an argument.

And

I think as usual, the things that you talk about are unrealistic. Overexagerated nonsense. Read over your silly post again.. doesnt it sound stupid. 987 million for Messi... your arguement is quite pathetic. you see, I never said spend close to 1billion on Messi. You said this. You throw this random statement in there, as if to somehow weaken my arguement. What a load of random nonsense. If you want to put your point across why not just deal with the facts, instead of childish figures like that.

I think the things that I talk about are more realistic. I am simply proposing that Man City be given a transfer budget that is much more close to the real life scenario.

Post removed, was better to be said over PM

I think as usual, the things that you talk about are unrealistic. Overexagerated nonsense. Read over your silly post again.. doesnt it sound stupid. 987 million for Messi... your arguement is quite pathetic. you see, I never said spend close to 1billion on Messi. You said this. You throw this random statement in there, as if to somehow weaken my arguement. What a load of random nonsense. If you want to put your point across why not just deal with the facts, instead of childish figures like that.

I think the things that I talk about are more realistic. I am simply proposing that Man City be given a transfer budget that is much more close to the real life scenario.

You won't get many to take you seriously if you are overly aggressive toward the poster rather than the post.

i know i over exaggerated, hence, " I know i have over exaggerated by a long way but it is potentially what could happen." I didnt say that he was saying he wanted to do this, i was saying with an unlimited budget this could happen. It could potentially throw the balance of the game out by giving clubs alot more money then they would normally have.

As i said, 150-200 would be a more realistic budget rather than an unlimited figure.

Guys- dont let a reasonable discussion degenerate into personal comments please.

Several of you have talked about a budget of £150-£200m but do you really think Man City have paid cash up front for all their summer signing?

Most will be paid in installments over the next 2-3 years and as we've seen in other threads this is perfectly possible with a transfer budget of £50m.

I dont think Mancini has a budget, he will buy the players he wants for the prices he wants.

I think that is the problem with an unlimited budget in the game, the human manager would be able to sign players for extreme prices that would just not happen in real life.

They are obviously spending an insane amount of money in real life but Robinho is still their record signing at 'just' £32.5m. Giving them an unlimited budget in the game would dwarf that figure on a regular basis.

Just wait until this cancer - yes, I call it a cancer - of a club gets CL football, and you will see their figures get dwarfed on a regular basis. My prediction is they'll offer at least £150M for Messi within the next 4 years.

Just wait until this cancer - yes, I call it a cancer - of a club gets CL football, and you will see their figures get dwarfed on a regular basis. My prediction is they'll offer at least £150M for Messi within the next 4 years.

If/when that happens then I think the game would have to reflect that, which would see the budgets being increased. I don't think it should be changed in the game until it happens in real life though.

I dont think Mancini has a budget, he will buy the players he wants for the prices he wants.

Its been confirmed QPR dont have a budget by Warnock, are we going to see an unlimited budget for then too? I hope so!

It would be interesting if they could somehow code that some clubs dont have a budget but rather the manager asked for a player and if hes good enough and the right price, the board will sanction it.

I think that is the problem with an unlimited budget in the game, the human manager would be able to sign players for extreme prices that would just not happen in real life.

They are obviously spending an insane amount of money in real life but Robinho is still their record signing at 'just' £32.5m. Giving them an unlimited budget in the game would dwarf that figure on a regular basis.

Exactly my thoughts daf. If the AI think they have an unlimited budget, they're really go out on a spending spree and spend stupidly like IRL...and if the human player has an unlimited budget, I can clearly see him/her abusing the transfer system and literally signing the entire World XI team. So no to unlimited budgets.

Exactly my thoughts daf. If the AI think they have an unlimited budget, they're really go out on a spending spree and spend stupidly like IRL...and if the human player has an unlimited budget, I can clearly see him/her abusing the transfer system and literally signing the entire World XI team. So no to unlimited budgets.

So you go with my idea, allowing them to buy 25 over 21s and as many u21s as they like as long as the price is the value of the player plus x%.

Then theres no stupid deals but they will still buy loads of players.

The group that have taken over Man City, their whole family together are worth £1.2 Trillion. That is 1,200 Billion. That is 1,200,000 Million

So far City have only spent a tiny fraction of this. Man City are essentially being used as an advert. The money is there. It is quite unlimited. they have billions to spend.

I think you're confusing the Abu Dhabi royal family with the royal family one of the other Emirates (though I think said family have invested most of their money in building projects in Abu Dhabi anyway). Abu Dhabi's wealth is much less, it was about half that (£560b) just before the collapse of Dubai, which has meant Abu Dhabi needed to bail them out. Sheik Mansour's personal fortune, which even then is not fluid, is £12b or so, or roughly double Abramovich's wealth and about a third more than Mittal is worth. Their money is far from "unlimited".

Should they have continual investment, and should the AI spend that money on better players? Yes. Should it be unlimited? No.

Besides, it isn't SI's job, it's Eric Cartman's, the Man City researcher.

they may have a lot of money but not all of that is going to go into transfers. further more, not all of it is going to be made available in one lump sum.