You can not be serious SI...

Just set Fletcher asking price to 63M and offer him to clubs at begining of game. Man city bought him for that money...

That does seem to be a bit excessive if you ask me

everything about that transfer is wrong

i know hes good but............

well aparently their away to spend stupid amounts of money that players arent worth in the january transfer window. So only time will tell if that was a realistic transfer or not.

Well actually some clubs seem to be desperate to buy some players...EG, there's a high percentage chance that, in your game, Barcelona will spend over 40 mil to buy mario gomez. xd Anyone noticed that?

in euro's btw it is in euros

nevertheless, thats about £40,000,000. Fletchy aint worth that much and this is coming from a Scotsman! lol

in euro's btw it is in euros

And still, it's a bit much.

But when you consider how much money Man City have, you might think they'd just pay the asking price rather than haggle to get him cheaper. Less of a hassle. If it's at all realistic, I'd assume that City essentially have unlimited funds in the game...?

i wouldnt know.. my fm isnt activated yet! lmao!

Football clubs are businesses, they aren't going to be put off negotiating.

nevertheless, thats about £40,000,000. Fletchy aint worth that much and this is coming from a Scotsman! lol

The way the pounds gone its like £61mil but i think the exchange rate is slightly outdated in FM.

Football clubs are businesses, they aren't going to be put off negotiating.

Calderon at Real Madrid said he was willing to shell out more than 100 million pounds for C. Ronaldo, and even he isn't worth that much. I don't think massive clubs are above overpaying to make sure they get what they want.

Ronaldo is slightly different to Fletcher

Of course clubs will try to get the players they want, but I'm 99% sure they wouldn't go in for Fletcher and automatically pay 63m for him.

But when you consider how much money Man City have, you might think they'd just pay the asking price rather than haggle to get him cheaper. Less of a hassle. If it's at all realistic, I'd assume that City essentially have unlimited funds in the game...?

The transfer module was rewritten for 09 wasn't it? Not putting in ceiling bids for players based on PA/CA seems like a typical gaffe - or maybe its intended to represent City's lack of prudence. I don't think its realistic though.

Likewise the 'big Man City spend-off' is another misjudgement on behalf of S.I imho. Since they have so far failed to attract anyone and will likely continue to do so. Billionaire owners and their 'big ambitions' usually amount to a whole lot of hot air and spin. I'm surprised S.I. chose to give Man City such ridiculously deep pockets tbh. To make Man City on a par with Chelsea you'd need to invest about 500 million pounds immediately with another 200 or so going in to the infrastructure. Without any viable revenue to balance the books, no actual available players of any real quality, no massive sponsorship deals on the horizon (for anyone), a relatively small stadium by EPL standards, a modest fan base, at least one other massive club in the same city and no backroom staff of any obvious quality I predict City might be top 6 in 3-5 years. Might be. All of which they could have achieved by hiring Martin O Neil and investing 20 million a season for three years - as Villa have unequivacably proved.

Don't see it happening for City tbh. Especially when the manager merry-go-round kicks off and they burn their way through six or seven high profile foreign flops in six or seven years. In fact I think more than one 'massive club' in England is going to go bust in coming years. United (http://soccerlens.com/manchester-uniteds-debt-analysed/7356/) and Liverpool (http://www.anfield-online.co.uk/lfc-news/2008/americans-transfer-debt-on-to-liverpool-fc/) looking both excellent candidates for liquidation. Extinction? No. But they'll certainly slide down the table when the money dries up and the fire sale starts ..

-edit- After a personal request I have removed my insulting reference to the city of Manchester and apologise for any offense given.

Les Girondins: Um, the transfer window is closed. That's why they're stuck with Robinho and a lower mid-table team aside from him.

They've been owned by this group from the UAE for a couple months. Hardly enough time to build a new stadium- which they don't need, anyway. City of Manchester Stadium holds 40,000, which is plenty big enough for the Premier League. Portsmouth's Fratton Park holds around 20,000, and they won the FA Cup last season.

And a massive club in the same city? Ever heard of Milan or London? Two big clubs in the same city is no problem whatsoever.

As for money- This investment group makes Abramovich look lower-middle class. As long as City have their financial backing, they will never have to worry about money.

Les Girondins: Um, the transfer window is closed. That's why they're stuck with Robinho and a lower mid-table team aside from him.

They've been owned by this group from the UAE for a couple months. Hardly enough time to build a new stadium- which they don't need, anyway. City of Manchester Stadium holds 40,000, which is plenty big enough for the Premier League. Portsmouth's Fratton Park holds around 20,000, and they won the FA Cup last season.

And a massive club in the same city? Ever heard of Milan or London? Two big clubs in the same city is no problem whatsoever.

As for money- This investment group makes Abramovich look lower-middle class. As long as City have their financial backing, they will never have to worry about money.

Correct, they will never have to worry about money and can always rely on players greed (robinho) as a negotiating tool to get the most selfish players out there to go to city! Most, i repeat, most of the high class foreign players do tend to stay in London because of a number of things, lifestyle and weather are a few!

Les Girondins: Um, the transfer window is closed. That's why they're stuck with Robinho and a lower mid-table team aside from him.

They have made 'tabloid' offers for everyone under the sun and been knocked back. They have also made a lot of enquiries but I know of only two real firm offers. So again, more publicity for Abu Dhabi and not a lot of tangible evidence to support their claims of global superiority. They bought the club to expand their brand not vice versa.

They've been owned by this group from the UAE for a couple months. Hardly enough time to build a new stadium- which they don't need, anyway. City of Manchester Stadium holds 40,000, which is plenty big enough for the Premier League. Portsmouth's Fratton Park holds around 20,000, and they won the FA Cup last season.

Its a fiscal reality that you need at least 60, 000 seats to generate the kind of revenue needed to finance a 120m wage bill. Chelsea have been operating at a massive loss for years and have stopped splashing out on players - you did notice that right?

They also got a huge wad of money in from regular ECL qualification and semi finals etc. So they are running a _titanic_ defacit if they can be prudent with signings, cut back internally and still lose 75 million a year.

And a massive club in the same city? Ever heard of Milan or London? Two big clubs in the same city is no problem whatsoever.

Yes. Milan, London, Paris, Madrid .... Manchester.

As for money- This investment group makes Abramovich look lower-middle class. As long as City have their financial backing, they will never have to worry about money.

I beg to differ, when billionaire's play fantasy football it inevitably ends in tears. Chelsea are in a unique position for now. If Abramovich pulled the plug, they'd go bankrupt. Man Utd, Liverpool etc are on borrowed time. American owners (you know that nation who's economy is going down the toilet on an epic scale), levereged up to the eyeballs with all the debt piled on the club not the owners. City might have arab cash in the attic, but all the money in the world doesn't take you from a mid table struggler to champions in one or even two seasons. The players just aren't available and Mancester is not an attractive proposition. Evidenced by every single high profile foreign United player constantly wanting to leave.

Some laughable statements from the club btw:

"Our goal is very simple - to make Manchester City the biggest clup in the Premier League, and to begin with, to finish in the top four this season." Dr Sulaiman Al Fahim

This just shows that they have absolutely no idea what they are talking about; the Premier League, football or the world of football economics or even the City of Manchester. So do I expect them to suddenly become world beaters after spending vast sums? No more than I expect Honda to win Formula 1.

When billionaires play fantasy football it ends in tears? Can't speak for every league in the world, but in England, as far as memory serves not one club has had a billionaire tycoon pull the plug and then gone bankrupt. As for the point about players not being interested, you must not have been watching much football news recently.

Kaka said he would consider moving their after speaking to Robinho, Elano etc. Chelsea went from essentially being a lucky top 4 candidate to title contenders in one close season, and won it the next. If man city were to bring in Kaka, another good midfielder and an experienced keeper I think they would be contenders for the top 4.

Let's face it, Robinho was presented with the chance to move to London (chelsea) or Manchester - he chose Manchester. Now, that alone just destroys the whole point made in an earlier post lol. I'm sure Robinho found the 50 - 60k more a week more than ample compensation for 'slumming' it in manchester.

Obviously we don't know what Man City really have to spend, but nearing on 30m for a few hours work wasn't too bad, January will see whether SI's researchers prediction was right.

When billionaires play fantasy football it ends in tears? Can't speak for every league in the world, but in England, as far as memory serves not one club has had a billionaire tycoon pull the plug and then gone bankrupt. As for the point about players not being interested, you must not have been watching much football news recently.

Kaka said he would consider moving their after speaking to Robinho, Elano etc. Chelsea went from essentially being a lucky top 4 candidate to title contenders in one close season, and won it the next. If man city were to bring in Kaka, another good midfielder and an experienced keeper I think they would be contenders for the top 4.

Let's face it, Robinho was presented with the chance to move to London (chelsea) or Manchester - he chose Manchester. Now, that alone just destroys the whole point made in an earlier post lol. I'm sure Robinho found the 50 - 60k more a week more than ample compensation for 'slumming' it in manchester.

Obviously we don't know what Man City really have to spend, but nearing on 30m for a few hours work wasn't too bad, January will see whether SI's researchers prediction was right.

Hmm. Almost but not quite enough to convince me. Throw a few more statistics and facts in and be a bit ruder ..

Kaka is past it. Having seen his performance against Portsmouth in typical English winter conditions he looked utterly haggard and subdued. I wouldn't spend 30 million on that. They might, but thats why they wont succeed. As I said, its not five years ago. Its now and there's a lot of overrated players who were great five years ago, who are living on past glories or just looking for one big pay day before they wind up. Which if you recall is how Chelsea got going: Vialli, Gullit, Zola, De Matteo, Ferrer, Deschamps, Hughes etc. That was nearly a decade ago as it happens. How much has football changed since then?

It has to go that way. Chelsea won the Cup Winners Cup and the European Super Cup. Both competitions that dont exhist anymore, and wages weren't 150k a week back then.

The Golden Era of magical players has past. The era of slightly past it superstar mercenaries has begun .. and that is not going to work. City would be well advised to look to the next generation of youngsters and build for the future instead of trying to buy success. That wont work now - its not 1999 anymore. There's four strong teams in the league not just one. And there's not the same level of available talent from abroad, and they won't get the same level of time on the ball or space to play their games against sub par defences.

I beg to differ, when billionaire's play fantasy football it inevitably ends in tears. Chelsea are in a unique position for now. If Abramovich pulled the plug, they'd go bankrupt. Man Utd, Liverpool etc are on borrowed time. American owners (you know that nation who's economy is going down the toilet on an epic scale), levereged up to the eyeballs with all the debt piled on the club not the owners. City might have arab cash in the attic, but all the money in the world doesn't take you from a mid table struggler to champions in one or even two seasons. The players just aren't available and Mancester is not an attractive proposition. Evidenced by every single high profile foreign United player constantly wanting to leave.

Every foreign player at Man Utd wants to leave, that comment would be hard to back up with evidence..

Les Gerodins, the way you takl about Manchester is as if you don't think Manchester is a big enough city to hold 2 major football clubs, compared to a place like London? You seem to be forgetting everyone down south supports Manchester United or Liverpool these days, so its not about where you come from..

And Manchester isn't some rotten hellhole either, maybe some parts of it are, but the city centre is quite sophisticated (And this is a scouser saying this).

Plus, I'd say bar the middle of London, the place is an absolute hellhole full of run down houses, mass immigration and knife crime. You barely recognise it is even in England, nevermind the capital.

Manchester City definitely do have ambition to be as big as Manchester United, the fact that they had owned the club for less than 24 hours and not only signed Robinho but put in a 35mil bid for Berbatov proves that. If anything, I think SI have been a bit too conservative with what they did with Man City on fm09, but only time will tell

The Man City situation is a bit of a chicken-egg thing. Good players will not go there until there's a good team with title / Champions League prospects; the team will not be good enough until there's enough good players.

That said, it will only take a few greedy players (Robinho) to start the ball rolling. You may say that Kaka's past it, but his name alone will make Man City a serious option instead of a laughing stock. Suddenly, good players will consider Man City, because they get to play with Kaka and Robinho. Quality attracts quality in this. Enough players of this calibre and you might just get some form of momentum. Not now, not in 1 year's time, but in the next 5 years, given that the money stays? They may just become the regular no. 5 of the Premier League (which would be a huge achievement for now), looking upwards to the big four.

Les Gerodins, the way you takl about Manchester is as if you don't think Manchester is a big enough city to hold 2 major football clubs, compared to a place like London? You seem to be forgetting everyone down south supports Manchester United or Liverpool these days, so its not about where you come from..

And Manchester isn't some rotten hellhole either, maybe some parts of it are, but the city centre is quite sophisticated (And this is a scouser saying this).

Plus, I'd say bar the middle of London, the place is an absolute hellhole full of run down houses, mass immigration and knife crime. You barely recognise it is even in England, nevermind the capital.

Manchester City definitely do have ambition to be as big as Manchester United, the fact that they had owned the club for less than 24 hours and not only signed Robinho but put in a 35mil bid for Berbatov proves that. If anything, I think SI have been a bit too conservative with what they did with Man City on fm09, but only time will tell

Hehe. I'm about halfway towards passing out .. if you hadn't noticed. So yeah, ok, I'll let you have that one. Manchester isn't that bad. But it certainly isn't moneyed London. I had the misfortune to visit St. Pancras recently and take a walk around the city. I honestly didn't recognise the place since having last been there in 2001. Everyone was foreign or ethnic and the sheer density of bodies was mind blowing. I've lived in Rome and Paris and now Bordeaux and London is simply horrible. There is a miasma of nasty that permeates every seedy corner and grimey thoroughfare. But then again, that's not Chelsea is it? We all know London is one big megatropolis of aggressive cultures; but the moneyed parts are off the scale.

Besides its bloody cold up north and it rains a lot. I'm sure I've read this in one or two autobiographies of former Man Utd stars and high profile escapists. I've had S.A.D all my life and I'll bet my last euro there's a lot of players who wouldn't mind it if they were 22 and single, but their wife and kids will .. and thats the rub.

The Man City situation is a bit of a chicken-egg thing. Good players will not go there until there's a good team with title / Champions League prospects; the team will not be good enough until there's enough good players.

That said, it will only take a few greedy players (Robinho) to start the ball rolling. You may say that Kaka's past it, but his name alone will make Man City a serious option instead of a laughing stock. Suddenly, good players will consider Man City, because they get to play with Kaka and Robinho. Quality attracts quality in this. Enough players of this calibre and you might just get some form of momentum. Not now, not in 1 year's time, but in the next 5 years, given that the money stays? They may just become the regular no. 5 of the Premier League (which would be a huge achievement for now), looking upwards to the big four.

Can't argue with that. You make a compelling 'realist' perspective point ..

I personally think that's why the City experiment will fail rather than flourish though ..

But hey ..

It does seem Man City seem to lack common sense when it comes to transfers in this game. They will waste money on average players.

Fletcher is a £10mil man tops.

I wouldn't pay more than 8mil for Fletcher so for Man City to be offering 63mil is ludacris.

I wouldn't pay more than 8mil for Fletcher so for Man City to be offering 63mil is ludacris.

Shh don't tell anyone, but I think what has happened here is what's generally referred to as: 'random probability'. The transfer system rather than doing the obvious and fixing ai negotiational responses based on pa/CA has actually done a bit of a sambuka induced limbo and gone for a mixture of that and random as fook. Just to keep it interesting.

So while we all sit here and lambaste hapless S.I. for yet another heinous gaffe/Epic Fail, its probably just a very random variable that very randomly went mad. It happens. 39 million for Robinho for example, or 30 million for Shevchenko? Yes? That kind of thing ..

Shh don't tell anyone, but I think what has happened here is what's generally referred to as: 'random probability'. The transfer system rather than doing the obvious and fixing ai negotiational responses based on pa/CA has actually done a bit of a sambuka induced limbo and gone for a mixture of that and random as fook. Just to keep it interesting.

So while we all sit here and lambaste hapless S.I. for yet another heinous gaffe/Epic Fail, its probably just a very random variable that very randomly went mad. It happens. 39 million for Robinho for example, or 30 million for Shevchenko? Yes? That kind of thing ..

Alas, if one blamed everything on very bad luck, we would be getting nowhere.

Yes, there may be some reason why Robinho would decide to join Worcester as it was his dream club, but do we argue that we're just "lucky" in the sense that it's rare, or do we get to a point where we say, "No, this should not happen under any circumstance?"

Shh don't tell anyone, but I think what has happened here is what's generally referred to as: 'random probability'. The transfer system rather than doing the obvious and fixing ai negotiational responses based on pa/CA has actually done a bit of a sambuka induced limbo and gone for a mixture of that and random as fook. Just to keep it interesting.

So while we all sit here and lambaste hapless S.I. for yet another heinous gaffe/Epic Fail, its probably just a very random variable that very randomly went mad. It happens. 39 million for Robinho for example, or 30 million for Shevchenko? Yes? That kind of thing ..

I don't know what is it, but it's just wrong. Giving 40M or 30 M for player who is one of the best in world at moment is ok (Chelsea couldn't know that Shevchenko would be so bad), but giving 65M for mediocre player is just unacceptable and big unforgivable fault!!! Something is seriously wrong!!!

Shh don't tell anyone, but I think what has happened here is what's generally referred to as: 'random probability'. The transfer system rather than doing the obvious and fixing ai negotiational responses based on pa/CA has actually done a bit of a sambuka induced limbo and gone for a mixture of that and random as fook. Just to keep it interesting.

So while we all sit here and lambaste hapless S.I. for yet another heinous gaffe/Epic Fail, its probably just a very random variable that very randomly went mad. It happens. 39 million for Robinho for example, or 30 million for Shevchenko? Yes? That kind of thing ..

Those prices are acceptable as they were/are some of the best players in the world. Fletcher is just average.

Actually Robinho wasnt allowed to move to Chelsea and so had to go to Mancity, Hense his many gaffs and admissions infront of the cameras "Im really pleased to have joined Chelsea" and "I really wanted to go to Chelsea, but Real wanted allow this so i went to Manchester City."

I don't know what is it, but it's just wrong. Giving 40M or 30 M for player who is one of the best in world at moment is ok (Chelsea couldn't know that Shevchenko would be so bad), but giving 65M for mediocre player is just unacceptable and big unforgivable fault!!! Something is seriously wrong!!!

I think thats taking it a bit far. This is one isolated case, I don't see it as being unacceptable at all. I agree it's not at all right but unacceptable and unforgivable?

No one has mentioned the fact that this is Darren Fletcher, a Manchester United player, transferring to Manchester City. While he isn't a crucial part of the United team, he is very much a squad member. If in real life City decided they wanted Fletcher, they would have to pay a ridiculous sum, purely because United wouldn't willingly sell any of their squad to City. I think a player worth maybe (some have said £8m-10m here - I'll be more generous in lieu of the player's international and Champion's League experience) £15m to all other clubs, would command a fee, specifically from Manchester City, of about £40m. I think that's the realistic part. The unrealistic part is why on earth Manchester City, starting the game with Stephen Ireland, Michael Johnson, Gelson Fernandes and Vincent Kompany, would want yet another fairly decent central midfielder.

Out of interest, why did the OP set the price at 63m Euros to start with?

Man City in this game just buy, buy and buy. They fill their team with superstars. I suspect there is little to no boardroom/manager intelligence. They have so many good players languising in the reserves.

Oh, and Arsenal are rated too high Too things in the game that show the hand of weakness. Man City is the main thing. They bought one player I'd agreed a fee with (12M) for 39M GBP...

Maybe they have the billion pound bug and are trying to shed some money.

Man City in this game just buy, buy and buy. They fill their team with superstars. I suspect there is little to no boardroom/manager intelligence. They have so many good players languising in the reserves.

Oh, and Arsenal are rated too high Too things in the game that show the hand of weakness. Man City is the main thing. They bought one player I'd agreed a fee with (12M) for 39M GBP...

Maybe they have the billion pound bug and are trying to shed some money.

Yes, you may miss out on them this season but bide your time for next season. Superstars dont like not playing so they get unsettled, hand in a transfer request, or Man City transfer list them, and you can get them at a knock down price!

Actually Robinho wasnt allowed to move to Chelsea and so had to go to Mancity, Hense his many gaffs and admissions infront of the cameras "Im really pleased to have joined Chelsea" and "I really wanted to go to Chelsea, but Real wanted allow this so i went to Manchester City."

yeh this is wht i herd

Just gonna have to bring this up, cause no on else has.

Some laughable statements from the club btw:

""Our goal is very simple - to make Manchester City the biggest clup in the Premier League, and to begin with, to finish in the top four this season." Dr Sulaiman Al-Fahim"

This just shows that they have absolutely no idea what they are talking about; the Premier League, football or the world of football economics or even the City of Manchester. So do I expect them to suddenly become world beaters after spending vast sums? No more than I expect Honda to win Formula 1.

Do you know who Dr Sulaiman Al-Fahim is? Do you know what his present role in MCFC is? I'll tell you. Nothing. He's been sacked for saying the sentence you quoted him as saying, as well as that rubbish about 135m bid for Ronaldo. Sheikh Mansour, the club's owner, has said...

"we understand it takes time to build a team capable of sustaining a presence in the top four of the Premier League and winning European honours. "

"whilst we want to bring in the best players in the world, we also want to see the academy continue to develop talent and give Mark Hughes the chance to bring home-grown players into the team. "

"We are building a structure for the future not just a team of all-stars."

A letter from Sheikh Mansour

Which seems to indicate he has some idea of what he's talking about.

haha they paid 14 million for benayoun and 12 million for pennant in my game. but i guess fletcher is that much better

Just gonna have to bring this up, cause no on else has.

Do you know who Dr Sulaiman Al-Fahim is? Do you know what his present role in MCFC is? I'll tell you. Nothing. He's been sacked for saying the sentence you quoted him as saying, as well as that rubbish about 135m bid for Ronaldo. Sheikh Mansour, the club's owner, has said...

"we understand it takes time to build a team capable of sustaining a presence in the top four of the Premier League and winning European honours. "

"whilst we want to bring in the best players in the world, we also want to see the academy continue to develop talent and give Mark Hughes the chance to bring home-grown players into the team. "

"We are building a structure for the future not just a team of all-stars."

A letter from Sheikh Mansour

Which seems to indicate he has some idea of what he's talking about.

Fair enough.

Certain teams have certain patterns. Man City buy everyone, particularly goalkeepers in the first few months. Reading sell Hahnemann and Federici and then go on a goalkeeper hunt as well. The transfer engine is intellegent in that way.

You can get £40 mill for Arbeloa as well. It’s insane.

It’s interesting to me that City is the only team in the whole game with a sugardaddy. The sugardaddy must be the cause for all this insanity. I suggest that if SI can’t code the sugardaddy to have more intelligence and business acumen (and by that I mean not spending just for the sake of spending so that eventually City have a reserve team full of superstars seeking a transfer), then they remove it altogether and instead just pump £140 mill or whatever the amount is right into City’s bank balance at the start of the game.

If SI can’t get this right in the next patch then I’m just going to untick City’s sugardaddy before I start a new game. All you have to do is read the Good Player & Team Guide forum to see how messed up and unrealistic the game can become when you start taking advantage of City.

Hoffenheim has a sugar daddy too:D..

i was playing as them, and once or twice a month he put a few million pounds in..

EDIT: And in my database, City hasn't got a sugar daddy... Don't know if anyone else have...

i read that hughes' stat for buying players is way too high, that's why he's spending these stupid amounts for players. just lower his 'buying' stat to 4 and it should prevent these transfers.

Dietmar Hopp(Hoffenheim's chairman) also has 20 on the 'Resources' stats in the editor...

IRL he's building a new stadium for the club with HIS OWN money:O..

its a joke i sold lucas for 50 million and benayoun for 30. this would never happen. if you look at city's targets in real life they're lookin at world class players like villa and buffon who are going to turn them into a top 4 team. in the game they're lookin at players with same reputation as their current team so they're never going to move upwards, just stay at the same level while spending stupid money in the process

I think thats taking it a bit far. This is one isolated case, I don't see it as being unacceptable at all. I agree it's not at all right but unacceptable and unforgivable?

when you consider that it's 'exploitable' with any and every 'decent' but not 'great' player to man city for a LUDICROUS amount of money, essentially ruining a game because if a/ you take the offer you feel guilty for basically cheating b/ for refusing to in some fit of morality you feel like an idiot.

darren fletcher is not an isolated case - i've seen fabio aurelio go for £34m to city. i've sold jermaine jenas for 40m. hamsik for £53m. the possibilities are endless.

i read that hughes' stat for buying players is way too high, that's why he's spending these stupid amounts for players. just lower his 'buying' stat to 4 and it should prevent these transfers.

this is only a temporary fix though; what if hughes gets fired in the game and a new manager comes in?

than you ust FMM and change his stat also. unfortunatly it's not easy to keep everything realistic for develepors..