Closed Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 107

Thread: Inflated Transfer Fees

  1. #1
    Amateur
    Join Date
    3rd September 2007
    Posts
    39

    Default

    Does anyone else feel that the Transfer Fees paid by the clubs in FM (8.02) are totally over the top?
    Is it Clubs having too much money (i.e. a lot more than they have in real life)?

    I'll give you an example in Season 3 of my game. Man Utd paid £39M for Michael Johnson (from city). i know he's a hot prospect in real life but c'mon!
    In Season 1 Liverpool paid £25M for Verdun Corluka (also from City).
    Also in Season 1 Ac Milan paid £25M for Diarra (from Pompey).
    I'm now half way throug my third season and it seems a lot of clubs who play European football all have a £25M-£35M signing in the last couple of seasons. Often for players who really aren't even world class.

    I agree that some price inflation may take place over time but some of the transfer fees have been mystifying.

    I dont know if anyone else has similar experiences...

  2. #2
    Amateur
    Join Date
    3rd September 2007
    Posts
    39

    Default

    Does anyone else feel that the Transfer Fees paid by the clubs in FM (8.02) are totally over the top?
    Is it Clubs having too much money (i.e. a lot more than they have in real life)?

    I'll give you an example in Season 3 of my game. Man Utd paid £39M for Michael Johnson (from city). i know he's a hot prospect in real life but c'mon!
    In Season 1 Liverpool paid £25M for Verdun Corluka (also from City).
    Also in Season 1 Ac Milan paid £25M for Diarra (from Pompey).
    I'm now half way throug my third season and it seems a lot of clubs who play European football all have a £25M-£35M signing in the last couple of seasons. Often for players who really aren't even world class.

    I agree that some price inflation may take place over time but some of the transfer fees have been mystifying.

    I dont know if anyone else has similar experiences...

  3. #3
    Third Team
    Join Date
    5th November 2007
    Posts
    7,335

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Yakubu22:
    Does anyone else feel that the Transfer Fees paid by the clubs in FM (8.02) are totally over the top?


    Yes, many many people feel the same way and many many people have opened threads about the exact same thing.

    quote:
    Is it Clubs having too much money (i.e. a lot more than they have in real life)?


    In my opinion, yes this is the major contributing factor in the size of transfer fees. If a club has a large transfer kitty then it stands to reason that the selling club is going to ask for as much as possible and milk the deal. Chelsea are a real life example; SWP was not worth 24m but they were forced to pay it because Man City knew they could afford such a ridiculous fee, likewise with Damien Duff.

    In FM terms, I tried to sign Huntelaar from Ajax and had a transfer kitty of 109 million, Ajax said they wouldn't settle for anything elss than 30m, but were happy to accept 20 from Porto. IMO this was all based on the fact that I had enough money to pay over the odds and IMO that is totally realistic. Whereas the amount of money I had available for transfer was unrealisitic.

  4. #4
    Semi Pro
    Join Date
    20th June 2004
    Posts
    2,019

    Default

    defenetly, transfer fees are ridicoulus, IMO. even the transfer amounts.

  5. #5
    Amateur
    Join Date
    3rd September 2007
    Posts
    39

    Default

    Obviously I understand that a selling cub will hold out for the best deal possible (especially if the Buying club are very wealthy).
    But I'm not talking about the elite few clubs of Europe but teams in the Uefa Cup (like Ath. Madrid, Portsmouth, Villa, Everton, Getafe) all paying massive sums of money for players.

    Yeh you are right with the Chelsea analogy but the ease at which some clubs generate money needs to be looked at. Arsenal offered me a budget of £120M to takeover after Wenger left. I cant see that ever happpening (being over stupid money to spend) in real life IMO.

  6. #6
    Semi Pro
    Join Date
    12th July 2007
    Posts
    3,641

    Default

    A very well documented issue. About 3 posts a day at one point. It's trailed off a bit lately, though. I'd like to think it was the AI taking inflation into account, but I doubt that. I'd rather have loads like this than none at all though. Always gives me a smile when someone like Corluka goes for £40M+. He's good, but even on the game he ain't that good. Especially when, if you play as City, the chairman happily accepts £14M for him.

  7. #7
    Third Team
    Join Date
    5th November 2007
    Posts
    7,335

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Yakubu22:
    Obviously I understand that a selling cub will hold out for the best deal possible (especially if the Buying club are very wealthy).
    But I'm not talking about the elite few clubs of Europe but teams in the Uefa Cup (like Ath. Madrid, Portsmouth, Villa, Everton, Getafe) all paying massive sums of money for players.

    Yeh you are right with the Chelsea analogy but the ease at which some clubs generate money needs to be looked at. Arsenal offered me a budget of £120M to takeover after Wenger left. I cant see that ever happpening (being over stupid money to spend) in real life IMO.


    Now you've hit the nail on the head with the actual issue IMO. Clubs make money far too quickly and make far too much. One of the answers is given in your initial post.

    You list Portsmouth as a small club spending outrageous amounts of money, the reason is they are selling players for outrageous amount e.g. Diarra. Man City in your game have sold £65m pounds worth of player so are istantly rich. So instead of a big four in England with huge busgets you now have a big 6, not to mention the amount Villa will generate by selling the likes of Barry etc.

    IMO the transfer amounts aren't too big but their affect is too big. Whereas IRL a team like Man City (in previous seasons) would sell 65m worth of players but only get 15m or 20m to spend, in game they get all 65m and so become a big spender and a big hitter. There is scope in FM for nearly every team in the PL to become super rich because of player sales, whereas IRL the money generated would not necessarily be made available.

  8. #8
    Semi Pro
    Join Date
    20th June 2004
    Posts
    2,019

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Nomis07:
    quote:
    Originally posted by Yakubu22:
    Obviously I understand that a selling cub will hold out for the best deal possible (especially if the Buying club are very wealthy).
    But I'm not talking about the elite few clubs of Europe but teams in the Uefa Cup (like Ath. Madrid, Portsmouth, Villa, Everton, Getafe) all paying massive sums of money for players.

    Yeh you are right with the Chelsea analogy but the ease at which some clubs generate money needs to be looked at. Arsenal offered me a budget of £120M to takeover after Wenger left. I cant see that ever happpening (being over stupid money to spend) in real life IMO.


    Now you've hit the nail on the head with the actual issue IMO. Clubs make money far too quickly and make far too much. One of the answers is given in your initial post.

    You list Portsmouth as a small club spending outrageous amounts of money, the reason is they are selling players for outrageous amount e.g. Diarra. Man City in your game have sold £65m pounds worth of player so are istantly rich. So instead of a big four in England with huge busgets you now have a big 6, not to mention the amount Villa will generate by selling the likes of Barry etc.

    IMO the transfer amounts aren't too big but their affect is too big. Whereas IRL a team like Man City (in previous seasons) would sell 65m worth of players but only get 15m or 20m to spend, in game they get all 65m and so become a big spender and a big hitter. There is scope in FM for nearly every team in the PL to become super rich because of player sales, whereas IRL the money generated would not necessarily be made available.


    exactly.

    becouse of that the game is totally unrealistic after a few transfer windows, for me.

  9. #9
    First Team
    Join Date
    3rd September 2006
    Location
    I will sing for you, when you've begged me AND YOU WILL BEG ME!
    Posts
    22,744

    Default

    i've not played many seasons outside the premier league, but prize money at the end of my sevilla game had little to no effect on my budget or finances. in fact, a lower mid table finish in the prem gives you more prize money than a top 6 finish in la liga.

    the problem is, before the beta patch, finance issues were worse. my first game was Athletico Madrid, and even though they didn't have a massive amount of money, they were losing loads more money than they were making every year. winning a champions league group game win was very important, nearly £500K prize money paid wages, but nothing else had an effect.

    and yet, buying a player from mallorca who was worth £1M (half the budget) would have cost about £7M-£9M. i refuse to pay stupid amount, especially when rivals get to bid much less for the same players.

  10. #10
    Amateur
    Join Date
    29th November 2006
    Posts
    68

    Default

    i think more money needs to come out of the game in order to make it more realistic. agents fees, interest, reimbursing shareholders and other expenditure needs to increase. when this happens the amounts of money spent on players etc, will be more realistic over a longer period. at the moment a team that earns 50m in a season will have 50m to spend and that money will be redistributed to whoever they buy from. all teams get progressively richer extremely fast as almost all money generated stays in the game.

  11. #11
    Amateur
    Join Date
    3rd September 2007
    Posts
    39

    Default

    yep as discussed above..I dont feel the transfer valuations are realistic. A lot of clubs seems to become "Rich" very easily by selling good (but not world class) players at almost World Record breaking prices. Which is also unreaslistic IMO.

    Hopefully in the next game/patch clubs wont be so stubborn when demanding ridiculous transfer fees. City turned down £42M for Micah Richards in my game. They wanted £62M. Well even in real life if he improves even more in the next year could you imagine a bid like that ever been made (OR consequently turned down) for him?

  12. #12
    First Team
    Join Date
    3rd September 2006
    Location
    I will sing for you, when you've begged me AND YOU WILL BEG ME!
    Posts
    22,744

    Default

    another example of clubs being too rich, i downloaded an italian save game from 2015 and chose roma, who finished 13th in 2014/15. they had over £250M and a transfer budget of £150M. it was fun spending it on good regens, but it put me off that game tbh.

  13. #13
    Subs Bench
    Join Date
    3rd March 2007
    Location
    On Twitter, apparently; @tomtuck01
    Posts
    20,612

    Default

    Transfer fee's are massively over the top on FM, its one of the biggest problems with the game in my opinion.

    But unfortunately its just something that has to be lived with.

  14. #14
    Part-Timer
    Join Date
    14th March 2006
    Posts
    1,657

    Default

    It is the stupidest part of this game right now. How could anyone defend these marginal players being sold for amounts that would smash records IRL. I can't believe they didn't fix the issue in one of the patches.

  15. #15
    Youth Team
    Join Date
    3rd March 2003
    Posts
    4,762

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by stokes_83:
    It is the stupidest part of this game right now. How could anyone defend these marginal players being sold for amounts that would smash records IRL. I can't believe they didn't fix the issue in one of the patches.


    It's not something that can just be fixed easily with a patch though - they'd need to re-work the whole financial model in the game. The problem is with club's having too much money, and hence being able to afford to splash vast sums on players.

    Obviously it starts with the big clubs signing top players from smaller clubs for vastly inflated fees (based on them having huge amounts of money) and then the knock-on effect being that the smaller clubs then become very wealthy themselves.

  16. #16
    Amateur
    Join Date
    19th May 2004
    Location
    cheshire
    Posts
    138

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Yakubu22:
    Does anyone else feel that the Transfer Fees paid by the clubs in FM (8.02) are totally over the top?
    Is it Clubs having too much money (i.e. a lot more than they have in real life)?

    I'll give you an example in Season 3 of my game. Man Utd paid £39M for Michael Johnson (from city). i know he's a hot prospect in real life but c'mon!
    In Season 1 Liverpool paid £25M for Verdun Corluka (also from City).
    Also in Season 1 Ac Milan paid £25M for Diarra (from Pompey).
    I'm now half way throug my third season and it seems a lot of clubs who play European football all have a £25M-£35M signing in the last couple of seasons. Often for players who really aren't even world class.

    I agree that some price inflation may take place over time but some of the transfer fees have been mystifying.

    I dont know if anyone else has similar experiences...


    I think the problem lies in the players desire to leave the smaller clubs for the truly top teams.

    What tends to happen in real life is that when a top team declares an interest with a players agent, the player and the agent tell the club they want to leave for this bigger team. The selling club now has a unhappy player and much reduce bargaining power. This just doesn't happen in FM nearly often enough. You would see prices greatly reduced if agents were properly introduced!

    The players mentioned above are all good players, but not world class. Man City should be looking to get around 10m for these players, not 30m. Yes world class players should go for 20-30m, but even when the player is unhappy that is greatly reduced, e.g. Owen to Newcastle, Parker and Dyer to West Ham, Henry to Barcelona.

  17. #17
    Amateur
    Join Date
    19th May 2004
    Location
    cheshire
    Posts
    138

    Default

    Even consider Ronaldinho! There are rumours of Milan trying to get him for around 20m. Who would have thought this time last year that he would go for that price? All because he is unhappy!

  18. #18
    Semi Pro
    Join Date
    20th June 2004
    Posts
    2,019

    Default

    what's even more frightening is that you guys talk in pounds not euro,

    I'm not sure about this, but how many transfers were higher than 30M euro (about 20M pounds), in last couple of seasons?

  19. #19
    Amateur
    Join Date
    17th December 2005
    Posts
    394

    Default

    Prices are over the top in the game, for example Kaka costs over £60 million in the game, when on a game such as Championship Manager 2008 you can get him for a bit more of a realistic price of £32 million

  20. #20
    Subs Bench
    Join Date
    16th August 2005
    Location
    Future events such as these will affect you in the future.
    Posts
    21,153

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by LARulz:
    Prices are over the top in the game, for example Kaka costs over £60 million in the game, when on a game such as Championship Manager 2008 you can get him for a bit more of a realistic price of £32 million

    I'd say that's a bad example. I'd be very surprised if Kaka left AC for less than £50mil.

  21. #21
    Amateur
    Join Date
    16th March 2000
    Location
    London
    Posts
    63

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Mitja:
    what's even more frightening is that you guys talk in pounds not euro,

    I'm not sure about this, but how many transfers were higher than 30M euro (about 20M pounds), in last couple of seasons?


    I read somewhere that in the calendar year, 2007, Torres was the biggest transfer anywhere in the world. His price was £20m-26.5m (depending on the source).

    Off the top of my head, I can't think of any other players who've gone for £20m plus in the last couple of years, except for Shevchenko (£30m).

  22. #22
    Youth Team
    Join Date
    3rd March 2003
    Posts
    4,762

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by LARulz:
    Prices are over the top in the game, for example Kaka costs over £60 million in the game, when on a game such as Championship Manager 2008 you can get him for a bit more of a realistic price of £32 million


    How can you say what a 'realistic' price would be for Kaka IRL? It would depend on a number of factors. Assuming Kaka has plenty of time remaining on his contract (3 years or more) I see no reason why Milan would sell him unless it was for a world record fee.

  23. #23
    Amateur
    Join Date
    28th May 2007
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Posts
    227

    Default

    Aiden McGeady -> Bayern Munich; £11.75M
    Massimo Donati -> Olympiakos; £8.75M
    Evander Sno -> Feyonoord; £7.25M

    Ridiculous, all of them.

    Then again, I paid £7M for Erik Edman

  24. #24
    Amateur
    Join Date
    28th May 2007
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Posts
    227

    Default

    Also, see this:
    I know he's good, but...

  25. #25
    Amateur
    Join Date
    25th August 2007
    Location
    I have seen it from somebody who have heard of it..
    Posts
    23

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Mitja:
    becouse of that the game is totally unrealistic after a few transfer windows, for me.

    You are so right, after the 1st season:
    Silva for 79M Euro to Inter
    Raul Gacia 65M Euro to Inter
    Denilson 58M Euro to A.C. Milan
    Goran Pandev 41M Euro again to Inter.
    I play as Arsenal and the offer for denilson was accepted by chairman.
    Also in my game a lot of job hopping; Kompany to PSV in 2st season and second to newcastle, PSV only made 1 M euro on the deal same with Diego from Werder to Chelsea to Roma.

    I have enough money to spend but I do not like it and start a new game after 2 - 3 seasons.

  26. #26
    Amateur
    Join Date
    25th August 2007
    Location
    I have seen it from somebody who have heard of it..
    Posts
    23

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Mikado:
    quote:
    Originally posted by Mitja:
    becouse of that the game is totally unrealistic after a few transfer windows, for me.

    You are so right, after the 1st season:
    Silva for 79M Euro to Inter
    Raul Gacia 65M Euro to Inter
    Denilson 58M Euro to A.C. Milan
    Goran Pandev 41M Euro again to Inter.
    I play as Arsenal and the offer for denilson was accepted by chairman.
    Also in my game a lot of job hopping; Kompany to PSV in 1st season and in second to newcastle, PSV only made 1 M euro on the deal same with Diego from Werder to Chelsea to Roma.

    I have enough money to spend but I do not like it and start a new game after 2 - 3 seasons.

  27. #27
    Part-timer
    Join Date
    18th May 2007
    Location
    Portman Road, Ipswich.
    Posts
    1,635

    Default

    Do you expect to see players go cheaply?

    I mean Mikado , the transfers in your are high because do you think that a team will be willing to let their star players go on the cheap?

    No, so expect to see teams pay a lot more than that specific player is worth, it's just happened in my game too, Real Madrid have just signed Vedran Corluka from Man City for £33M, not only that, but they also signed Ricardo Quaresma for £32.5M from Porto.

  28. #28
    Amateur
    Join Date
    25th August 2007
    Location
    I have seen it from somebody who have heard of it..
    Posts
    23

    Default

    Ofcourse the better the player the more he will cost, but it is ridiculous that Inter can spend 209 M Euro in two months.

    [img=http://img389.imageshack.us/img389/3682/intertrasnfer20082009rm4.jpg]

  29. #29
    First Team Squad Member
    Join Date
    31st December 2006
    Posts
    18,677

    Default

    [img=http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/3721/agbonlahordv6.th.jpg]]Agbonlahor[/URL]

    Take a look at this then - From 8.0.2

    He isnt even that good!!

  30. #30
    Part-timer
    Join Date
    18th May 2007
    Location
    Portman Road, Ipswich.
    Posts
    1,635

    Default

    How much was he worth originally?

  31. #31
    First Team Squad Member
    Join Date
    31st December 2006
    Posts
    18,677

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by happy slappy:
    How much was he worth originally?


    I don't know - but defiantly not £28,000,000!

  32. #32
    Part-timer
    Join Date
    18th May 2007
    Location
    Portman Road, Ipswich.
    Posts
    1,635

    Default

    Hey, I guess that if they were going to sell one of their best players, they might as well try and get a decent amount of money for him.

  33. #33
    Moderator
    Join Date
    27th October 2006
    Location
    United Arab Emirates
    Posts
    5,088

    Default

    i refuse to pay an over-the-odds price for a player, on FM08 i vowed not to end up mkaing massive ***** signings as i have done before, as it is this season i got Luka Modric for £7m, sold van persie for £20m and i am happy with that business. i wont spend a record transfer fee, under any circumstances

  34. #34
    Semi Pro
    Join Date
    20th June 2004
    Posts
    2,019

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by llama3:
    i refuse to pay an over-the-odds price for a player, on FM08 i vowed not to end up mkaing massive ***** signings as i have done before, as it is this season i got Luka Modric for £7m, sold van persie for £20m and i am happy with that business. i wont spend a record transfer fee, under any circumstances


    that's the spirit

    good job with modric. you can push up his PA slighltly without feeling guilty, he's a god

  35. #35
    Amateur
    Join Date
    20th October 2006
    Location
    Sheffield for Uni. Birmingham for Home.
    Posts
    430

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Hershie:
    quote:
    Originally posted by LARulz:
    Prices are over the top in the game, for example Kaka costs over £60 million in the game, when on a game such as Championship Manager 2008 you can get him for a bit more of a realistic price of £32 million

    I'd say that's a bad example. I'd be very surprised if Kaka left AC for less than £50mil.


    I've just signed him on a free. Granted he is 32 now but his stats are still pretty decent as a backup player.

  36. #36
    Amateur
    Join Date
    20th October 2006
    Location
    Sheffield for Uni. Birmingham for Home.
    Posts
    430

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by bridport_james:
    quote:
    Originally posted by happy slappy:
    How much was he worth originally?


    I don't know - but defiantly not £28,000,000!


    Sorry for the double post. Isn't Gabby worth around £6.5m? Double that IRL

  37. #37
    Semi Pro
    Join Date
    1st June 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,182

    Default

    Yakubu,

    What would you price your player at if you did not want to sell him? Lets say your star defender? 50mill? if someone bids, then i amsure you would sell.

    Equally so, when you have money, you do not mind spedinging it. I just spend 60mill trying to get two decent english players.

    Supply and demand

    There will be players that go for prices far far lower than their true value if the team that owns them isnt playing them, so why not the other way round?

  38. #38
    Third Team
    Join Date
    5th November 2007
    Posts
    7,335

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by lam:
    There will be players that go for prices far far lower than their true value if the team that owns them isnt playing them, so why not the other way round?


    Another good point. It can work in the opposite direction as well, I picked up a 26 year old Nani for 424k and Gourcuff for 1.3m.

  39. #39
    Reserves
    Join Date
    14th March 2004
    Location
    Phnom Penh!
    Posts
    10,375

    Default

    I agree that there are a lot of irrational elements in the transfer prices in FM08; here. let me add an extra element into the discussion and see what you make of it.

    I've used the editor to turn Spurs into a bit of a super-club. In the first season it was nip 'n' tuck between the Big 5 until the very last matchday. I was edging it, but my board were deeply unhappy since I'd been dumped early out of the League Cup, FA Cup AND EURO Cup by the same team every time - Liverpool. And every time I was scuppered by the same player - Torres.

    Leaving the board confidence bug aside, in the close season I decided I really really wanted Torres (nb. Liverpool are not a rival team).

    Now here comes the rub: I fired up FMM and saw his Sale Price (i.e. the 'secret' one) at about £60 million. From the prize money for winning the EPL I had that, so I bid. It was rejected. In FMM the sale price had immediately risen to over £100 million.

    I left it a week and the sale price was back to £60M. I bid higher - same rejection, same leap to £100M+. Repeat ad nauseum.

    So even the hidden stat is manipulated by the AI to up the price to beyond what you can afford. I couldn't test this, but my guess is that if A.N.OTHER had offered the £60M it would have been accepted.

    So, what's going on?

  40. #40
    Semi Pro
    Join Date
    1st June 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,182

    Default

    IMO i think the transfer system is fairly accurate. When teams do not want to sell a player they put a high value on them. If there are teams out there rich and stupid enough to come in and buy them, then all to the good. Personally i believe it spreasds the wealth a bit more.

    I think what does need looking at, is how some managers decide on who to buy. An example of this would be the player mentioned at the begining of this thread.

    HOwever, that said, we do not know what motivates a manager to single out a player. As i mentioned previously i just spent 60mill on two decent english players. Now, there is no way someone out there AI or not, would have know that i was desperate to re-instroduce the rare species of 'the englishman' back into the wilds that are 'Tottenham' Sath lundon.

    Lee

  41. #41
    Third Team
    Join Date
    5th November 2007
    Posts
    7,335

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by phnompenhandy:
    I agree that there are a lot of irrational elements in the transfer prices in FM08; here. let me add an extra element into the discussion and see what you make of it.

    I've used the editor to turn Spurs into a bit of a super-club. In the first season it was nip 'n' tuck between the Big 5 until the very last matchday. I was edging it, but my board were deeply unhappy since I'd been dumped early out of the League Cup, FA Cup AND EURO Cup by the same team every time - Liverpool. And every time I was scuppered by the same player - Torres.

    Leaving the board confidence bug aside, in the close season I decided I really really wanted Torres (nb. Liverpool are not a rival team).

    Now here comes the rub: I fired up FMM and saw his Sale Price (i.e. the 'secret' one) at about £60 million. From the prize money for winning the EPL I had that, so I bid. It was rejected. In FMM the sale price had immediately risen to over £100 million.

    I left it a week and the sale price was back to £60M. I bid higher - same rejection, same leap to £100M+. Repeat ad nauseum.

    So even the hidden stat is manipulated by the AI to up the price to beyond what you can afford. I couldn't test this, but my guess is that if A.N.OTHER had offered the £60M it would have been accepted.

    So, what's going on?


    What's your relationship like with Liverpool?

    I've noticed the same thing, a German regen striker called Proll was listed with 8.6m asking price, so I bid. Six bids later and it's gradually went up to 14m, yet they have accepted an offer of 8.6m from HSV. I'm Bayern btw and the selling team is Schalke, who are on my rivalries list.

    It may have something to do with rivalries, but tbh any team IRL that turns down 60m for any player is mad and I sugegst that if Man Utd came in with 60m for Torres Liverpool wouldn't turn it down IRL, despite the rivalry.

    The major irritation for me is valuation, I really don't see the point in it, considering it seems to have little impact on the actual selling price eventually. Surely as asking price goes up, valuation should as well??

  42. #42
    Semi Pro
    Join Date
    1st June 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,182

    Default

    quote:
    back into the wilds that are 'Tottenham' Sath lundon.


    DOH !!!!

    spot the error.

    What i meant to say was 'Norf lundun mate', init.

  43. #43
    Third Team
    Join Date
    5th November 2007
    Posts
    7,335

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by lam:
    IMO i think the transfer system is fairly accurate. When teams do not want to sell a player they put a high value on them. If there are teams out there rich and stupid enough to come in and buy them, then all to the good. Personally i believe it spreasds the wealth a bit more.

    I think what does need looking at, is how some managers decide on who to buy. An example of this would be the player mentioned at the begining of this thread.

    HOwever, that said, we do not know what motivates a manager to single out a player. As i mentioned previously i just spent 60mill on two decent english players. Now, there is no way someone out there AI or not, would have know that i was desperate to re-instroduce the rare species of 'the englishman' back into the wilds that are 'Tottenham' Sath lundon.

    Lee


    As you can see from my posts above, I would tend to agree with you re: the buying club being able to afford over the top amounts. However, it is slightly laughable to see players like Corluka move for £25m, could the selling price and acceptance price not be directly linked to PA and CA, so avoiding huge transfer fees for below average players?

  44. #44
    Semi Pro
    Join Date
    22nd January 2004
    Location
    Newcastle upon Tyne (lurking in the gloaming)
    Posts
    3,676

    Default

    My biggest irritation with the transfer market is with the way bids are accepted/rejected differently for AI-controlled clubs or human clubs.

    I was trying to sign Elano for Fiorentina from Man City and was getting quoted all manner of ridiculous transfer fees. Then City accepted £12 million from Lyon and were still quoting £29 million to me if I wanted to sign him (funnily enough I didn't want to sign him after that and signed Berbatov instead!)

  45. #45
    Amateur
    Join Date
    3rd September 2007
    Posts
    39

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by lam:
    Yakubu,

    What would you price your player at if you did not want to sell him? Lets say your star defender? 50mill? if someone bids, then i amsure you would sell.

    Equally so, when you have money, you do not mind spedinging it. I just spend 60mill trying to get two decent english players.

    Supply and demand

    There will be players that go for prices far far lower than their true value if the team that owns them isnt playing them, so why not the other way round.
    .


    Yeh but how realistic is that, this is my point (spending £60M on two "decent" english players)?
    I'm not talking about world class players -not even great players! Just very good players.
    Look at my original post - Season 1

    Lassana Diarra for £23M
    Verdan Corluka £22M
    Vincent Komapny £25M

    Lets just think about how much their clubs (in real life) paid for them 6 months ago. Probably under 25% of this new value.
    These are just two obvious examples in season 1 there is more!
    Sure you have a your best player and you may not want to sell them. However every player has his price and in the real world its not as inflated as in FM.
    Take for example Micah Richards at City who is a bright young talent who you may desperately want to keep hold of. Sure if you bid £10M or even £15M the bid would get rejected in real life. But how much after £20M or £25M would you need to go to get him. IMO not much more. In my game City demanded £62M and settled on £45M. Crazy since he isnt even world class.

    Ask yourself - how many players in Rea life World football transfer for £25M+ a year? Then look at how many go for that price in FM. You can't pretend prices aren't inflated. Seville paying £34M for Chellini from Juve. I dont think so...

    Its supply and demand on steroids!

  46. #46
    Reserves
    Join Date
    14th March 2004
    Location
    Phnom Penh!
    Posts
    10,375

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by glamdring:
    My biggest irritation with the transfer market is with the way bids are accepted/rejected differently for AI-controlled clubs or human clubs.

    I was trying to sign Elano for Fiorentina from Man City and was getting quoted all manner of ridiculous transfer fees. Then City accepted £12 million from Lyon and were still quoting £29 million to me if I wanted to sign him (funnily enough I didn't want to sign him after that and signed Berbatov instead!)



    Yes, that's the kind of scenario I'm alluding to with the evidence of the FMM editor.

    Nomis07 - I have 0 relationship with Liverpool - no rivalry, no manager interaction.

    I did earlier try to tap up an Arsenal youth and he refused on account of our rivalry which was fair enough; the Torres case doesn't fall into that territory.

    More: I fiddled FMM to make Torres love me 100%. Result - he disliked his club and manager for blocking the move, but it made no difference to the club rejection of my offers!

  47. #47
    Amateur
    Join Date
    5th February 2005
    Posts
    43

    Default

    On my game, Juventus paid £34.5mill for Robin Van Persie. Class player tho.

  48. #48
    Amateur
    Join Date
    3rd September 2007
    Posts
    39

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by cypriotsoldier:
    On my game, Juventus paid £34.5mill for Robin Van Persie. Class player tho.


    yeh that is believable though cos he is top class and a proven international footballer. Whereas Arsenal selling Rosicky for £26M when he hasnt got the same potential (and is a lot older) as RVP just wouldnt happen

  49. #49
    Third Team
    Join Date
    5th November 2007
    Posts
    7,335

    Default

    I think the RVP is just as ridiculous as the others. Consider that Thierry Henry cost £16m, Patrick Vieira £16m and £34m for RVP seems insane.

    I think we are getting bogged down in the, how much for a "world class" player argument. If you consider how much it actually costs for a truely world class player and compare it to the prices paid for good or very good players;

    Thierry Henry £16m compared to Owen Hargreaves £18m
    Fernando Torres £24m compared to Shaun Wright Philips £24m
    Michael Essien £24m compared to Paulo Ferreira £18m.

    "Inflated" transfer fees are part and parcel of world football these days, but the real issue is that the transfer fees are so huge in FM. Forget the fact that the players aren't "World Class", when was the last time a team outside the Premiership paid over £30m for a player??

    Paying over the odds for average players seems realistic but in the context of FM it's just how far over the odds it seems to go.

  50. #50
    Reserves
    Join Date
    14th March 2004
    Location
    Phnom Penh!
    Posts
    10,375

    Default

    RVP is a bit of a red herring in this argument since he has age on his side.

    Also, comparing Torres and SWP is weak because that latter was purchased in the heady early daus of the Roman/Jose empire.

    But the main points are as follows:

    1. Clearly less-than-world-class players are going for stupid fees, and world class players for fees far higher than is realistic.

    2. The AI seems to treat human players and AI managers differently. Now I accept SI's case that there is no differentiation between human and AI in the match engine, but is it really the case when it comes to transfer dealings?

  51. #51
    Third Team
    Join Date
    5th November 2007
    Posts
    7,335

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by phnompenhandy:
    Also, comparing Torres and SWP is weak because that latter was purchased in the heady early daus of the Roman/Jose empire.


    I beg to differ, the comparison is wholly relevant to FM because so many clubs experience "heady early days of the Roman/Jose empire"esque windfalls, and find themselves in a position to spend that sort of money on players.

    If we were to take a more recent high transfer fee example to compare with Torres then perhaps Malouda at £18m would be more reasonable. Can anyone actually say in honesty that there is only £6m difference in player between Malouda and Torres?

  52. #52
    Amateur
    Join Date
    28th October 2007
    Posts
    435

    Default

    I didn't really think it was an issue until Arsenal signed Joaquin from Valencia for 36 Million.

    1. Arsenal would never buy a player for so much
    2. Joaquin is not worth 36 million of the queens English pounds!

  53. #53
    Reserves
    Join Date
    14th March 2004
    Location
    Phnom Penh!
    Posts
    10,375

    Default

    That's a valid point - as fantasy newbie managers of the top clubs in the world, we do tend to act Mourinhoesque. It's really up to the boards to curb our spending.

    The main 2 points summarising the points made in this thread (by you included) still stand though.

  54. #54
    Reserves
    Join Date
    14th March 2004
    Location
    Phnom Penh!
    Posts
    10,375

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by phnompenhandy:
    That's a valid point - as fantasy newbie managers of the top clubs in the world, we do tend to act Mourinhoesque. It's really up to the boards to curb our spending.

    The main 2 points summarising the points made in this thread (by you included) still stand though.


    Should have quoted Nomis07 there.

  55. #55
    Semi Pro
    Join Date
    22nd January 2004
    Location
    Newcastle upon Tyne (lurking in the gloaming)
    Posts
    3,676

    Default

    I accept that a lot of these fees being reported are in the 1st season, but putting that aside, we don't know what transfer fees will be like 10 years down the line in real life. Maybe they will be at this insane level or maybe the transfer market will have bombed completely.

    Basically my point is that I really couldn't give a flying fig about absolute transfer fees. Trying to rationalise what a player is worth is impossible given the ludicrous market place that is football. Relative transfer fees are more of an issue, i.e. players relative to each other moving to or from the same club (different clubs in different financial situations, either buying or selling, will always value players of similar ability very differently) and transfer fees relative to how much money a club has available to spend - i.e. clearly if you only have £25 million in the bank blowing £20 million on a single player who is not world class is stupid. If you have £250 million in the bank then it is less stupid.

  56. #56
    Third Team
    Join Date
    5th November 2007
    Posts
    7,335

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by phnompenhandy:
    That's a valid point - as fantasy newbie managers of the top clubs in the world, we do tend to act Mourinhoesque. It's really up to the boards to curb our spending.

    The main 2 points summarising the points made in this thread (by you included) still stand though.


    That leads me to a suggestion, which I don't think will get a good response but IMO would be a good addition to the game.

    Should wage and transfer structures be set by the board att he start of each season along with budgets? E.g. Man Utd have £20m to spend and have the ability to spend every penny of that on one player, Derby have £20m to spend but the board set a limit of £7.5m as the highest amount allowed to be spent on one player. This could rise as reputation and earnings rise and eventually players would have the ability to spend £20m on one player, no matter what club they are. IMO that seems realisitc as to how RL clubs would be run.

    Personally I set myself a target of highest transfer fee I can pay as the clubs record purchase, i.e. at Bayern Munich I can't spend more than the £17m spent on ribery. Likewise I set a wage structure and limit myself to £46k pw per player at the most, if anyone asks for more then they move.

    IMO the unrealistic element is that clubs such as Derby can spend £40m in one season and have players earning £60k a week after only 2 seasons.

    I doubt this will get a good response but it's just a suggestion.

  57. #57
    Amateur
    Join Date
    3rd September 2007
    Posts
    39

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by glamdring:
    I accept that a lot of these fees being reported are in the 1st season, but putting that aside, we don't know what transfer fees will be like 10 years down the line in real life. Maybe they will be at this insane level or maybe the transfer market will have bombed completely.

    Basically my point is that I really couldn't give a flying fig about absolute transfer fees. Trying to rationalise what a player is worth is impossible given the ludicrous market place that is football. Relative transfer fees are more of an issue, i.e. players relative to each other moving to or from the same club (different clubs in different financial situations, either buying or selling, will always value players of similar ability very differently) and transfer fees relative to how much money a club has available to spend - i.e. clearly if you only have £25 million in the bank blowing £20 million on a single player who is not world class is stupid. If you have £250 million in the bank then it is less stupid.



    Thats the whole point of this thread. These examples are in Seasons 1 and 2 i.e. 2007,2008 and 2009.
    Obviously we can't predict the market in 10 years time (but at a guess it will be higher prices). However this debate is about above-average players transfering among above average size clubs for astronomical fees.
    Since FM is a simulation, is it realistic that clubs like Arsenal or Roma will have between £120M and £200M in the bank to spend on players in 2 years time? I very much doubt it.

  58. #58
    Third Team
    Join Date
    5th November 2007
    Posts
    7,335

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Yakubu22:
    Since FM is a simulation, is it realistic that clubs like Arsenal or Roma will have between £120M and £200M in the bank to spend on players in 2 years time? I very much doubt it.


    I don't see why it isn't realisitc, if Arsenal sell Fabregas, Hleb and Adebayor, as is being reported, then I would sugegst they would have the guts of £120m to spend including non spent fees left over from this year.

    IMO the issue is not teams like Arsenal and Roma having that amount to spend, because they are massive teams with massive money potential, the issue is teams like Man City and Portsmouth having £120m to spend.

  59. #59
    Reserves
    Join Date
    14th March 2004
    Location
    Phnom Penh!
    Posts
    10,375

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Nomis07:
    quote:
    Originally posted by phnompenhandy:
    That's a valid point - as fantasy newbie managers of the top clubs in the world, we do tend to act Mourinhoesque. It's really up to the boards to curb our spending.

    The main 2 points summarising the points made in this thread (by you included) still stand though.


    That leads me to a suggestion, which I don't think will get a good response but IMO would be a good addition to the game.

    Should wage and transfer structures be set by the board att he start of each season along with budgets? E.g. Man Utd have £20m to spend and have the ability to spend every penny of that on one player, Derby have £20m to spend but the board set a limit of £7.5m as the highest amount allowed to be spent on one player. This could rise as reputation and earnings rise and eventually players would have the ability to spend £20m on one player, no matter what club they are. IMO that seems realisitc as to how RL clubs would be run.

    Personally I set myself a target of highest transfer fee I can pay as the clubs record purchase, i.e. at Bayern Munich I can't spend more than the £17m spent on ribery. Likewise I set a wage structure and limit myself to £46k pw per player at the most, if anyone asks for more then they move.

    IMO the unrealistic element is that clubs such as Derby can spend £40m in one season and have players earning £60k a week after only 2 seasons.

    I doubt this will get a good response but it's just a suggestion.



    Seriously, I think that it's a damned good idea and should be part of the chairman and board's make-up (i.e. their attributes in business, interfering etc.)

    As to projecting financial prospects into the future, that's not a n issue. FM always bases future financial models on the current situation, so that TV money won't zoom up or take a dive; the global situation will be consistent - the only variable is you, the human manager!

  60. #60
    Semi Pro
    Join Date
    22nd January 2004
    Location
    Newcastle upon Tyne (lurking in the gloaming)
    Posts
    3,676

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Nomis07:
    quote:
    Originally posted by Yakubu22:
    Since FM is a simulation, is it realistic that clubs like Arsenal or Roma will have between £120M and £200M in the bank to spend on players in 2 years time? I very much doubt it.


    I don't see why it isn't realisitc, if Arsenal sell Fabregas, Hleb and Adebayor, as is being reported, then I would sugegst they would have the guts of £120m to spend including non spent fees left over from this year.

    IMO the issue is not teams like Arsenal and Roma having that amount to spend, because they are massive teams with massive money potential, the issue is teams like Man City and Portsmouth having £120m to spend.


    Teams like Man City and Portsmouth have ultra-rich owners. You can't expect a game to predict exactly how much of that they will choose to plough into those clubs come next season.

  61. #61
    Third Team
    Join Date
    5th November 2007
    Posts
    7,335

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by glamdring:
    Teams like Man City and Portsmouth have ultra-rich owners. You can't expect a game to predict exactly how much of that they will choose to plough into those clubs come next season.


    Surely that's exactly what is expected of the game considering it predicts the amount a Chairman would accept for a player without the managers approval etc.

  62. #62
    Semi Pro
    Join Date
    20th June 2004
    Posts
    2,019

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Nomis07:
    quote:
    Originally posted by Yakubu22:
    Since FM is a simulation, is it realistic that clubs like Arsenal or Roma will have between £120M and £200M in the bank to spend on players in 2 years time? I very much doubt it.


    I don't see why it isn't realisitc, if Arsenal sell Fabregas, Hleb and Adebayor, as is being reported, then I would sugegst they would have the guts of £120m to spend including non spent fees left over from this year.

    IMO the issue is not teams like Arsenal and Roma having that amount to spend, because they are massive teams with massive money potential, the issue is teams like Man City and Portsmouth having £120m to spend.


    no, the issue is about any club splashing totally unrealistic amounts of money for avarage or good players. (we're not talking about Cristiano, Messi or Kaka.) the resoult of it is too much money in flow. it's enough that 4 or 5 players are sold for huge amount. that's what people involved in football know (and that's why it doesn't happen). if club is rich that doesn't meen that board or chairman are idiots.

  63. #63
    Semi Pro
    Join Date
    20th June 2004
    Posts
    2,019

    Default

    for how much is Dani Alves gonna be sold, who's targetet from Man U? he's one of the hottest players in next transfer window. no more than £20m (25 max). and even that's insane for the full back. Man U could bought him last year but Sevilla wanted too much for him, probably. what heppened? he stayed in Sevilla and he's unhappy there. now they need to sell him, or he'll move for free in next year or year after, after his contract expires.

    you want £30m for Richards? OK, I won't buy him. I'll unsettle him and I'll force you to sell him for £15m in next couple of years or even get him for free. and that's how things go IRE.

  64. #64
    Third Team
    Join Date
    5th November 2007
    Posts
    7,335

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Mitja:
    you want £30m for Richards? OK, I won't buy him. I'll unsettle him and I'll force you to sell him for £15m in next couple of years or even get him for free. and that's how things go IRE.


    I couldn't agree more, but IMO the issue is that whilst IRL Man Utd only have say £40m to spend on players each season rather than £120m. It isn't unrealistic to think that Utd could spend £120m in one season because Chelsea have done it but at the same time it is very unlikely. Unfortunately in FM it is very likely due to the amount of money earned by every club.

    In my two saves I have Bayern Munich with a balance of £189m and transfer budget of £109m, Roma with budget £300m and transfer budget £201m. Yes it's totally unrealistic, but it is also unrelaistic to assume that a club with a player i'm interested in won't ask for £40m considering I have it to spend and then some.

    The amount of money earnt is the issue IMO and how easily it is earnt. The issue with smaller teams having such huge budgets is that by 2012 we see the top 10 in England spending £40m a year on players, whereas if the money situation was more realistic we would still only be seeing the top four do it and we wouldn't take as much notice.

  65. #65
    Semi Pro
    Join Date
    20th June 2004
    Posts
    2,019

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Nomis07:
    quote:
    Originally posted by Mitja:
    you want £30m for Richards? OK, I won't buy him. I'll unsettle him and I'll force you to sell him for £15m in next couple of years or even get him for free. and that's how things go IRE.


    I couldn't agree more, but IMO the issue is that whilst IRL Man Utd only have say £40m to spend on players each season rather than £120m. It isn't unrealistic to think that Utd could spend £120m in one season because Chelsea have done it but at the same time it is very unlikely. Unfortunately in FM it is very likely due to the amount of money earned by every club.

    In my two saves I have Bayern Munich with a balance of £189m and transfer budget of £109m, Roma with budget £300m and transfer budget £201m. Yes it's totally unrealistic, but it is also unrelaistic to assume that a club with a player i'm interested in won't ask for £40m considering I have it to spend and then some.

    The amount of money earnt is the issue IMO and how easily it is earnt. The issue with smaller teams having such huge budgets is that by 2012 we see the top 10 in England spending £40m a year on players, whereas if the money situation was more realistic we would still only be seeing the top four do it and we wouldn't take as much notice.


    yes and Chelsea have done it with 1 injection of money and it seems like things do normalise even there. but I consider Chelsea as as exception not a rule. I realy don't know how SI managed to put these amount of transfer money even for for richest clubs.

    since you were mentioning Roma and Bayern... Bayern is rich club but they are known for their stinginess and they bought Ribery and Toni becouse of the fan pressure on board, after bad resoults last season...

    Roma is in debt IRE if I'm not wrong. it's a question if Sensi family can retain their club becouse of the financial situation, they didn't buy a player for high amount for years now...

    some clubs have money but mostly they don't. small clubs will need to sell their best players for realistic amounts. IMO the problem in the game is in EPL. it's got the money...but I'm not sure if financial situation isn't 'a little' exaggerated. also transfer budgets and prize money are insane in EPL.

  66. #66
    Third Team
    Join Date
    5th November 2007
    Posts
    7,335

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Mitja:
    yes and Chelsea have done it with 1 injection of money and it seems like things do normalise even there. but I consider Chelsea as as exception not a rule. I realy don't know how SI managed to put these amount of transfer money even for for richest clubs.

    since you were mentioning Roma and Bayern... Bayern is rich club but they are known for their stinginess and they bought Ribery and Toni becouse of the fan pressure on board, after bad resoults last season...

    Roma is in debt IRE if I'm not wrong. it's a question if Sensi family can retain their club becouse of the financial situation, they didn't buy a player for high amount for years now...

    some clubs have money but mostly they don't. small clubs will need to sell their best players for realistic amounts. IMO the problem in the game is in EPL. it's got the money...but I'm not sure if financial situation isn't 'a little' exaggerated. also transfer budgets and prize money are insane in EPL.


    Does this not back up my earlier suggestion then?

    quote:
    That leads me to a suggestion, which I don't think will get a good response but IMO would be a good addition to the game.

    Should wage and transfer structures be set by the board at the start of each season along with budgets? E.g. Man Utd have £20m to spend and have the ability to spend every penny of that on one player, Derby have £20m to spend but the board set a limit of £7.5m as the highest amount allowed to be spent on one player. This could rise as reputation and earnings rise and eventually players would have the ability to spend £20m on one player, no matter what club they are. IMO that seems realisitc as to how RL clubs would be run.

    Personally I set myself a target of highest transfer fee I can pay as the clubs record purchase, i.e. at Bayern Munich I can't spend more than the £17m spent on ribery. Likewise I set a wage structure and limit myself to £46k pw per player at the most, if anyone asks for more then they move.

    IMO the unrealistic element is that clubs such as Derby can spend £40m in one season and have players earning £60k a week after only 2 seasons.

    I doubt this will get a good response but it's just a suggestion.

  67. #67
    Amateur
    Join Date
    3rd September 2007
    Posts
    39

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Mitja:
    quote:
    Originally posted by Nomis07:
    quote:
    Originally posted by Yakubu22:
    Since FM is a simulation, is it realistic that clubs like Arsenal or Roma will have between £120M and £200M in the bank to spend on players in 2 years time? I very much doubt it.


    I don't see why it isn't realisitc, if Arsenal sell Fabregas, Hleb and Adebayor, as is being reported, then I would sugegst they would have the guts of £120m to spend including non spent fees left over from this year.

    IMO the issue is not teams like Arsenal and Roma having that amount to spend, because they are massive teams with massive money potential, the issue is teams like Man City and Portsmouth having £120m to spend.


    no, the issue is about any club splashing totally unrealistic amounts of money for avarage or good players. (we're not talking about Cristiano, Messi or Kaka.) the resoult of it is too much money in flow. it's enough that 4 or 5 players are sold for huge amount. that's what people involved in football know (and that's why it doesn't happen). if club is rich that doesn't meen that board or chairman are idiots.


    If we are referring to the original examples (from my game) which I stated then actually you are wrong!

    Arsenal have not sold anyone except Rosicky in the first year. Yet within 18 months have accrued over £100M in transfer cash. Adebayour, RVP, Hleb etc are all still there! How do you explain that?

  68. #68
    Moderator
    Join Date
    27th October 2006
    Location
    United Arab Emirates
    Posts
    5,088

    Default

    arsenal do actually irl have that kind of money to spend, wenger doesnt like to, so thats fair enough, but we do genuinely have up to £100m to spend before player sales, cos the emirates earns us so much cash!

  69. #69
    Third Team
    Join Date
    5th November 2007
    Posts
    7,335

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Yakubu22:
    Arsenal have not sold anyone except Rosicky in the first year. Yet within 18 months have accrued over £100M in transfer cash. Adebayour, RVP, Hleb etc are all still there! How do you explain that?


    We need more info than just who they have or haven't sold. Have they won anything? Where did they finish in the PL, CL etc etc? Each of these bring with them massive amounts of prize money and huge amounts even for finishing 2nd or 3rd.

  70. #70
    Semi Pro
    Join Date
    20th June 2004
    Posts
    2,019

    Default

    yes I agree, some clubs do have that policy (max. amount for a player) but mostly they don't (as far as I know). much easier restriction would be that board limits any transfer which is more than 2x of his true value, especially for those those transfers over 10m. I know this can't be set as a defenitve rule, but IMO it's much more realistic than having 30m transfers for 'avarage players' all the time.

    I realy wouldn't like to comment your Derby example.

  71. #71
    Semi Pro
    Join Date
    20th June 2004
    Posts
    2,019

    Default

    I was commenting this:

    quote:
    Originally posted by Nomis07:
    quote:
    Originally posted by Mitja:
    yes and Chelsea have done it with 1 injection of money and it seems like things do normalise even there. but I consider Chelsea as as exception not a rule. I realy don't know how SI managed to put these amount of transfer money even for for richest clubs.

    since you were mentioning Roma and Bayern... Bayern is rich club but they are known for their stinginess and they bought Ribery and Toni becouse of the fan pressure on board, after bad resoults last season...

    Roma is in debt IRE if I'm not wrong. it's a question if Sensi family can retain their club becouse of the financial situation, they didn't buy a player for high amount for years now...

    some clubs have money but mostly they don't. small clubs will need to sell their best players for realistic amounts. IMO the problem in the game is in EPL. it's got the money...but I'm not sure if financial situation isn't 'a little' exaggerated. also transfer budgets and prize money are insane in EPL.


    Does this not back up my earlier suggestion then?

    quote:
    That leads me to a suggestion, which I don't think will get a good response but IMO would be a good addition to the game.

    Should wage and transfer structures be set by the board at the start of each season along with budgets? E.g. Man Utd have £20m to spend and have the ability to spend every penny of that on one player, Derby have £20m to spend but the board set a limit of £7.5m as the highest amount allowed to be spent on one player. This could rise as reputation and earnings rise and eventually players would have the ability to spend £20m on one player, no matter what club they are. IMO that seems realisitc as to how RL clubs would be run.

    Personally I set myself a target of highest transfer fee I can pay as the clubs record purchase, i.e. at Bayern Munich I can't spend more than the £17m spent on ribery. Likewise I set a wage structure and limit myself to £46k pw per player at the most, if anyone asks for more then they move.

    IMO the unrealistic element is that clubs such as Derby can spend £40m in one season and have players earning £60k a week after only 2 seasons.

    I doubt this will get a good response but it's just a suggestion.

  72. #72
    Third Team
    Join Date
    5th November 2007
    Posts
    7,335

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Mitja:
    much easier restriction would be that board limits any transfer which is more than 2x of his true value, especially for those those transfers over 10m.


    Apologies on the Derby front i'll say Forest instead

    On your point, as I remember back when CM01/02 was out I was a young whippersnapper who cheated and created super teams, on occasion the board would terminate a transfer because they thought the amount I was buying for was too high or selling for was too low.

    Is it just me or was that a feature back then. Could that not be brought back?

  73. #73
    Semi Pro
    Join Date
    22nd January 2004
    Location
    Newcastle upon Tyne (lurking in the gloaming)
    Posts
    3,676

    Default

    That's an issue of general financial simulation and is totally separate from transfer fees. The giant transfer fees are an effect of that rather than a problem in themselves.

    FM is a football sim and whilst the transfer market and finances are a key part of football there is no way a football sim can model a hugely complex financial situation with total accuracy. Clearly though basic things like Arsenal having hundreds of millions to spend after 1 season without selling anyone is a situation that should be easy enough to stop happening.

    As for the chairman setting strict limits on what proportion of budget you can spend on one player at different clubs I don't like that. I do think though that chairmen should interfere as much on buying players as they do on selling them. Insisting on you selling someone for £10 million and then giving you the fill £10 million to spend on whoever you want with no constraints is just silly. In that case the chairman would step in based on judging each signing on its merits.

  74. #74
    Amateur
    Join Date
    3rd September 2007
    Posts
    39

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Nomis07:
    quote:
    Originally posted by Yakubu22:
    Arsenal have not sold anyone except Rosicky in the first year. Yet within 18 months have accrued over £100M in transfer cash. Adebayour, RVP, Hleb etc are all still there! How do you explain that?


    We need more info than just who they have or haven't sold. Have they won anything? Where did they finish in the PL, CL etc etc? Each of these bring with them massive amounts of prize money and huge amounts even for finishing 2nd or 3rd.


    Arsenal in my game won the Premierhsip in 1st season -but didnt do very well in the CL. They sold Rosicky for £22M and paid £26M for Mutu.

    It is definitely two issues at play. One is the huge amounts of cash certain clubs can accrue in a short amount of time. As someone mentioned in a previous post. Roma finished mid table (in season 3) with £200M in the bank.
    Two is the transfer fees which far from word class players go for. As per my opening post -Diarra, Corluka etc

    llama3 - Arsenal do not have £100M to spend. The reason why is the Emirates Stadium. they are still paying the mortgage on that. Despite what Wenger may say - he would've love to have bought a top centre half and def Midfielder this year. But Arsenal dont have enough cash to buy anyone better than what they have already have. If Wenger had stupid money sat in a bank account do you honestly think he wouldnt have bought as opposed to watching their season fozzle out?

  75. #75
    Semi Pro
    Join Date
    20th June 2004
    Posts
    2,019

    Default

    arsenal's got a lot of transfer budget money IRE. maybe not 100m... but how would players feel if he bought 3 players for 100m? there's probably no manager who's willing to take such risk with unsetling his dressing room (except Chelsea a few years ago). most managers do pay atention who they buy, they follow players for years. he should have bought some, I'm sure...but Arsenal had a lot of bad luck with injuries.

    and like you said they need to pay for the stadium...

  76. #76
    First Team
    Join Date
    3rd September 2006
    Location
    I will sing for you, when you've begged me AND YOU WILL BEG ME!
    Posts
    22,744

    Default

    yeah, i finished 2nd in my first season at Arsenal, sold Gilberto to Inter for £11.5M, bought Van der Vaart for £12M, and that was all my big spending. i got so much money for doing nowt else but winning the fa cup that year that i splashed out much more than i usually would.

    i've not really sold anyone apart from eduardo, but i got aguero for £21M + clauses, sergio ramos for £27.5M release fee, steven taylor for £10M & daniel alves for a stupid £45M. yet i still have £30M+ weighing my pockets down.

    whenever i manage abroad, its always arsenal who are interested in my players. for example, i created a juve game with fake players. i had a bid from the gunners for my £5.75M amc. i didn't want to upset the player, so i set an asking price of £31M + 50% next transfer fee clause. to my astonishment, the submitted the bid

    and on another note, i have never read posts about arsenal going bankrupt compared to liverpool (in my game they were relegated with the same squad who won the prem in 07/08), man utd and chelsea. it's all an "overimprovement" from finance issues in past games, but there is so much more money generated in england, arsenal especially.

    we're not that great irl

  77. #77
    Third Team
    Join Date
    17th November 2007
    Location
    Smashing The Granny Out Of It
    Posts
    7,872

    Default

    its not the prices teams pay for players for me (even vo yes some are stupid)its when teams buy some medioca player or even a good player for a daft price then you check is stats from previous season and hes bassicly done nowt to justify the fee

    example from my game inter milan bought gussepi rossi from villareal for 28 million in second season of my game eye raised an eyebrow but thought to myself he must of had a great season so i check is stats and he only scored 12 goals in about 30 game with an average rating of 7 which is great really not bad i know but far from justifing 28m,this is wot i dont like about transfer system in fm08,it would't happen IRL,yes maybe if he'd had a great season

  78. #78
    Moderator
    Join Date
    27th October 2006
    Location
    United Arab Emirates
    Posts
    5,088

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Yakubu22:
    quote:
    Originally posted by Nomis07:
    quote:
    Originally posted by Yakubu22:
    Arsenal have not sold anyone except Rosicky in the first year. Yet within 18 months have accrued over £100M in transfer cash. Adebayour, RVP, Hleb etc are all still there! How do you explain that?


    We need more info than just who they have or haven't sold. Have they won anything? Where did they finish in the PL, CL etc etc? Each of these bring with them massive amounts of prize money and huge amounts even for finishing 2nd or 3rd.


    Arsenal in my game won the Premierhsip in 1st season -but didnt do very well in the CL. They sold Rosicky for £22M and paid £26M for Mutu.

    It is definitely two issues at play. One is the huge amounts of cash certain clubs can accrue in a short amount of time. As someone mentioned in a previous post. Roma finished mid table (in season 3) with £200M in the bank.
    Two is the transfer fees which far from word class players go for. As per my opening post -Diarra, Corluka etc

    llama3 - Arsenal do not have £100M to spend. The reason why is the Emirates Stadium. they are still paying the mortgage on that. Despite what Wenger may say - he would've love to have bought a top centre half and def Midfielder this year. But Arsenal dont have enough cash to buy anyone better than what they have already have. If Wenger had stupid money sat in a bank account do you honestly think he wouldnt have bought as opposed to watching their season fozzle out?


    the mortgage is well structed, we dont have any problems from it. if it had affected our ability to be competitive we wouldnt have moved. i suggest you read the financial reports rather than the tabloids

  79. #79
    Amateur
    Join Date
    7th June 2007
    Location
    Remanded to Area 51 for extensive testing
    Posts
    433

    Default

    I agree, they tend to be completely unrealistic. In my game, Arsenal have just splashed out £56m on Joaquin

  80. #80
    Amateur
    Join Date
    27th October 2006
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    75

    Default

    I'm not sure whether any of you experienced this too, but there is also a problem with the demand of wages by the players. There were several times when i offered a contract to a player and he demanded like 100K a week but he only earned 10K a week at his current club.

  81. #81
    Semi Pro
    Join Date
    1st June 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,182

    Default

    quote:
    glamdring
    Semi Pro


    Location: Newcastle
    Registered: 22 January 2004 Posted 22 April 2008 10:35 My biggest irritation with the transfer market is with the way bids are accepted/rejected differently for AI-controlled clubs or human clubs.

    I was trying to sign Elano for Fiorentina from Man City and was getting quoted all manner of ridiculous transfer fees. Then City accepted £12 million from Lyon and were still quoting £29 million to me if I wanted to sign him (funnily enough I didn't want to sign him after that and signed Berbatov instead!)



    G, you need to be carefull when buying players at the end of a season or at the begining.

    Near the end of the season a players value is based on their performance. if they have performed well then their value is high. When the new season starts, many players values seem to reset.

    An example of this would Rossi, in my game at the end of last season he hadnt played well and i could have picked him up for £11mill. At that point i didnt as i didnt need him. About 1 month later in the new season i got a silly bid for my no.1 striker and sold him, i then turned to Rossi and he was now valued at £30mill.

    The same applies for players that have played well in the season. Value at end is high, value at beginging of new season is low. I think that this is related to their PA and CA,

    YOu can examine this by using mini-scout.

    Lee

  82. #82
    Amateur
    Join Date
    19th July 2006
    Location
    Adelaide
    Posts
    54

    Default

    In my Liverpool game recently Real Madrid spent £66 million on Silva taking him from Man u, i think thats a bit over the top.

  83. #83
    Part-Timer
    Join Date
    7th April 2007
    Location
    Vienna, Austria
    Posts
    1,210

    Default

    It's crazy in mine too. I think the issue is with the good but not world class players. I can see huge transfer fees for guys like Silva, Fabregas etc.

    But in my game:
    Joao Moutinho for $53 million
    Reo Coker for $40 million
    Scott Brown for $35 million
    some Spanish DM I've never heard of for $30 million

  84. #84
    Amateur
    Join Date
    26th February 2003
    Location
    I'm not stressed, I'm just very, very, very alert
    Posts
    153

    Default

    The current transfer market “on steroids!” is a result of the overall crappy finance system of FM. Clubs are generating to much money and operating expenses (wages, staff, stadium maintenance, loans) are far from reality, therefore the AI can create unrealistic transfer funds. Without TV or sponsor ships income most clubs will go belly up in no time. In FM there is only a “happy camper” finance scenario, where overrated transfer funds go directly to the P&L of the club (no transfers / agent costs, no third party finance). This issue can only be resolved by implementing a more realistic finance system or some kind of transfer CAP.

  85. #85
    Part-Timer
    Join Date
    18th March 2001
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    1,036

    Default

    But aren't the high transfer fees just a 'cosmetic' issue?

    I mean, if the teams have too much money to spend then surely it's a good thing that the players cost too much? Otherwise the big teams could by everyone.

    Just divide every fee you see by two or three in your mind and imagine everything is alright.

    The real problem is that there are too many transfers made, IMO.

  86. #86
    Semi Pro
    Join Date
    22nd January 2004
    Location
    Newcastle upon Tyne (lurking in the gloaming)
    Posts
    3,676

    Default

    A realistic finance system would be a life'#s work to implement. Every country has a different situation and club in even just one country operate differently even when in the same league.

    I notice almost every figure quoted on here has been for transfers between top (ish) clubs. What about lower down the leagues? Are there insane amounts of money being spent on transfers there too?

  87. #87
    Amateur
    Join Date
    3rd September 2007
    Posts
    39

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by glamdring:
    A realistic finance system would be a life'#s work to implement. Every country has a different situation and club in even just one country operate differently even when in the same league.

    I notice almost every figure quoted on here has been for transfers between top (ish) clubs. What about lower down the leagues? Are there insane amounts of money being spent on transfers there too?


    I dont think anyone expects a world wide Financial model implemented. But playing a few season of FM is enough to see the point here.
    I haven't noticed an inflation of lower league player fees.
    However my original point in the opening thread was that this price inflation seems to effect good top flight players (who are far from world class). Prices for genuine World Class players and lower league players seem to be ok. As per my example Corluka and Lassana Diarra costing a combined £50M in season 1.

    Why would a club offer so much for these players?
    ....and why would their selling club seriously hold out for these values?

  88. #88
    Third Team
    Join Date
    5th November 2007
    Posts
    7,335

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by LSS:
    But aren't the high transfer fees just a 'cosmetic' issue?

    I mean, if the teams have too much money to spend then surely it's a good thing that the players cost too much? Otherwise the big teams could by everyone.

    Just divide every fee you see by two or three in your mind and imagine everything is alright.

    The real problem is that there are too many transfers made, IMO.


    In a way you're right, they are just cosmetic and don't really affect me as i've never spent over £9m on a player. However, the problem is that if a AI team buys Adrian Mutu for £30m, and two years later I want to buy him his value will still be incredibly high and I will have to fork out crazy money for him.

    For me that isn't an issue because I know I can find better players for far far far less, but there are people who may only want to make big money signings or recreate the galacticos and they are being hidnered by the current setup.

  89. #89
    Semi Pro
    Join Date
    22nd January 2004
    Location
    Newcastle upon Tyne (lurking in the gloaming)
    Posts
    3,676

    Default

    Why?

    Presumably their clubs also have these insane amounts of money to spend too otherwise they shouldn't be buying such expensive players.

    If the problem is simply that there is too much money sloshing around then high transfer fees really don't matter because everyone who should has the money to pay them.

  90. #90
    Part-Timer
    Join Date
    18th March 2001
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    1,036

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Nomis07:
    In a way you're right, they are just cosmetic and don't really affect me as i've never spent over £9m on a player. However, the problem is that if a AI team buys Adrian Mutu for £30m, and two years later I want to buy him his value will still be incredibly high and I will have to fork out crazy money for him.


    But as the teams, including you, have too much money to spend, you could actually have a chance to pay crazy money for him.

    Think it like this... if the fees would be lower, then everyone would have less money and the fees would still be high compared to what you could pay.

    The fees aren't actually high, it's the money's value that is low.

  91. #91
    Third Team
    Join Date
    5th November 2007
    Posts
    7,335

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by LSS:
    But as the teams, including you, have too much money to spend, you could actually have a chance to pay crazy money for him.

    Think it like this... if the fees would be lower, then everyone would have less money and the fees would still be high compared to what you could pay.

    The fees aren't actually high, it's the money's value that is low.


    I agree and it really doesn't bother me at all. It works both ways, in another save I have I spend lots of money and recently bought Marica for £30m, but I sold De Rossi for £37m, so it was no big deal to me.

    What you're basically saying is, that it evens out if you look at the big picture. You have too much money in the bank so players cost a lot more than expected. That's no different to you having £30m in the bank and Corluka costing £5m. It's all in balance in a way.

    That's fair enough and i'd be inclined to agree, however it certainly isn't realistic and it's understanable why people find it irritating.

  92. #92
    Amateur
    Join Date
    3rd September 2007
    Posts
    39

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Nomis07:
    quote:
    Originally posted by LSS:
    But as the teams, including you, have too much money to spend, you could actually have a chance to pay crazy money for him.

    Think it like this... if the fees would be lower, then everyone would have less money and the fees would still be high compared to what you could pay.

    The fees aren't actually high, it's the money's value that is low.


    I agree and it really doesn't bother me at all. It works both ways, in another save I have I spend lots of money and recently bought Marica for £30m, but I sold De Rossi for £37m, so it was no big deal to me.

    What you're basically saying is, that it evens out if you look at the big picture. You have too much money in the bank so players cost a lot more than expected. That's no different to you having £30m in the bank and Corluka costing £5m. It's all in balance in a way.

    That's fair enough and i'd be inclined to agree, however it certainly isn't realistic and it's understanable why people find it irritating.


    Exactly right....yes high fees are balanced out by inflated budgets. But since this game is supposed to be the most realistic "Football Management game" - then its something which needs addressing IMHO.

  93. #93
    Part-timer
    Join Date
    1st December 2005
    Location
    Currently languishing in the lower leagues with Leigh (oooh alliteration)
    Posts
    1,742

    Default

    I believe there is another side to this issue. Some people have suggested that we cannot know what inflation and other influences will do to the price of players in the near future. We could very well see these kinds of prices being paid in the near future. However there are two other topics that have cropped up recently that, to me, imply a major problem with clubs spending habits.

    One of the threads if i remember correctly stated that a major club, Valencia i think, Paid 100mil for one player, they promptly went into administration and the poster was able to buy the player back for 10mil within two weeks.

    The second example shows Barcelona making a bid of 20mil plus three well known hot prospects probably bringing the transfer up to the 80 mil mark.

    Surely these two examples must act as some kind of definitive evidence that top clubs are willing to pay far too much in order to secure players who, as mentioned in this thread, are often not all that. In my opinion it is not feasible that a club would exchange three top rated youngsters or indeed buy itself into administration in order to sign one player, especially since the aforementioned clubs probably have players of a similar quality already.

    In my opinion this is something that does need to be looked into for the next incarnation of FM.

  94. #94
    Part-Timer
    Join Date
    18th March 2001
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    1,036

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Pricey85:
    Surely these two examples must act as some kind of definitive evidence that top clubs are willing to pay far too much in order to secure players who, as mentioned in this thread, are often not all that. In my opinion it is not feasible that a club would exchange three top rated youngsters or indeed buy itself into administration in order to sign one player, especially since the aforementioned clubs probably have players of a similar quality already.


    Also the top clubs (especially Spanish) tend to buy quite expensive players that end up not getting any games in the team.

  95. #95
    Third Team
    Join Date
    5th November 2007
    Posts
    7,335

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Pricey85:
    One of the threads if i remember correctly stated that a major club, Valencia i think, Paid 100mil for one player, they promptly went into administration and the poster was able to buy the player back for 10mil within two weeks.


    It was Sociedad and was in FM06 if I remember rightly, so isn't an issue anymore.

    quote:
    The second example shows Barcelona making a bid of 20mil plus three well known hot prospects probably bringing the transfer up to the 80 mil mark.


    The initial fee was £15.5 and the adding players to transfers thing takes them at their value rather than asking price. The three players offered were still young and not first team regulars so their value would still have been quite low and the actual transfer fee would have been £30m at a stretch rather than £80m.

  96. #96
    Moderator
    Join Date
    27th October 2006
    Location
    United Arab Emirates
    Posts
    5,088

    Default

    i simply do not pay an inflated price, i will not do it. i would much prefer to buy promising youngsters and train them up. I mean this summer i have spent £2.1m on 2 quality kids, whereas on my game newcastle have spent some £57m and frankly dont look like getting near the kind of level i am at. I have recouped £13.75m in fees for 2 of my players, and have a remainder budget of £118m

  97. #97
    Part-timer
    Join Date
    1st December 2005
    Location
    Currently languishing in the lower leagues with Leigh (oooh alliteration)
    Posts
    1,742

    Default

    Wasn't aware that the first example was 06 so i withdraw that. However regardless of whether the players in the second example were young it still has to be taken into account that all three offered were among the hottest new talent at the club. I just don't think it's realistic that the club would be willing to part with all three just to sign one player.

  98. #98
    Third Team
    Join Date
    5th November 2007
    Posts
    7,335

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Pricey85:
    Wasn't aware that the first example was 06 so i withdraw that. However regardless of whether the players in the second example were young it still has to be taken into account that all three offered were among the hottest new talent at the club. I just don't think it's realistic that the club would be willing to part with all three just to sign one player.


    You're definately right, but I think it's a similar issue to Dos Santos and Bojan ending up on a free at the end of the first season, which is equally unrealistic.

  99. #99
    Amateur
    Join Date
    12th September 2007
    Posts
    20

    Default

    in season 2 of my watford game, real madrid paid 37.5m for giuseppe rossi.

    Wtf!

  100. #100
    Third Team
    Join Date
    5th November 2007
    Posts
    7,335

    Default

    quote:
    Originally posted by Eoin_jg:
    in season 2 of my watford game, real madrid paid 37.5m for giuseppe rossi.

    Wtf!


    You're basing this as unrealistic because of your opinion or him IRL. In game he is excellent and probably worth that sort of money, I had him at AC Milan and he scored 37 in 42 for me.

Closed Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts