Free is a lot off money

How large are his wages? His signing on fee? Bonuses?

The transfer fee may be zero, but you've still spent money on him.

I signed Jari Litmanen on a free and he was playing well for me so I decided to check what my fans thought of him.

As shown in the screenshot spending nothing on a player is obviously way to much for my fans well.

The funny thing is that they don’t think it’s to much money for the more expensive players who aren’t playing as well

dunno about Litmanen... maybe you've just made their heads spin from the fact that BOLTON have spent £50 odd million in one season?

I doubt it’s his wages as they are 3k a week and he has a £350 appearance and goal bonus so that can’t be it.

I sold of almost all of the squad to pay for the singings so I have only spent a few million that I didn’t gain through sales.

It was probably his signing on fee

mister_gall. It can’t be his singing on fee as I’m almost certain he didn’t have one and even if he did the more expensive players would have higher ones anyway which leads me back to my question how is a free transfer with no major add-ons more expensive than a 15 and a half million pound transfer. Even if he did have a high singing on fee, it wouldn’t have reached 15 and a half million

as salzburg i haven't signed any players on free transfer yet (usually too old or too bad)

The only reason I signed him was because I spent so much money on other players and I needed cover. He only started playing after I had a succession of injuries and luckily proved quite good.

thats the best thing I've seen in ages

Maybe you had to pay compensation but did not realise...but then again Im sure when you pay compensation it comes up with that as the cost.

mister_gall. It can’t be his singing on fee as I’m almost certain he didn’t have one and even if he did the more expensive players would have higher ones anyway which leads me back to my question how is a free transfer with no major add-ons more expensive than a 15 and a half million pound transfer. Even if he did have a high singing on fee, it wouldn’t have reached 15 and a half million

If you can't remember if there was a signing on fee, how do you know for sure that there wasn't one?

The more expensive players are largely irrelevant. They're younger, are likely to be at the club longer and have more time to justify their fees and wages than a 37 year old Litmanen. Who may not have gotten a 15.5 million pound signing on fee, but at his age, with the high chance he'll retire soon, then any substantial signing on fee could be looked on as a large expense.

The fans are judging him according to what was paid for him. Not judging him against other signings. And if you look at your screen shot, there is no claim there that a free transfer is more expensive than a 15.5 million pound one. They're reserving their judgement on the other signings, not sorting them by expense.

I didn’t have to pay compensation as he had been released by his last club.

Well I transferred most of my excess wage budget towards transfer budget so I wouldn’t have been able to offer a large singing on fee although I’m no where near the red. However, I understand your point and see how age could be important but surely, this must be another flaw of the confidence system as in real life the fans would understand I have spent most of my budget and need a few cheaper players to bulk up my squad until I can get enough money to sign better players. Surely, they should be more worried that I spent 15 and a half million on an unknown 16 year old.