Adz10 Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 is it me or does the fees requested by some teams seem exaggerated? I bid £10 million than £15 million for Micah Richards to Arsenal and they want £86Million! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmi88 Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 It Is a teams way of saying he is not for sale Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adz10 Posted October 12, 2011 Author Share Posted October 12, 2011 i see, that makes a bit more sense, but still if I bid £40million (i wont but as an example) they reject but surely in real life they would accept £40 million? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AcidBurn Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 They might in real life but in FM it depends how they view the player. There are certain players in my squad that I would not sell for £40 million. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
schiv85 Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 i see, that makes a bit more sense, but still if I bid £40million (i wont but as an example) they reject but surely in real life they would accept £40 million? As was said, they are basically saying he isnt for sale. Plus, you are probabaly seen as a title rival. Add to that, man city dont exactly need the cash. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adz10 Posted October 12, 2011 Author Share Posted October 12, 2011 but they sold me Tevez for £16 million and want £86 for Micah, i think something is wrong here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
milnerpoint Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 the difference is Tevez starts the game on the transfer market as City want to offload him, Richards is seen by the backroom staff in FM as being a very important first team player, plus he is homegrown, i dont see the issue to be honest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keyzer Soze Posted October 12, 2011 Share Posted October 12, 2011 the difference is Tevez starts the game on the transfer market as City want to offload him, Richards is seen by the backroom staff in FM as being a very important first team player, plus he is homegrown, i dont see the issue to be honest. I agree! Many times it's not the quality of the player that make is selling price, but the need of the selling (and buying) club. They want 86M for Micah, but perhaps if you negotiate with them... perhaps a bid of 40M/50M would be enough. As Carmi88 said, it's the club saying they dont want to sell... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluebeard Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 It is a bit silly though. I had this the other way - as Man City, Arsenal wouldn't accept even £120m for Sagna! I reckon they would take that IRL - they could sign someone for £20-30m and set the rest against their debt. Or buy a new RB, Eden Hazard and still set £60m against their debt. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
milnerpoint Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 Not every team will cave in when you throw buckets of cash at them, do you think Barca would sell Messi for any amount of money? Of course not. Richards and Sanga are two of the most important players in their respective teams. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Braundjoh Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 Bit of a difference there though milnerpoint. I see what you're getting at, but £120m? They would bite their own face off for that kind of money. I can understand the Richards thing more, as they have unlimited money virtually, but Arsenal would take that for Sagna. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motherlover Posted October 13, 2011 Share Posted October 13, 2011 Not every team will cave in when you throw buckets of cash at them, do you think Barca would sell Messi for any amount of money? Of course not. Richards and Sanga are two of the most important players in their respective teams. But there is a pretty tangiable difference between Lionel Messi and Bakary Sagna. Messi is perhaps the finest player of his entire generation. Sagna is certainly one of the world's finest rightbacks. Therein lies the key distinction. Barcelona can't do any better than Messi. Arsenal could conceivably do better than Sagna. Even allowing for an overestimation of Sagna's ability in FM and perhaps some world-beating form, I struggle to believe that Arsenal wouldn't part with Sagna for £120M. At this moment in time I suspect they'd actually let him go for around a fifth of that. If the game actually wants to say 'NO', it should stick to outright rejecting your offer. Arsenal are the party losing out here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adz10 Posted October 14, 2011 Author Share Posted October 14, 2011 i stick by my guns here and believe man city would sell Richards for alot less than £86million. I think he only has 2 years left on his contract also? One thing that proves my point is Blackburn publicly valued Chris Samba at £10-12million in the summer, in the game they wont accept any less than £20million. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
milnerpoint Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 Blackburn never publicaly announced any fee for Samba, the papers threw figures about, but no one from Blackburn ever came out and said we will sell him for £10-12m. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
milnerpoint Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 But there is a pretty tangiable difference between Lionel Messi and Bakary Sagna. Messi is perhaps the finest player of his entire generation. Sagna is certainly one of the world's finest rightbacks. Therein lies the key distinction. Barcelona can't do any better than Messi. Arsenal could conceivably do better than Sagna. Even allowing for an overestimation of Sagna's ability in FM and perhaps some world-beating form, I struggle to believe that Arsenal wouldn't part with Sagna for £120M. At this moment in time I suspect they'd actually let him go for around a fifth of that. If the game actually wants to say 'NO', it should stick to outright rejecting your offer. Arsenal are the party losing out here. Bit of a difference there though milnerpoint. I see what you're getting at, but £120m? They would bite their own face off for that kind of money. I can understand the Richards thing more, as they have unlimited money virtually, but Arsenal would take that for Sagna. thing is tho guys your trying to compare a real life situation with something that would never happen, Arsenal would do everything possible right now to hold onto Sanga, he is their top right back and arguable one of the worlds top full backs, your right they prob would take £120m but no team is ever going to offer that money, never even close, infact no team would ever offer more than £20m for him, the game is basically saying they dont want to sell the player Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adz10 Posted October 14, 2011 Author Share Posted October 14, 2011 i just think, as good as the game is, they have valuations part pretty messed up. i cant even sign a 17 year old, unknown but decent prospect goalkeeper for less that £9million Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
milnerpoint Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 Which goalkeeper tho, and from which team? Its not as cut and dry as your making out. Would you sell your best young goalkeeper to the AI? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adz10 Posted October 14, 2011 Author Share Posted October 14, 2011 Branescu was the GK. I've managed to get him for £5million now which is fair. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AcidBurn Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 Like people have said it is basically the AI saying the player is not for sale. Everyone would moan a lot more if they kept bidding and the AI rejected every offer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stampler Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 thing is tho guys your trying to compare a real life situation with something that would never happen, Arsenal would do everything possible right now to hold onto Sanga, he is their top right back and arguable one of the worlds top full backs, your right they prob would take £120m but no team is ever going to offer that money, never even close, infact no team would ever offer more than £20m for him, the game is basically saying they dont want to sell the player good point! most sensible post here . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazbowski Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 But "every player has a price" It's ludacrous for anyone to say Arsenal would say no to £120 mil. As someone mentioned earlier they would 100% sell him for £30 mil. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
milnerpoint Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 Its ludicrous to think anyone would ever offer £120M for him or even £30M for him, not even City would throw that kind of money at Sanga. So basically your trying to compare an unrealistic real life situation to what is happening in FM and expecting realistic results. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
treble_yell_:-) Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 This thread follows the traditional route of someone questioning the utterly broken transfer module and apologists making excuses for an area of the game that has needed work for years. Like people have said it is basically the AI saying the player is not for sale. Everyone would moan a lot more if they kept bidding and the AI rejected every offer. Or SI could just allow the AI to reply, HE IS NOT FOR SALE. Everyone would be happy and there would be less threads on how broken the transfer module is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
keffepoeten Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 I couldn't agree more with treble_yell_:-)! And I think it is a bad example for the discussion to talk about a player from Man City, who virtually have all the money in the world. Another example, based on the teams and the players I know well: I am managing Malmö FF in the top Swedish league, reigning champions. I want to sign Michael Görlitz from Halmstad, a very poor club fighting to stay in the top division. He is valued at 500.000 euros and I have a good economy and a bad patience, so I offer 1.200.000 right away. The answer? They want 4.200.000? Seriously? The only player who has ever gone from a swedish side for a higher price is Zlatan Ibrahimovic from Malmö FF to Ajax! In reality, even though he is one of the few decent players in their team and crucial for their fight to stay in the top division, he still has a high salary for this team and the transfer fee I offered would save their life! I would be a club legend for all eternity for offering them 1.200.000! Or, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The North End Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 I think negotiations are being taken as too concrete in this thread, it's just that - a negotiation! £86 million for Richards means they don't want to sell but you can still negotiate the price down, so Man City aren't saying 'its £86 million or nothing!' Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AcidBurn Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 Or SI could just allow the AI to reply, HE IS NOT FOR SALE. Everyone would be happy and there would be less threads on how broken the transfer module is. I don't think that would reduce the amount of threads at all. If the AI just said he is not for sale people would simply make threads saying "I offered £100 million for so and so and they said he is not for sale, no one would refuse £100 million" people would complain either way. I find this area annoying but I use the same system. I had a newgen midfielder who I did not want to sell but Valencia offered £25 million I told them I wanted £70 million and they bid £48 million and I accepted. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Welsh Lad Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 If you scouted Richards, you scout would have said Man City are unlickly to sell to you because you are a rival, if you enquired about his availability Man City would say he is not available because you are a rival. If you've just put in an offered with out scouting or enquiring and so far you have increased the offer to £15M and they have said they want £86M because he is viewed has a key player at the club, you now have to find the middle ground so to speak or you can refuse and say I don't think he is worth that much. For the 'every player has a price' it is relative to the players importance to the team they are playing in, using Sagna and Arsenal are ok examples but think of Man Utd they have shed loads of debt but do you think they would except £30M for Rooney just to pay off debts. I would think no, I would think it would be well £30M for debt payments and £20M+ on top to go back into looking for a new player. But then each Chairman and Board are different. How many times has one of your excepted bids come back and said the chairman has excepted the offer because it was to good to turn down. So, looking back at the Richards saga. £10M manager says no, £15M managers says no but the chairman says if you give us £86M then you can have him. Think of it has going to a boot sale, all the sellers are after the best price which could be a £1, £2 or more above what they would actually sell it for because they now people will try and haggle, if they don't and buy the item for the shown price then happy days. In FM11 Liverpool always make an offer for S. Petrov I would sell him for £5.5M but when they ask how much would I sell him for I say £7M, they can flat out refuse to haggle or they can counter offer which they do sometimes so if the offer £5.5M or more then I sell. I think what has happened in real life at Arsenal hasn't helped the situation but before all that happened, who really thought they would sell Clichey, Nasri to Man City and Fabregas to Barca. I didn't think they would, but now with them gone I think it is right that they will hold on to the other players, well maybe until January atleast. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
soldierblue123 Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 Transfer fees seems realistic to me. When the club place a huge fee on a plaer it means it doesn't don't want to sell. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kabajingai Posted October 14, 2011 Share Posted October 14, 2011 i stick by my guns here and believe man city would sell Richards for alot less than £86million. I think he only has 2 years left on his contract also? One thing that proves my point is Blackburn publicly valued Chris Samba at £10-12million in the summer, in the game they wont accept any less than £20million. Some of you people clearly have never worked in sales. You don't ever ask somebody to pay market value for something as a first offer, not least when the product, or in this instance, the player is still worth something to your club. Its called high-balling. It helps to separate your market to find people who are genuinely interested in zed purchase and those that are just messing about. 20m is merely a starting offer to either begin negotiations or state your intentional worth of the product. But once again, if a player has two years left on his contract and is perfectly happy at a club why should they just sell for whatever figure somebody deems appropriate? The odds are stacked in favour of the seller not the buyer. Players values will fluctuate depending on the length of their contract and their status within the club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dazbowski Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 If you scouted Richards, you scout would have said Man City are unlickly to sell to you because you are a rival, if you enquired about his availability Man City would say he is not available because you are a rival. If you've just put in an offered with out scouting or enquiring and so far you have increased the offer to £15M and they have said they want £86M because he is viewed has a key player at the club, you now have to find the middle ground so to speak or you can refuse and say I don't think he is worth that much.For the 'every player has a price' it is relative to the players importance to the team they are playing in, using Sagna and Arsenal are ok examples but think of Man Utd they have shed loads of debt but do you think they would except £30M for Rooney just to pay off debts. I would think no, I would think it would be well £30M for debt payments and £20M+ on top to go back into looking for a new player. But then each Chairman and Board are different. How many times has one of your excepted bids come back and said the chairman has excepted the offer because it was to good to turn down. So, looking back at the Richards saga. £10M manager says no, £15M managers says no but the chairman says if you give us £86M then you can have him. Think of it has going to a boot sale, all the sellers are after the best price which could be a £1, £2 or more above what they would actually sell it for because they now people will try and haggle, if they don't and buy the item for the shown price then happy days. In FM11 Liverpool always make an offer for S. Petrov I would sell him for £5.5M but when they ask how much would I sell him for I say £7M, they can flat out refuse to haggle or they can counter offer which they do sometimes so if the offer £5.5M or more then I sell. I think what has happened in real life at Arsenal hasn't helped the situation but before all that happened, who really thought they would sell Clichey, Nasri to Man City and Fabregas to Barca. I didn't think they would, but now with them gone I think it is right that they will hold on to the other players, well maybe until January atleast. Man Utd sold Ronaldo for 80 mil, they would sell Rooney for the same imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
milnerpoint Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 Only because Ronaldo demanded a move, and only because it was Real Madrid, i dont think United would sell Rooney for any amount of money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 bahahaha ;s Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
soccer316 Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 Definitely a gamebreaker for me, not getting it unless a patch comes out that fixes it. Course you get the fanboys trying to justify it as usual so it isn't worth the time of day listening to their illogical arguments.. this is some of the most shocking transfer issues i've seen in any edition of FM and you can spin it however you want, it's a gamebreaker Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
milnerpoint Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 Definitely a gamebreaker for me, not getting it unless a patch comes out that fixes it. Course you get the fanboys trying to justify it as usual so it isn't worth the time of day listening to their illogical arguments.. this is some of the most shocking transfer issues i've seen in any edition of FM and you can spin it however you want, it's a gamebreaker Whats game breaking about it? The fact you cant sign players from title rivals unless you overspend? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
soccer316 Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 The fact it's completely unrealistic and shatters the illusion of the game. As I said, not interested in what fanboys who make any excuse for a poorly coded game have to say Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
milnerpoint Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 what a fantastic attitude you have. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arsenal987 Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 Definitely a gamebreaker for me, not getting it unless a patch comes out that fixes it. Course you get the fanboys trying to justify it as usual so it isn't worth the time of day listening to their illogical arguments.. this is some of the most shocking transfer issues i've seen in any edition of FM and you can spin it however you want, it's a gamebreaker come on guys it isn't that big of a deal.So what if they want 86m for richards or 168m for rafael you are not gonna offer that are you so just calm down.And soccer316 how can it be a gamebreaker its just a way of saying you cant have him, it would be a bit more understandable if you were not allowed to ask the board a question or being blocked from looking at a league for example but its just a method that all a method Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crispypaul Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 The fact it's completely unrealistic and shatters the illusion of the game. As I said, not interested in what fanboys who make any excuse for a poorly coded game have to say Don't buy it then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
treble_yell_:-) Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 He IS right though , even if the way he is expressing himself is wrong. It's not just the big players moving to big clubs, at the lower reaches of European clubs its just as bad , if not worse as proportionally the limited budgets make the inflated transfer fee's hurt more. The amount of times I have had to play 2/3/4/5 times the listed value of a player ( those claiming that it's only ever clubs not willing to sell their best players need to stop defending the indefensible ) is unreal. These players are rarely great players, not even always first team players , at clubs with varying financial situations and varying reputations. If the Valuation system is what at fault here then fix it, it creates expectations. If I look at some 23 year Dutch striker, who has spent half the season on the bench for his club and is valued at say 2 million , I would look to pay anywhere between 1.8-2.6 . Would I get him for that ? Nope, they ill come back asking for 5+ and not be willing to negotiate it down. Don't buy it then. I'm pretty sure Sega and SI don't share your sentiment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AcidBurn Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 I played as Malaga and it took a bid of £40 million for Micah Richards to get Man City to sell. The one thing I do find strange is that it takes that much for someone who is listed as a rotational player and not a first teamer. Tried to bid for Rafael and have gone to £40 million and no luck so far. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
milnerpoint Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 He isnt right, in 23 seasons in scotland i have yet to come across a realistic player i couldnt afford, especially in the early seasons, if you cant afford a players your aiming too high or being too cheap. But thats not the point being argued here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
milnerpoint Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 I played as Malaga and it took a bid of £40 million for Micah Richards to get Man City to sell. The one thing I do find strange is that it takes that much for someone who is listed as a rotational player and not a first teamer. Tried to bid for Rafael and have gone to £40 million and no luck so far. I think thats more of a data input error, when you start with City one of the first things you are told to do is change him to important first team member from rotation, the AI in the game rate him very highly and very importantly, he is homegrown so that makes him even more valuable with the squad rules! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AcidBurn Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 He isnt right, in 23 seasons in scotland i have yet to come across a realistic player i couldnt afford, especially in the early seasons, if you cant afford a players your aiming too high or being too cheap. But thats not the point being argued here. I think the thing that annoys me slightly is people only moan when the AI demand too much not when they get someone cheap. On FM11 I signed Adam Johnson for £4 million, Micah Richards for £5 million, Ramsey for £10 million and the same for Jack Wilshere, Pedro for £6.5 million, Sergio Busquets for £14 million, M'Vila for £1.7 million the list is endless of people who can be signed for unrealistically low prices yet I never see a thread about that or maybe I missed it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
milnerpoint Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 I think the thing that annoys me slightly is people only moan when the AI demand too much not when they get someone cheap. On FM11 I signed Adam Johnson for £4 million, Micah Richards for £5 million, Ramsey for £10 million and the same for Jack Wilshere, Pedro for £6.5 million, Sergio Busquets for £14 million, M'Vila for £1.7 million the list is endless of people who can be signed for unrealistically low prices yet I never see a thread about that or maybe I missed it. Well to me thats a much bigger issue than AI teams asking for too much, there are countless real life examples of teams asking crazy prices for the players they dont want to sell, but players like that should never be bought for such low prices. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AcidBurn Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 Well to me thats a much bigger issue than AI teams asking for too much, there are countless real life examples of teams asking crazy prices for the players they dont want to sell, but players like that should never be bought for such low prices. When a team asks for too much it does not bother me at all I just don't bother trying to sign the player. I have asked for huge unrealistic fees when the AI come after my players, the most extreme example being me selling a player for £100 million. I also sold a few others for around £40 million mainly because when a team bid I asked for around £60 million and negotiated the transfers to between £40 million and £45 million. The major problem for me is seeing the AI spend reasonably large sums of cash on a player only for him to play a handful of games and be transfer listed within two seasons. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie_G_32201 Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 Like people have said it is basically the AI saying the player is not for sale. Everyone would moan a lot more if they kept bidding and the AI rejected every offer. Doesnt stop man city offering me £2M for jack robinson every few days, the exact same offer, always rejected yet they come back constantly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
milnerpoint Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 When a team asks for too much it does not bother me at all I just don't bother trying to sign the player. I have asked for huge unrealistic fees when the AI come after my players, the most extreme example being me selling a player for £100 million. I also sold a few others for around £40 million mainly because when a team bid I asked for around £60 million and negotiated the transfers to between £40 million and £45 million.The major problem for me is seeing the AI spend reasonably large sums of cash on a player only for him to play a handful of games and be transfer listed within two seasons. I do the exact same, i do not sell anyone unless i decide to or its taken out my hands, i set asking values of 10x my player values at a minimum and do not budge from these at all when teams ask, so i cannot ever be annoyed if it happens in reverse. I have sold players for miles over their values in FM with this strategy. The second point is def one that could be looked at, the only thing you can say is not every big transfer works out, again you could pull up quite a few examples of players signed for big money and yet played a handful of games before being sold, but it does happen a bit too often in FM, i think its always more of a case of the AI signing players they dont need and never adjusting their team or formation to fit them in. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
milnerpoint Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 Doesnt stop man city offering me £2M for jack robinson every few days, the exact same offer, always rejected yet they come back constantly. Have you set a value for him in the transfer section? If you do they will stop offering £2M Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jibby123 Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 is it me or does the fees requested by some teams seem exaggerated? I bid £10 million than £15 million for Micah Richards to Arsenal and they want £86Million! What's unrealistic is that you're the Arsenal manager. What enables that?? You playing a game. A game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Shanahan Posted October 15, 2011 Share Posted October 15, 2011 Only because Ronaldo demanded a move, and only because it was Real Madrid, i dont think United would sell Rooney for any amount of money. Personally I'd love to see Rooney go for £30m, but then again I'm not a typical (English) Utd fan. But I do realise that he won't go for a lot more than that as the club value him (I don't know how) very highly, as evidenced by the contract negotiations last summer, Rooney: Throws toys out of pram and wails like big baby "Want more! Want More! WANT MORE!!!!!" Utd; "Fine heres our offer (hands over contract of 200k per week)". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.