How are transfer values calculated?

[KingCanary]

I ask because I'm seeing what feels like some very odd ones as the game goes on that don't feel very realistic or based on anything in game.

In real life value is always driven by multiple factors but it feels as if in FM 24 that performance and age both seem to not have the affect they should. 

As an example, in my current save in February 2027 Bryan Mbeumo is still at Brentford. He's 2 years into a 5 year deal, aged 27 and turning 28 in the summer so prime years but older than most teams look to form out big sums for. He's also scored a total of 11 league goals and 15 assists  across the last 4 Premier League seasons. His average rating has gone down steadily from 7.07 to 6.95 to 6.77 and 25 games into the current season he's sitting at 6.59. Brentford currently sit in 19th. 

Despite this he's currently valued at £95-136m. Maybe I'm missing something but I can't see how a player in relegation threatened team who is averaging 3 goals and 4 assists a season, with declining form and turning 28 next transfer window could command this valuation.

In comparison I signed Evan Ferguson in the summer for £45m after Brighton suffered a shock relegation. Over the past 4 seasons he's scored 52 league goals in 110 games, added 9 assists, is only 22, averaging 7.09 last season and 7.31 this season, and playing for the team that won the league last year. His valuation? £75m-100m. 

I feel like I must be missing something that goes into the calculations because Brentford have multiple aging players with huge valuations despite average form (29 year old Rico Henry who is averaging 6.74 is valued up to £86m, Vitaly Janalt averages 6.69 aged 28, nearly 29 but is still valued at up to £77m). Is it something to do with the club themselves? Is it a reputation thing? 

[Ein]

I don't know. Maybe depends on a club's willingness to sell but in that case I don't know on which basis one's own player values are calculated. Also, I don't understand why values now come in ranges. It should simply be one market value like in Transfermarkt.

[fc.cadoni]

There multiple factors which being connected with transfer value; like current ability, player performance, player reputation, league and so on. Transfer Values comes in range, but the most up to date is Ask the Agent or with full scouting. 

[Ein]

IMO it should be possible to view/sort players by market value (like Transfermarkt and past editions of FM). Market value would depend on a number of factors (league/player reputation, performance, age, contract length, etc). Then there should be the asking price (or a not for sale declaration) set by the club which the respective player/agent may or may not agree with. A scout's estimate of the asking price would be given in the scout report. In the recent editions the former component is completely lacking and it's not even possible to view the most valuable players.

[dukebone]

Just wanted to get in on this and post the most ridiculous one I've seen. Transfermarkt has him listed for 80 million Pounds IRL. Some clarification on this would be cool.

[phd_angel]

Intriguing question…. Assuming FM is not broken in this regard, I wonder if their agent may be influencing their valuations. Can you check the agent’s profiles, personalities and geographic scope?

Also, would the player’s world reputation and/or international experience be affecting this?

Finally, how about merchandising, though we can’t see brand sponsorships on FM…

[Marko1989]

It is very broken, even if the agent is influencing the valuation it is still broken, no agent in the world would come up with such a valuation. It would not be a problem if one player value was 200, 300, 400M, but there are a bunch of players. Look at this bs, Martinelli 329M !?!?!

I will never understand why they got rid of the previous valuation that was similar to Transfermark. One price, based on a couple of factors, it was not perfect, but at least it is not as ridiculously bad as this system. Among bad valuations, there are many examples of "not for sale" players which clubs would very easily sell in reality.

Or, if they don't want to get rid of ranges, they could make a combination of old and new system. One number for player value like Transfermarkt, and range for the money club would sell a player. Something like this. But again, old system with just one value would be the best. No "not for sale" bs, no 350-400m ranges for players in 2025 and similar
  

Edited January 10 by Marko1989

[Jonthedon26]

Yeah transfer values are a complete mess in this game. Managing Birmingham City, young(ish) left back Longelo has a value of something like £4.5 - £5.5mil, I can't remember the exact figure, but he isn't in my plans, never plays and when he occasionally does play he is rubbish. He is only on £4k per week and has about 2 years left on his contract. When I have offered him out to clubs I get messages back such as "so and so are only willing to pay £200k for him". How is there such a difference between the in-game valuation and what teams are actually willing to pay for him? Now me personally, I would be happy to let him go for about £1mil, especially as I am in financial ruin, so I am really interested to know where the £4.5mil+ valuation is coming from. 

[Sunstrikuuu]

21 hours ago, fc.cadoni said:

There multiple factors which being connected with transfer value; like current ability, player performance, player reputation, league and so on. Transfer Values comes in range, but the most up to date is Ask the Agent or with full scouting. 

Are there really?  Or is it uh kind of swamped by one factor in particular?

Let's look at a few players, all of whom play LAM or RAM.

 Player A is CA 178 and PA 180.  He makes £400kpw and has Important Player squad status; his contract expires in 2031.  He plays in the highest-reputation league in the world for the second-highest reputation team worldwide.  He's 25 years old.  Player B is 178 CA and 178 PA.  He makes £350kpw and has Regular Starter squad status; his contract expires in 2030.  He plays in the second-highest reputation league in the world for the highest reputation team worldwide.  He's also 25 years old.  Player A and Player B have similar Home and Current reputations, but Player B has 1400 more World Reputation. 

Player C plays for #2 rep worldwide in the #1 league.  He's under contract through 2030 at £275kpw.  He's 25, with 186 CA/PA.  Here's his Reputation:

Player D plays for #1 rep worldwide in the #2 league.  He's under contract through 2031 at £450kpw.  He's 26, with 184/184 CA/PA.  Here's his Reputation:

Player E plays for what I think is the #3 reputation worldwide team, in the #1 league.  He's under contract through 2031 at £525kpw.  He's 23, with 185 CA/PA.  Here's his Reputation:

Player F plays for a top-10 reputation team in the #2 league.  He's under contract through 2031 at £325kpw.  He's 19 with 175 CA/183 PA.  Here's his Reputation:

Player G plays for a top 20 reputation team (maybe towards the bottom of the top 10?  Not sure) in the #3 league.  He's under contract through 2031 at £200kpw.  He's 25 with 171 CA and 177 PA.  Here's his Reputation:

Player H plays for the #3 reputation worldwide team in the #1 league.  He's under contract through 2031 at £325kpw.  He's 23 with 175 CA/PA.  Here's his reputation:

OK so.  In terms of ability, pure CA/PA, all of these players are stars, but players A-E are a small step above, with 180+ CA/PA.  All of the players are in a similar contractual situation, with C and G making significantly less money and E making significantly more.  A and B are in similar World Reputation positions to players E and C respectively, and we can see that B, C and D are all absolute creme de la creme superstars from a reputational standpoint.  Player F is the outlier in age, as he's only 19.

In valuation, though, one of these players is valued at £300m.  Four are valued between £200-299m.  One is valued between £150-199m.  Two are valued between £100-149m.  Can anyone guess which is which, and what the common factor is for the players with the lowest valuation?  Answer is in the spoiler.

Spoiler

Player E is valued at £300m.  Players D, F, G and H are valued in the £200m range; the low value is £217m for Player G and the high value is £263m for Player D.  Player B is valued in the £150-200m range, with an actual asking price of £191m.  Players A and C are the two low men on the totem pole --  their highest valuations are nearly £50m below Player B's.  And what links them?  They play for the user team, of course.

Other than the factor I've identified in the spoiler, any clear trends to explain the valuations?

Edited January 10 by Sunstrikuuu

[kopfan1977]

I had also posted a thread regarding this and highlighted two or three examples.  After thinking about what others have saying it does make a little sense. Even if the values are skewed massively in the favour of the AI when it comes to star players.

 

We are able to build better squads than the AI. Majority of the time Cherry picking the best of the best. Some of you will scout the old fashioned way, trawling through academies when a new generation of talent is spawned. Some will wait a few seasons till they turn 18 and pay a bit extra knowing they won't have had to develop that player.  

We then approach the AI about a player and if you can afford that player then you'll be guaranteed to purchase that player. We as humans get to say No thanks to their bids or negotiate it and hope they'll pay silly money for the player they want. 

 

Out of curiosity I used a non licenced tool to look at a few things:

My star player 188/198 PA is valued at £122m, yet a wonderkid 182/183 PA that PSG signed is now valued at £250-350m.. 

Even looking at contracts, both have similar length - My player has 1 more year, Signing bonus is almost the same, Wages again almost similar at £285k p.w. Only bonuses differ here. Rep Wise my player has higher rep than the PSG player by a few hundred on each. My team is Prem Champs, CL holders, Super cup holders, World club cup holder and Ranked best side in Europe, playing in the highest ranked league in the world.

PSG are next best despite not having won anything in Europe other than their own League and cups, their league is 5th ranked. 

Meanwhile Barca regen who has lower rep, lower CA/PA, playing in the 2nd ranked league in the world is valued at £282-350m

 

I've tried to make it make sense, but I can't.. So going back to what someone else posted on my post I've linked below:

" It seems to me more like SI is tweaking the game a little bit to prevent human players from buying everyone cheap and exploiting the AI too easily. Probably easier to add value to non human players teams than it is to make better negotiation logic."

 

THIS IS THE ONLY THING THAT MAKES SENSE TO ME!!

 

[fc.cadoni]

2 hours ago, Sunstrikuuu said:

Are there really?  Or is it uh kind of swamped by one factor in particular?

Let's look at a few players, all of whom play LAM or RAM.

 Player A is CA 178 and PA 180.  He makes £400kpw and has Important Player squad status; his contract expires in 2031.  He plays in the highest-reputation league in the world for the second-highest reputation team worldwide.  He's 25 years old.  Player B is 178 CA and 178 PA.  He makes £350kpw and has Regular Starter squad status; his contract expires in 2030.  He plays in the second-highest reputation league in the world for the highest reputation team worldwide.  He's also 25 years old.  Player A and Player B have similar Home and Current reputations, but Player B has 1400 more World Reputation. 

Player C plays for #2 rep worldwide in the #1 league.  He's under contract through 2030 at £275kpw.  He's 25, with 186 CA/PA.  Here's his Reputation:

Player D plays for #1 rep worldwide in the #2 league.  He's under contract through 2031 at £450kpw.  He's 26, with 184/184 CA/PA.  Here's his Reputation:

Player E plays for what I think is the #3 reputation worldwide team, in the #1 league.  He's under contract through 2031 at £525kpw.  He's 23, with 185 CA/PA.  Here's his Reputation:

Player F plays for a top-10 reputation team in the #2 league.  He's under contract through 2031 at £325kpw.  He's 19 with 175 CA/183 PA.  Here's his Reputation:

Player G plays for a top 20 reputation team (maybe towards the bottom of the top 10?  Not sure) in the #3 league.  He's under contract through 2031 at £200kpw.  He's 25 with 171 CA and 177 PA.  Here's his Reputation:

Player H plays for the #3 reputation worldwide team in the #1 league.  He's under contract through 2031 at £325kpw.  He's 23 with 175 CA/PA.  Here's his reputation:

OK so.  In terms of ability, pure CA/PA, all of these players are stars, but players A-E are a small step above, with 180+ CA/PA.  All of the players are in a similar contractual situation, with C and G making significantly less money and E making significantly more.  A and B are in similar World Reputation positions to players E and C respectively, and we can see that B, C and D are all absolute creme de la creme superstars from a reputational standpoint.  Player F is the outlier in age, as he's only 19.

In valuation, though, one of these players is valued at £300m.  Four are valued between £200-299m.  One is valued between £150-199m.  Two are valued between £100-149m.  Can anyone guess which is which, and what the common factor is for the players with the lowest valuation?  Answer is in the spoiler.

  Hide contents

Player E is valued at £300m.  Players D, F, G and H are valued in the £200m range; the low value is £217m for Player G and the high value is £263m for Player D.  Player B is valued in the £150-200m range, with an actual asking price of £191m.  Players A and C are the two low men on the totem pole --  their highest valuations are nearly £50m below Player B's.  And what links them?  They play for the user team, of course.

Other than the factor I've identified in the spoiler, any clear trends to explain the valuations?

Nice!

So reputation, contract wage plays a role here; and player E earns the most. What about contract length and player performance?

[wazzaflow10]

It seems more like the human's player valuation is just a guide for market valuation - i.e. selling significantly less than this amount will anger fans and the board. Only the player knows what they'd sell their players for so its impossible for the game to provide that number without a player input. If you get an offer

I'd reckon the high valuation for AI players is the cost of impatience to accept right now. Its encouraging you to use the tools you have at your disposal. Make a bid for a low amount to get the team to reject and have the player get upset. Declare them as your top target, watch their matches etc. The number will come down. It might be a bit of a premium if you're a big club with a lot of cash. But that's how it is in real life. If you're impatient it'll cost you more and the AI can be impatient too. Plenty of people here have shown AI making 150, 200, 250M+ bids for players.

[kopfan1977]

8 minutes ago, fc.cadoni said:

Nice!

So reputation, contract wage plays a role here; and player E earns the most. What about contract length and player performance?

They may play a role here, but values overall make Zero sense. Unless you look at it from another angle.

AI are majority of the time unable to negotiate properly or 99% unable to refuse a bid from a player. Meaning AI Values of players are inflated to be more than that of a human managers players despite said player being better, better rep, equal wage, longer contract by a year and is outperforming the AI player (which is a given seeing as we have more control over our players instruction) just to add some sort of balance to the game. Or humans would just buy every wonderkid, sell at mega inflated prices and stockpile their virtual cash.

 

Frustrating seeing as I keep having to reject bids for stars (luckily my club rep allows this) that are valued lower than other players.

[Sunstrikuuu]

3 hours ago, fc.cadoni said:

Nice!

So reputation, contract wage plays a role here; and player E earns the most. What about contract length and player performance?

All of those players are on contracts to 2030 or 2031, so 4 or 5 years.  It's not obvious to me which way it's contributing to valuation.  In terms of performance... who knows?  It hasn't seemed to affect things in the past with the AI being interested in buying players who outperform their CA/PA.

[Smoo]

Player's estimated values are best understood like this. The price the club will demand if the player is happy, and the price the club will demand if the player is unhappy. For example, I found a regen who looked very good at Empoli. My scouts said he was valued between £15m and £20m. And when I bid, Empoli were asking for about £20m plus a few add ons. Obviously, I'm not going to pay that, and he was 16 at the time so he wasn't interested in signing for me anyway. So I keep an eye on him, make a bid and leak my interest to the media every 3 months or so. Eventually, he becomes unhappy that he was denied a transfer to my team. I get another scout report to see what Empoli would be willing to sell now that he's unhappy, and the price has come down to £7m.

£7m was his actual transfer value. But SI have purposefully doubled or even tripled the price clubs will be willing to sell happy players at to stop us hoarding wonderkids.

Edited January 10 by Smoo

[Ein]

There's no actual or objective transfer value. The asking price can change depending on a number of factors including player happiness. I'm not fazed by astronomical asking prices. Basically it means that the club is presently unwilling to sell. If you manage to unsettle a player, the asking price can drop to a more realistic value. The issue, as mentioned earlier, is that the game lacks the more objective market value. It should be possible to sort players and clubs by market value. Having a market value doesn't mean that clubs would be forced or expected to sell at market value. They could still demand ten times as much or just outright refuse to sell. It would then be up to the player/agent to force a transfer.

[Sunstrikuuu]

2 hours ago, Ein said:

If you manage to unsettle a player, the asking price can drop to a more realistic value.

I'll be honest: I have never seen this happen.  I've seen unhappy players get transfer-listed, but I've never tapped up a player and had their price drop as a result.

[whatsupdoc]

7 hours ago, Sunstrikuuu said:

I'll be honest: I have never seen this happen.  I've seen unhappy players get transfer-listed, but I've never tapped up a player and had their price drop as a result.

Yeah I find the opposite happens. You're more likely to annoy an opposing manager the price goes up a lot. 

[Ein]

I don't have FM23/24 but I've seen it happen in previous editions. Normally, I offer a non-negotiable offer that I consider reasonable but below their asking price. This can unsettle the player if refused and he may then end up transfer listed for a reduced asking price.

[Sunstrikuuu]

4 hours ago, Ein said:

I don't have FM23/24 but I've seen it happen in previous editions. Normally, I offer a non-negotiable offer that I consider reasonable but below their asking price. This can unsettle the player if refused and he may then end up transfer listed for a reduced asking price.

What I always get is the player being transfer-listed for the same asking price, then the player and the manager kiss and make up six months later and they're removed from the transfer list.  

[wazzaflow10]

1 hour ago, Sunstrikuuu said:

What I always get is the player being transfer-listed for the same asking price, then the player and the manager kiss and make up six months later and they're removed from the transfer list.  

Are you declaring them as a transfer target or top target or asking players to speak to the media about the transfer or scouting their games? Putting a single bid in and doing nothing after won't really affect things. If you time it right you can get players to threaten to run the contract down which is most effective with 2-3 years remaining depending on how far out you plan. Ideally you're buying players with 18 months or less left on their contract anyway. You can whittle the value down it just takes some time to truly unsettle someone. Its not always going to work though.

[NineCloudNine]

This can be perplexing.

Playing as Roma I just bought a good 20-yr old defender (Valentin Gomez) for £3m plus future incentives. As soon as he joined his value became £40m.

At the same time I have been offered £16.5m by Real Madrid for Gianluca Mancini, a first-choice Italy international. I declined this, Mancini got upset and he would only settle for £22m as a reasonable value. I demanded this of Madrid and they cancelled the offer.

It is hard to work out what the algorithm is trying to achieve here.

Edited to add: oh and then my three team leaders came to me and demanded that Mancini, our best defender, be allowed to leave right before the end of the transfer window.

Edited January 13 by NineCloudNine

[KingCanary]

On 13/01/2024 at 12:53, NineCloudNine said:

Playing as Roma I just bought a good 20-yr old defender (Valentin Gomez) for £3m plus future incentives. As soon as he joined his value became £40m.

I personally don't have a problem with this as value is linked to the club/league they are playing in.

A promising 19 year old playing for a midtable team in Poland is going to have a lower transfer value than that same player if he joins a team in the Premier League or Serie A because a team like Crystal Palace or Torino can reject a bid of £5m for a player like that while a team like Lubin can assemble an entire squad for that money. 

 

[KingCanary]

On 11/01/2024 at 01:50, Ein said:

There's no actual or objective transfer value. The asking price can change depending on a number of factors including player happiness. I'm not fazed by astronomical asking prices. Basically it means that the club is presently unwilling to sell. If you manage to unsettle a player, the asking price can drop to a more realistic value. The issue, as mentioned earlier, is that the game lacks the more objective market value. It should be possible to sort players and clubs by market value. Having a market value doesn't mean that clubs would be forced or expected to sell at market value. They could still demand ten times as much or just outright refuse to sell. It would then be up to the player/agent to force a transfer.

To be fair old versions of FM had this kind of market value and people got very pissed off when they bid for a player who was valued at £1m and were asked for £20m. Having both may be a good idea but may be confusing.

I think my main issue with the values is that age possibly doesn't play enough of a factor. If you look at the top 25 all time transfer fees paid 17 of them were for players 25 or younger. Of the 8 that don't fit that criteria one only just misses out (Harry Maguire, aged 26), one is an absurd fee paid by a Saudi team (Neymar) and one is for one of the best players of all time (Ronaldo). 

Generally a player has to be completely exceptional to have a team spending huge fees for anyone much past 27. I get the whole 'he's not for sale' angle but I just can't picture (in the original example I posted) Brentford turning down £70m for a nearly 28 year old Bryan Mbuemo who has scored three goals all season, yet the game is telling me the bidding starts at nearly £100m.

[NineCloudNine]

46 minutes ago, KingCanary said:

I personally don't have a problem with this as value is linked to the club/league they are playing in.

 

I agree. I have no issue with the promising 20yr old being valued at £40m.

i’m less clear about why the 26 yr old first choice Italian international who plays alongside him has a stated value of half that, is subject to a £17m bid and gets upset at an asking price above £22m.

[kopfan1977]

On 16/01/2024 at 11:43, NineCloudNine said:

I agree. I have no issue with the promising 20yr old being valued at £40m.

i’m less clear about why the 26 yr old first choice Italian international who plays alongside him has a stated value of half that, is subject to a £17m bid and gets upset at an asking price above £22m.

It's frustrating as heck.. I have Joao Neves playing for me. PSG want him but age 29 for me his value is less than £80m. Despite being one of my top earners, One of my star players and a 4 year contract he signed less than 3 months ago.

Out of curiosity I saved the game when they bid £88m for him, accepted and sold him. His value then went to £190-228m upon signing for PSG on a contract that was similar to what he had playing for me.

Couple of small differences between my club and PSG - I have best world rep, PSG are not far below. I have a positive bank balance of £412m, I have no idea what PSG have other than them being Rich. I am going to guess they don't have the abundance of readies available like I have. But they are going to have at least £100-200m in transfer funds available. However their bids are always a take it or leave it offer. Same with other clubs bidding for my players.

In an attempt to deter these clubs from bidding I have slapped £250m valuations on the players I deem untouchable and had no reactions from any of the players so far regarding this valuation. No clubs are bidding which is fantastic but at the same time annoying. It would be nice to keep players at the same club for majority of their careers but at the same time I'm not buying anyone as I don't need to so this balance is increasing. Finding yth players good enough to break into my squad is hard.

[KingCanary]

I've got to say this one has floored me- 23 year old Brazilian Winger, no caps. Career spent largely in the Brazilian leagues or the French second tier. Good stats but nothing to blow your mind.

His valuation is....

£85-129m! Bear in mind only one Brazilian team has ever received a fee north of £50m and that was for Neymar. I can't get my head around how this valuation could exist?

[NineCloudNine]

On 16/01/2024 at 11:43, NineCloudNine said:

I agree. I have no issue with the promising 20yr old being valued at £40m.

i’m less clear about why the 26 yr old first choice Italian international who plays alongside him has a stated value of half that, is subject to a £17m bid and gets upset at an asking price above £22m.

I'm going to back away from my previous comment here. I've spent some time looking at CA/PA of players to see if I can make some sense of the valuations. In this particutar case Gianluca Mancini has a CA of 146 and a PA of 150, at age 26. He's just not that good and he's not going to get any better. Valentin Gomez has a CA of around 135 at age 20 and a PA of over 160 so having over double Mancini's valuation makes sense. In fact the weird thing is that Real Madrid wanted to buy Mancini at all tbh.

Valuations seem to take a very serious jump up at higher CA and PA, meaning over 160. Nicolo Barella - same age as Mancini - has a CA of 161 and a PA of 169, which is very rarified air. He's valued at over £100m by Inter.

There are still some weird numbers, but it does seem that SI are trying to replicate the real life situation of world class players and high potential kids going for very very high fees while most clubs scrabble around trading players at a fraction of that value even if they are 'only' 10-15pts of CA worse.

Edited January 19 by NineCloudNine

[Ein]

150 CA players can be very good, it depends on the spread of their attributes. Mancini, in particular, is a very well rounded central defender with excellent mentals. Some clubs seem to have low asking prices by default. Roma is one of those clubs. Even in FM22, the likes of Mancini, Cristante and Karsdorp (who was very good in that edition) are all initially valued below €20m.

[NineCloudNine]

31 minutes ago, Ein said:

150 CA players can be very good, it depends on the spread of their attributes. Mancini, in particular, is a very well rounded central defender with excellent mentals. Some clubs seem to have low asking prices by default. Roma is one of those clubs. Even in FM22, the likes of Mancini, Cristante and Karsdorp (who was very good in that edition) are all initially valued below €20m.

Yes 150 is easily good enough to be a regular international - as Mancini is. But Transfermarkt currently has him valued around £20m, so maybe FM wasn't as far out as my initial post suggested when Madrid offered me £18m.

And there is a very large jump from 150 to 160 CA and up. A quick look at the database shows just over 500 players with CA between 140 and 150, just over 200 between 150 and 160 and 79 over 160. The transfer values of those 79 are vertiginously higher than the 200 below them, who are in turn worth multiple of the next 500.

I'm not saying SI have got this right, but I think I get what they are trying to do.

Your point about the selling club is an interesting one. Roma are very average and financially weak, which might be reflected in the valuation the game gives their players.

[XaW]

I just want to add that the transfer values are not, at any rate, locked in for the AI. I have this player who has been targeted by a lot of teams who are better than my South African side. Now, he is my best player, but playing in South Africa, I know I have to sell when the big European sides comes knocking. However, I want to get enough money in, and the transfer values are not really high due to the low reputation of the South African league. I am still managing to get in offers several times his transfer value.

The offer from Benfica is also to happen at the end of the season, as well as a 50% of next sale (which could be massive if he is successful there)

The Porto one is a bit lower with more clauses, so I will only accept the one from Benfica in the end, but both are good offers.

Now, these are not the only offers I've gotten, and I've negotiated them up to where they currently are. I have several other teams who were not willing to go that high that I rejected.

If only 1 club was interested I doubt I would have gotten as much as I'm currently doing, but thought I'd add my comments to make sure you don't take the values as gospel, but rather as vague guidelines. Personally, I wouldn't have sold the player for his transfer value. 3 times more, then we are talking!  

[XaW]

23 hours ago, XaW said:

I just want to add that the transfer values are not, at any rate, locked in for the AI. I have this player who has been targeted by a lot of teams who are better than my South African side. Now, he is my best player, but playing in South Africa, I know I have to sell when the big European sides comes knocking. However, I want to get enough money in, and the transfer values are not really high due to the low reputation of the South African league. I am still managing to get in offers several times his transfer value.

The offer from Benfica is also to happen at the end of the season, as well as a 50% of next sale (which could be massive if he is successful there)

The Porto one is a bit lower with more clauses, so I will only accept the one from Benfica in the end, but both are good offers.

Now, these are not the only offers I've gotten, and I've negotiated them up to where they currently are. I have several other teams who were not willing to go that high that I rejected.

If only 1 club was interested I doubt I would have gotten as much as I'm currently doing, but thought I'd add my comments to make sure you don't take the values as gospel, but rather as vague guidelines. Personally, I wouldn't have sold the player for his transfer value. 3 times more, then we are talking!  

As an update I did sell him, and while the fans hated it, they did have this message.

[DP]

The range really is horrible. Looks horrible, isn’t really a thing outside of FM and doesn’t add much to the game. 

Would be so much more impactful as an approximate value - like past FMs - and how people talk about players in real life. It was a very questionable design choice. 

[wazzaflow10]

10 hours ago, XaW said:

As an update I did sell him, and while the fans hated it, they did have this message.

Not game breaking but it is annoying that if you sell anyone who "isn't expected to make the first team" by the fans its basically impossible to get anything other than a C or F/E when you sell a player.

I could see a grade like that for when Manchester United sold Ronaldo or Barca sold Neymar as they aren't selling clubs. Fans aren't happy a star was sold but recognize the team got good value. For smaller clubs there should be much more weight on if you sold the player far above value.

[XaW]

4 minutes ago, wazzaflow10 said:

Not game breaking but it is annoying that if you sell anyone who "isn't expected to make the first team" by the fans its basically impossible to get anything other than a C or F/E when you sell a player.

I could see a grade like that for when Manchester United sold Ronaldo or Barca sold Neymar as they aren't selling clubs. Fans aren't happy a star was sold but recognize the team got good value. For smaller clubs there should be much more weight on if you sold the player far above value.

I mean, this guy is probably the best player the club has ever seen, so I totally understand why they would hate it that we sold him, but at the same time, I got a lot of money for him. So I think a C is fine in this case. That said, I've seen a lot of instances where I think the game has it wrong. It's something I should be better at reporting tbh, and I hope you report it too when you see it.

[wazzaflow10]

17 minutes ago, XaW said:

I mean, this guy is probably the best player the club has ever seen, so I totally understand why they would hate it that we sold him, but at the same time, I got a lot of money for him. So I think a C is fine in this case. That said, I've seen a lot of instances where I think the game has it wrong. It's something I should be better at reporting tbh, and I hope you report it too when you see it.

Totally fair then. I don't expect it to be an A+ grade. There should be some let down of letting that kind of player go that caps the fan reaction. Not knowing your club's finances but if that turned the club a huge profit I would expect a B there. Especially considering you got a 50% next sale clause too! (I'd hope the board gave you an A+ on that). I've seen grades change over time as results of the team go up and down. I'd hope that if your team went on a nice little run or the funds were reinvested into the squad the grade would improve after the initial sting wore off.

And yeah its never really causes enough problems that I think I need to report anything immediately. Always just kind of whatever as long as I win that grade doesn't matter. The match grades are much more annoying when you win 2-0 or 3-0 and get a C because the fans expected 4+ goals or something. Just little things. But when I get back to playing 24 (took a hiatus while the scouting is bugged) I'll see if I can compile some reports for the dev team.

[kopfan1977]

On 25/01/2024 at 08:30, XaW said:

I just want to add that the transfer values are not, at any rate, locked in for the AI. I have this player who has been targeted by a lot of teams who are better than my South African side. Now, he is my best player, but playing in South Africa, I know I have to sell when the big European sides comes knocking. However, I want to get enough money in, and the transfer values are not really high due to the low reputation of the South African league. I am still managing to get in offers several times his transfer value.

 

You say transfer values are not at any rate locked in for the AI.. Any chance of explaining  this below then as it completely baffles me as to how my players can get these values. Because something just doesn't add up for me. I don't wish to sell either player that I have used as examples. I have no need to sell. Yet the AI is interested and keeps bidding on them as their values are reasonably low.

 

Claudio Echeverri is valued at £147-£176m. He is current Premier league top scorer. Plays regularly for Argentina. He's only 25 years old and close to his max potential. Former World player of the year 2 years running. And his value at that point was still under £100m

Then there is a wonderkid at Barcelona. 23 years old. Nowhere near Echeverri in terms of total output. Around the same PA 176. Only awards he has received is European Golden boy 3 years ago, And being named in Spanish first division best 11. His value is between £185-264m.

 

Giorgio Scalvini is Valued at £80-87m has been super consistent for me. Regular starter for Italy with 94 caps and still only 27 years old. 

Now compare him with Calum Doyle who plays for Aston Villa, Same age, PA nowhere near that of Scalvini or his partner in Crime Diomande. Not won any awards other than club ones. Just 22 caps for England yet his value is close to £110m 

 

So to these Values - What is it that influences them? Home rep, World rep, current rep, Age, Contract length, wages? 

Considering Both of my players have 5 year contracts on 350k + whilst the other 2 have 2 years and 3 years on their contracts, Both on considerably less wages compared to my 2 and all my reps are higher too. For their values to be higher than my own players values doesn't make sense.

 

 

I have Joao Neves playing for me. PSG want him but age 29 for me his value is less than £80m. Despite being one of my top earners, One of my star players and a 4 year contract he signed less than 3 months ago.

Out of curiosity I saved the game when they bid £88m for him, accepted and sold him. His value then went to £190-228m upon signing for PSG on a contract that was similar to what he had playing for me.

Couple of small differences between my club and PSG - I have best world rep, PSG are not far below. I have a positive bank balance of £412m, I have no idea what PSG have other than them being Rich. I am going to guess they don't have the abundance of readies available like I have. But they are going to have at least £100-200m in transfer funds available. However their bids are always a take it or leave it offer. Same with other clubs bidding for my players.

 

Edited January 26 by kopfan1977

[XaW]

2 minutes ago, kopfan1977 said:

You say transfer values are not at any rate locked in for the AI.. Any chance of explaining  this below then as it completely baffles me as to how my players can get these values. Because something just doesn't add up for me. I don't wish to sell either player that I have used as examples. I have no need to sell. Yet the AI is interested and keeps bidding on them as their values are reasonably low.

Claudio Echeverri is valued at £147-£176m. He is current Premier league top scorer. Plays regularly for Argentina. He's only 25 years old and close to his max potential. Former World player of the year 2 years running. And his value at that point was still under £100m

Then there is a wonderkid at Barcelona. 23 years old. Nowhere near Echeverri in terms of total output. Around the same PA 176. Only awards he has received is European Golden boy 3 years ago, And being named in Spanish first division best 11. His value is between £185-264m.

Giorgio Scalvini is Valued at £80-87m has been super consistent for me. Regular starter for Italy with 94 caps and still only 27 years old. 

Now compare him with Calum Doyle who plays for Aston Villa, Same age, PA nowhere near that of Scalvini or his partner in Crime Diomande. Not won any awards other than club ones. Just 22 caps for England yet his value is close to £110m 

So to these Values - What is it that influences them? Home rep, World rep, current rep, Age, Contract length, wages? 

Considering Both of my players have 5 year contracts on 350k + whilst the other 2 have 2 years and 3 years on their contracts, Both on considerably less wages compared to my 2 and all their reps are higher too. For their values to be higher than my own players values doesn't make sense.

I have Joao Neves playing for me. PSG want him but age 29 for me his value is less than £80m. Despite being one of my top earners, One of my star players and a 4 year contract he signed less than 3 months ago.

Out of curiosity I saved the game when they bid £88m for him, accepted and sold him. His value then went to £190-228m upon signing for PSG on a contract that was similar to what he had playing for me.

Couple of small differences between my club and PSG - I have best world rep, PSG are not far below. I have a positive bank balance of £412m, I have no idea what PSG have other than them being Rich. I am going to guess they don't have the abundance of readies available like I have. But they are going to have at least £100-200m in transfer funds available. However their bids are always a take it or leave it offer. Same with other clubs bidding for my players.

 

It's impossible for me to know for sure, as I don't have your save, as to how they are calculated, I don't know, but I can venture a guess or two.

I would assume the players reputation makes a massive impact, and that is reflected by the club he is at. So if you are a mid-table PL club who sells a player to Barcelona, I would expect the value to rise based on that alone. I also think the value is higher the shorter time he has been at the club as well as how long a contract (and the wage on the contract too!). I would also think somethings as semi related as player importance to the club would impact it. So a "Star player" would have a natural higher value than the identical player on "squad player" for example. I wouldn't be surprised if it also took into account if the club already had a replacement at the club too.

I think there are so many factors involved with various weight to them that only SI can know for sure. If you think you have seen something that you don't think is right the only way to know is to report it to SI as a possible bug and let them take a look under the hood.

[XaW]

9 minutes ago, wazzaflow10 said:

Totally fair then. I don't expect it to be an A+ grade. There should be some let down of letting that kind of player go that caps the fan reaction. Not knowing your club's finances but if that turned the club a huge profit I would expect a B there. Especially considering you got a 50% next sale clause too! (I'd hope the board gave you an A+ on that). I've seen grades change over time as results of the team go up and down. I'd hope that if your team went on a nice little run or the funds were reinvested into the squad the grade would improve after the initial sting wore off.

And yeah its never really causes enough problems that I think I need to report anything immediately. Always just kind of whatever as long as I win that grade doesn't matter. The match grades are much more annoying when you win 2-0 or 3-0 and get a C because the fans expected 4+ goals or something. Just little things. But when I get back to playing 24 (took a hiatus while the scouting is bugged) I'll see if I can compile some reports for the dev team.

Yeah, a B would be suitable too, but I can't really say a C is wrong here. The club had never had a balance higher than about a million before, so this allow the club to essentially survive without worrying about income for 5 years or so, so it's a massive deal for the club.

And these are the smaller, and sometimes very vague issues that are easy to forget when reporting bugs. So I think SI would welcome them, even if they won't have a priority over higher impact bugs.

[kopfan1977]

8 minutes ago, XaW said:

It's impossible for me to know for sure, as I don't have your save, as to how they are calculated, I don't know, but I can venture a guess or two.

I would assume the players reputation makes a massive impact, and that is reflected by the club he is at. So if you are a mid-table PL club who sells a player to Barcelona, I would expect the value to rise based on that alone. I also think the value is higher the shorter time he has been at the club as well as how long a contract (and the wage on the contract too!). I would also think somethings as semi related as player importance to the club would impact it. So a "Star player" would have a natural higher value than the identical player on "squad player" for example. I wouldn't be surprised if it also took into account if the club already had a replacement at the club too.

I think there are so many factors involved with various weight to them that only SI can know for sure. If you think you have seen something that you don't think is right the only way to know is to report it to SI as a possible bug and let them take a look under the hood.

I am going to assume my club rep is max or close to maxed being No.1 Ranked team in the world. Barca are 4th I think. Villa are 20th.

 

Echeverri rep is higher than the similar player at Barca, Been at my club longer than the Barca player has at his club. Same with Scalvini and Doyle - Scalvini rep is higher, but has been with me a year longer. Diomande however has been with me less time than Doyle has at Villa with higher PA yet valued lower. All 3 of my players are 'Important'. Same with Doyle, Only the Barca regen is Star player.

 

Neves on the other hand is down as Star player, 5 year contract, 350k+ p.w. Valued at only £80m but on that test I did selling him to PSG his value shot to the moon.

 

I do however have 4 top prospects waiting patiently, playing a couple of low risk games here and there. All with very good potential. I've already lost one massive prospect to PSG who had activated a £96m clause I hadn't realised was inserted in his contract - however his value was only about £80-92m anyway, but upon signing for PSG went to £120+. Now his value is close to £260-300m after scouting him and that's after 3 years with them.

 

None of my players has even got valued that much, Not even Neves after I broke club transfer record to sign him 4 seasons back.

Do you think that things like Club finances, 'Squad Value' - as in overall squad Value would effect values of players, e.g Having 20 players capable of starting for any side and a couple of prospects, compared to having say 5 or 6 star players and the rest just squad filler material. So values of said players are distributed around said players.

[Smoo]

25 minutes ago, XaW said:

It's impossible for me to know for sure, as I don't have your save, as to how they are calculated, I don't know, but I can venture a guess or two.

I would assume the players reputation makes a massive impact, and that is reflected by the club he is at. So if you are a mid-table PL club who sells a player to Barcelona, I would expect the value to rise based on that alone. I also think the value is higher the shorter time he has been at the club as well as how long a contract (and the wage on the contract too!). I would also think somethings as semi related as player importance to the club would impact it. So a "Star player" would have a natural higher value than the identical player on "squad player" for example. I wouldn't be surprised if it also took into account if the club already had a replacement at the club too.

I think there are so many factors involved with various weight to them that only SI can know for sure. If you think you have seen something that you don't think is right the only way to know is to report it to SI as a possible bug and let them take a look under the hood.

I have no idea why you would think any of that matters when SI staff have actually confirmed that AI teams will artificially price their players more than they are worth, because they don't want to sell them. The only way to to get a "realistic" (still not all that realistic) asking price is to unsettle the player by making bids and talking about them in the press, in the hope that one day when they 31 years old they will request a transfer.

The transfer values attached to player teams is market value, and trying to artificially inflate their value in the way the AI does, will conveniently not work for the player.

[XaW]

5 minutes ago, Smoo said:

I have no idea why you would think any of that matters when SI staff have actually confirmed that AI teams will artificially price their players more than they are worth, because they don't want to sell them. The only way to to get a "realistic" (still not all that realistic) asking price is to unsettle the player by making bids and talking about them in the press, in the hope that one day when they 31 years old they will request a transfer.

The transfer values attached to player teams is market value, and trying to artificially inflate their value in the way the AI does, will conveniently not work for the player.

We aren't talking about ACTUAL sales prices here, but the transfer value that the game gives. And if SI have said they are artificially increased, then please link, because I want to read it.

And of course we can influence prices, I just posted an example of it a few posts above here, where I got 3-4 times the value set from an AI team. I also did the same in FM23 that I posted here too and I can probably find if you want to see it. Any tool the AI has, we also have access to. Unsettling players isn't that hard, and I've done it many times in FM to get a player for way below their value.

[wazzaflow10]

18 minutes ago, kopfan1977 said:

I am going to assume my club rep is max or close to maxed being No.1 Ranked team in the world. Barca are 4th I think. Villa are 20th.

 

Echeverri rep is higher than the similar player at Barca, Been at my club longer than the Barca player has at his club. Same with Scalvini and Doyle - Scalvini rep is higher, but has been with me a year longer. Diomande however has been with me less time than Doyle has at Villa with higher PA yet valued lower. All 3 of my players are 'Important'. Same with Doyle, Only the Barca regen is Star player.

 

Neves on the other hand is down as Star player, 5 year contract, 350k+ p.w. Valued at only £80m but on that test I did selling him to PSG his value shot to the moon.

 

I do however have 4 top prospects waiting patiently, playing a couple of low risk games here and there. All with very good potential. I've already lost one massive prospect to PSG who had activated a £96m clause I hadn't realised was inserted in his contract - however his value was only about £80-92m anyway, but upon signing for PSG went to £120+. Now his value is close to £260-300m after scouting him and that's after 3 years with them.

 

None of my players has even got valued that much, Not even Neves after I broke club transfer record to sign him 4 seasons back.

Do you think that things like Club finances, 'Squad Value' - as in overall squad Value would effect values of players, e.g Having 20 players capable of starting for any side and a couple of prospects, compared to having say 5 or 6 star players and the rest just squad filler material. So values of said players are distributed around said players.

All of this strikes me as the game showing you what your board set player prices as "fair value". Not what you would sell for or what they could be sold for but what the board sets as a target to "help" you not get hosed. They won't be happy if you get less than what is listed. IRL player values are listed as assets on a balance sheet so if a club is counting on a player's value to be X and you cash in for less their books are affected in a negative way.

The AI on the other hand is showing you what it would take to buy this player right now rather than what their board set as minimum acceptable values - obviously for negotiation purposes.

A good test would be to start a new manager (without picking the team) and look at player values and see if they are any different than what they show as your manager.

[wazzaflow10]

1 hour ago, XaW said:

Yeah, a B would be suitable too, but I can't really say a C is wrong here. The club had never had a balance higher than about a million before, so this allow the club to essentially survive without worrying about income for 5 years or so, so it's a massive deal for the club.

And these are the smaller, and sometimes very vague issues that are easy to forget when reporting bugs. So I think SI would welcome them, even if they won't have a priority over higher impact bugs.

Yep its QOL/immersion issue that doesn't really change much of how you play barring doing some crazy things.

[Smoo]

Angelo, Wesley Fofana and Reece James transfer values a few days before the transfer window shuts and 10 days after it has shut. No change.

Ronnie Stutter, bought by Liverpool for £9m from me. After the transfer window shuts, his value, which was already absurdly high for a player of his reputation, potential ability and contract, increases by more than 100%.

Carlos Baleba, unsettled by my attempts to sign him. Before the transfer window closes valued at £54m. After the transfer window closes, his SALES value, not his transfer value, increases by almost 50%. He's also not unhappy that the club have massively increased his SALE value, something the player cannot get away with. If I agreed a sales value with a player and then increased it for no reason, I'd have the entire squad mutinying for this. But the AI doesn't have that problem.

Funny how my players values don't change at all though, right?

[wazzaflow10]

4 minutes ago, Smoo said:

Angelo, Wesley Fofana and Reece James transfer values a few days before the transfer window shuts and 10 days after it has shut. No change.

Ronnie Stutter, bought by Liverpool for £9m from me. After the transfer window shuts, his value, which was already absurdly high for a player of his reputation, potential ability and contract, increases by more than 100%.

Carlos Baleba, unsettled by my attempts to sign him. Before the transfer window closes valued at £54m. After the transfer window closes, his SALES value, not his transfer value, increases by almost 50%. He's also not unhappy that the club have massively increased his SALE value, something the player cannot get away with. If I agreed a sales value with a player and then increased it for no reason, I'd have the entire squad mutinying for this. But the AI doesn't have that problem.

Funny how my players values don't change at all though, right?

 

There's a spike in interest for the last player and you don't know if they've agreed to a price at all with the player. That seems pretty self explanatory. More teams interest = higher price. Its basic economics.

Stutter's case is peculiar but did you sell him on a contract that was winding down? Also the idea the transfer value should be static is probably an incorrect assumption. He probably got a big rep boost going to Liverpool, the management team might think more highly of him than yours did and they just purchased him.

It could be a bug it might be how it's expected to work. If you think you have a case then open a bug report with those two saves.

[Smoo]

30 minutes ago, wazzaflow10 said:

There's a spike in interest for the last player and you don't know if they've agreed to a price at all with the player. That seems pretty self explanatory. More teams interest = higher price. Its basic economics.

Stutter's case is peculiar but did you sell him on a contract that was winding down? Also the idea the transfer value should be static is probably an incorrect assumption. He probably got a big rep boost going to Liverpool, the management team might think more highly of him than yours did and they just purchased him.

It could be a bug it might be how it's expected to work. If you think you have a case then open a bug report with those two saves.

Same dates, Inter are interested in Nkunku before the transfer window closes. They are not interested after the window closes. His transfer value remains the same. So there goes your basic economics theory.

Stutters contract at Chelsea is irrelevant, because those two screenshots are AFTER his transfer. His value doubles in a 2 week period while he's at Liverpool.

Edit: Also, I would be amazed if his reputation increased significantly going from Chelsea's U21 team to Liverpools U21.

Edited January 26 by Smoo

[NineCloudNine]

1 hour ago, wazzaflow10 said:

All of this strikes me as the game showing you what your board set player prices as "fair value". Not what you would sell for or what they could be sold for but what the board sets as a target to "help" you not get hosed. They won't be happy if you get less than what is listed. IRL player values are listed as assets on a balance sheet so if a club is counting on a player's value to be X and you cash in for less their books are affected in a negative way.

The AI on the other hand is showing you what it would take to buy this player right now rather than what their board set as minimum acceptable values - obviously for negotiation purposes.

A good test would be to start a new manager (without picking the team) and look at player values and see if they are any different than what they show as your manager.

I'm sure this is correct

[wazzaflow10]

6 hours ago, Smoo said:

Same dates, Inter are interested in Nkunku before the transfer window closes. They are not interested after the window closes. His transfer value remains the same. So there goes your basic economics theory.

Stutters contract at Chelsea is irrelevant, because those two screenshots are AFTER his transfer. His value doubles in a 2 week period while he's at Liverpool.

Edit: Also, I would be amazed if his reputation increased significantly going from Chelsea's U21 team to Liverpools U21.

 

One team probably isn't really enough to cause a change in valuation and/or it could have been rumoured interest only. There's no potential for a bidding war if only one team is interested.

Stutters contract is completely relevant because valuation decreases as contracts run down generally. If he had 12 months left that would be a completely plausible explanation for why his value was 9M and immediately increased after he was awarded a new contract.

I wouldn't even know where to begin to start calculating how rep increases. Liverpool is very clearly above Chelsea at the moment though so its possible that a player moving from Chelsea to Liverpool experiences a significant rep boost.

And if you don't like any of these answers see the post above for what the mechanic may actually be.

[Smoo]

You're completely missing the point about Stutter, His £9m transfer fee is not what I'm complaining about. The problem is after he moves to Liverpool his valuation is £26m-£31m, two weeks later his valuation doubles to £63m-£77m. He has terrible potential ability, at best a League One player. His Liverpool contract isn't worth anywhere near that much in monetary terms. £9m is probably more than he was worth, which is an example of the AI's terrible squad building. The problem is how does his valuation double in two weeks, both valuations whilst being a Liverpool player, from ~£30m to upwards of £70m.

You're talking about the real world. Football Manager is not the real world. The difference in reputation between Chelsea and Liverpool, in game, is marginal. Add to that I've won a League Cup and two FA Cup's in two seasons.

And I know how the mechanics work. My first post in this thread was explaining how the AI has an artificially high transfer value, and you have to unsettle a player to get a more realistic valuation. The problem with this is it stagnates the transfer market. Many players will end up never leaving their clubs because they never become unsettled and the transfer value remains too high, so no one bids for them. I don't think I've ever seen Haaland leave Man City. In reality, he will very likely go to Real Madrid in a few years. All the while, the AI can unsettle your players very easily. And a new addition to this years game is player mutinies every 6 months, demanding you let your best player leave. When does this ever happen.

I've played FM for over 20 years. It's been slowly getting worse every year as they add half baked features that don't work and never get fixed.