BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Free agency / Salary reduction?

Free agency / Salary reduction?

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
114356.26 in reply to 114356.24
Date: 10/4/2009 1:10:11 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
Rules and market-economy changes should be communicated in advance, not the day for the night because you were wrong with economy when you try new adjustments..


Who says what was done is wrong? You can't completely predict how a market is going to react to changes. BB is no different.

Plus, the changes that were made recently were intended to work in the long run. This FA introduction is being done for the short term.

Why would it be so bad for prices to level off?

Last edited by brian at 10/4/2009 1:10:27 PM

"Well, no ones gonna top that." - http://tinyurl.com/noigttt
This Post:
00
114356.27 in reply to 114356.23
Date: 10/4/2009 1:12:32 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
11011101
Don't get me wrong.
I think that it is necessary to reduce money income, market prices are out of mind, out of any reasonable balance, to me this was not so unpredictable when BBs decided to introduce so many economical income, but now, with this situation, changing again to me would be the worst thing they can do.
I agree to Fotocopiator, waiting for the next season would be the best solution, we can't change at mid-season buying power for some users.

Adding one more thing: BBs always speak about market balance to find and I know that it is so hard to listen all the complaints of people who want money, who want to buy the greatest players in the game, who want this and those.
But every season there are new changes which have always the result to delete previous changes.
I think it would be great to be more patient, when we do something, before judging that is completely wrong and that we need to delete it, we have to wait some time to find some kind of "starting point of balance".

By the way, I'm not an economist, so I'm only speaking about my ideas without every kind of technical reason, maybe (surely) BBs know it better and they will explain the situation better than me, but actually I'm strongly against it for now.
At the end of the season, saving this announcement which will make users allowed to react with a new strategy, I will be with you about the rebirth of FAs.

From: brian

This Post:
00
114356.29 in reply to 114356.25
Date: 10/4/2009 1:16:18 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
planning is getting pretty impossible with lot of changes


For a long time prices were going down, and then this season there has been a huge spike in prices. This should help offset some of that.

I dont see how steady deflation followed by unexpected short term inflation (which the BB's are taking action on) makes of impossible planning. It's not even very many changes.

"Well, no ones gonna top that." - http://tinyurl.com/noigttt
From: Verrinho

This Post:
00
114356.30 in reply to 114356.23
Date: 10/4/2009 1:20:15 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
3232
I don't hear very many in here making up sad stories about them.


just because it is useless to come here in BB-global and say something.

This Post:
00
114356.31 in reply to 114356.26
Date: 10/4/2009 1:24:21 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
514514
Rules and market-economy changes should be communicated in advance, not the day for the night because you were wrong with economy when you try new adjustments..


Who says what was done is wrong? You can't completely predict how a market is going to react to changes. BB is no different.

Plus, the changes that were made recently were intended to work in the long run. This FA introduction is being done for the short term.

Why would it be so bad for prices to level off?


Well... nobody says "we are wrong", but doing this re-introduction BBs admit that they were... wrong.

Don't talk me about prediction on the market because it's my second work :-) so I know how market works in real life and on BB I could imagine the same... when investigations are depth, market work good with minimal adjustments and... re-introduction of FA is not minimal and moreover not budgeted

From: brian

To: Foto
This Post:
00
114356.32 in reply to 114356.28
Date: 10/4/2009 1:25:51 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
576576
Wov. Curious sentence to describe two users that don't agree with FA's come back and try to say the reasons in a good tone


How many people are buying 100k centers, and just happened to get in a bid war and then sell a player to get an early bid in the last day or two?

It's not the same and you know it


Its the same, in both hypothetical cases a team was adversely affected by unexpected changes in the market. Though, its different as the one I made up has a higher chance of occurring.

"Well, no ones gonna top that." - http://tinyurl.com/noigttt
From: Zezo™

This Post:
00
114356.33 in reply to 114356.31
Date: 10/4/2009 1:35:59 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
134134
planning is hard when conditions change frequently and not always as expected.
you brought the example of those who decided to build arena last season and buy now - i'm sure they feel pretty unlucky, expecially if they thought they had a nice plan for their team.
i sold a player last season because i thought i couldn't afford to pay his salary - i suppose it's my fault not to predict that my TV contract and merchandise income would grow so much. anyway, everybody in italy forum was surprised by how much more money for week there was, so maybe is not just me.
and it's not a complaining about how my team is disavantaged or whatever, i'm just sad that i sold a player i could have kept.

This Post:
00
114356.34 in reply to 114356.23
Date: 10/4/2009 1:39:47 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
33
Quite the dramatic overreaction by you and Fotocopiator here. Plus you overlook those that would be harmed by inflation, such as those that decided to invest money in an arena last season and then save up to buy a player this season. They now have much less buying power in that instance, when then couldn't have forseen this seasons change in prices.

I don't hear very many in here making up sad stories about them.


If the problem is money that come from arenas resizing it will be a temporary inflation and we don't need new changes!!! if bb want to reintroduce FA mean that this isn't the real problem!!!


Last edited by Mattew Howard at 10/4/2009 1:41:43 PM

This Post:
00
114356.35 in reply to 114356.13
Date: 10/4/2009 1:42:29 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
your kidding right there going to be cheap to bring down prices to help stop inflation.

this is just a huge mistake and very unfair to those that have allready spent the money as they were given no warning


This Post:
00
114356.36 in reply to 114356.18
Date: 10/4/2009 2:04:35 PM
BC Hostivař
První liga
Overall Posts Rated:
13171317
Second Team:
Jirkov
From the news:

One of the effects of the updated economic rules has been a temporary increase in the amount of money in the game, particularly in one-time payments from arena contraction.
(The global increase in merchandising money under the new rules is approximately in balance with the global increase in salaries this offseason).


I think you forgot for one very very important think. Almost all of team now earns more money for gate receipts than last season. For example my team has maximum last season 555k for a game, now is 606k and I think I'm able to raise it somewhere up to 650k by setting optimal ticket prices. I ask many teams in my countries and it looks all team are able to earn some 20k-30k more than last season with the same arena. If I count over 50k teams playing BB it is about $ 1.000.000.000 - 1.500.000.000 more in game every week (at the start of the season it wasn't so much, because it took some time to set the ticket prices well).
I'm not sure you know about this effect of new attendance formula.
You also mentioned arena destruction, but I can't believe it's in sum more than $ 500M, there are not so many team which have too large arenas.

Advertisement