BuzzerBeater Forums

I agree. I already played a football manager game where supporters could have a second team and it was fun but things must be done properly.
I mean some restrictions in order to not create a big gap among supporters and free users, and allow also a free one to climb to the top.
The game i played allowed it, the economies of 2 teams should be separated, only players could be moved among the 2 teams and only in offseason, a player that moved from 2nd to 1st team should be sold only after 1 entire season he's in the main one, and so on... i leave it to the intelligence of game owners and i trust they could find the right way to encourage people in doing Supporter but at the same time allow the free ones to be competitive.

Last edited by Aureliano71 at 1/20/2014 7:46:15 AM

I salute you and other supporters who give money although they aren't getting in-game advantages. Just to give something back to the game we all enjoy.

Your counterparts should be ashamed. "Another money-making game"? Wow. In BB vocabulary, atrocious.

I personally think its time for the poll and thread to be locked soon, after a final and conclusive(?) post by BB-Marin.

The percentages for and against the motion are pretty stable. One percent more or less won't change the outcome of the BBs decision.
Excellent arguments have been made, from both voting "sides", suggestions on improving the initial model, as well.
I don't know whether the BBs had in mind to go through with the secondary team idea, had the voting given a simple majority or a 2/3 majority or whatever, but they have everything in their hands to make a decision for or against the proposition.

We've reached a point that the outcome of the voting won't change significantly. Instead people become impatient and drift the course of the discussion to useless to this thread topics.

BB-Marin has stated in his 3rd post that a new server situation is irrelevant to this thread and a totally different suggestion, yet we keep coming back to that. Users are drawn into political theories and issues, use foul language and worst of all, in my opinion, we continue to see a pattern developing where supporters show prejudice against non-supporters AND vice versa.

Having out first official poll and discussion thread was excellent and hope to see it more often from now on.



Last edited by maddoghellas at 1/20/2014 12:07:04 PM

It's all good and nice what you said, I agree, but it's a classic voice-of-reason demagogy. Ideas take a long time to mature. This thread has been open for 8 days only. A lot of people voted without fully understanding the idea, and with wrong presumptions.

Anyway, the main problem I have, is with people attacking the very principles of BuzzerBeater. It has always been a non-profitable organization, created only for enjoyment of it's users. Everyone should at least try to appreciate it.

It's all good and nice what you said, I agree, but it's a classic voice-of-reason demagogy. Ideas take a long time to mature. This thread has been open for 8 days only. A lot of people voted without fully understanding the idea, and with wrong presumptions.

Anyway, the main problem I have, is with people attacking the very principles of BuzzerBeater. It has always been a non-profitable organization, created only for enjoyment of it's users. Everyone should at least try to appreciate it.

The whole process revealed some faults in the procedure. I, too, believe that 8 days are not enough, for such an important decision. But the in the last 100(could easily say 200) or so posts, we had nothing really new. No new arguments, no new suggestions etc.
As BB-Marin said, we had people voting without having read hiw initial posts, let alone arguments and/or syggestions for improvement for and against the proposition. You can't beat that, whether you have 8 or 88 days available.

Maybe next time, when we do something similar, we could have a set time of arguing and improving the initial proposition and then, in the same thread, have the (very specific to what we vote for)poll activated, for a set period of time, as well.

About the "war" between supporters and non-supporters, i believe that selecting to be on a "side" is wrong to start with and against the philosophy of BuzzerBeater and its administrators.

I have banners in my bb pages, you haven´t because you pay... so the income you do to bb are direct, i do inderect... but i do... i just believe i can play for free, becuase there are many ways to get incomes...

I don't think revenue from Supporters and Non-Supporters is equal. I think Supporters contribute approximately 10x or 20x the amount of revenue for each Non-Supporter. This is my own assumption, as I don't work for BB. I wanted to mention this, because I think it's dangerous to think the game receives just as much revenue from each type of player (Supporter and Non-Supporter). That type of thinking might make someone incorrectly assume "the game doesn't need Supporter revenue, because the game gets ad revenue anyway."

Supporter per year = $39.99.

Ad Revenue per year (my assumption) = probably between $1.00 - $4.00 per year per user. Facebook's annual advertising revenue per monthly user is estimated at $5.70 in 2013. In 2008 it was $2.68. While I know BB isn't Facebook, it has some similarities of users logging on frequently and spending time on multiple pages with each login. FB bombards users with ads though, and advertisers on FB know they're getting much more exposure than 31,000 users. So, let's estimate that BB's ad revenue is less than FB, but we'll give BB an optimistic guess of $2.00 per year per user.

$39.99 is a LOT more than $2.00.

Ad revenue reference:
(http://www.trefis.com/stock/fb/articles/216618/maryhow-fa...)

I'm not saying everyone has to be a Supporter. Some cannot afford it. But BB should consider prudent moves to attract new Supporters, convince existing Supporters to re-subscribe, and attract existing Supporters to contribute more revenue (1/2 price Supporter package for 2nd team). A proposal for a 2nd team does all of those things, without giving any in-game advantage to paying customers. It's a brilliant idea.

smallest communities will be invaded by foreign players... a really bad idea

Smallest communities are getting smaller anyway. Players are quitting because they find playing the same teams and bots every season gets boring.

I'm not tied to Micronations, 99th Country, or Separate Server idea. I think they all could work, but all have pros and cons.

But it is interesting to hear your point of view from South Africa, where there are only 8 users. You would not want to open South Africa to users from other countries, even if it meant less Bots, and more competition. Could you describe your point of view, so that we can understand the concerns of micronation managers?