View forum thread

Managers' Development Discussion Thread - The Transfer Market
This is one of a group of threads inviting discussion from all managers about the proposals for developing various parts of Itsagoal.

It is important to realize that although each of the proposals has been formulated after much thought and discussion, none of them is set in stone. The members of the Think Tank have done their best to consider topics from all angles, but do not claim to have thought of absolutely everything.

This is therefore the chance for everyone to get involved with discussion. Please therefore read through the proposals, and make your comments.

For this process to be both useful and manageable, please do not stray from the topic being discussed. Threads will be closely moderated to keep them relevant.

We expect there to be differences of opinion, and would encourage all managers to engage in positive discussion. In the end, Itsagoal is Ron's game, and he will make the final decisions, but we want to hear from you first!


...........................................................................................................................

The Transfer Market

Objectives

A transfer system which is more dynamic and interactive.

As far as possible not to disadvantage managers who cannot login more than once a day.

To prevent cheating or manipulation by managers.

1. Listing / Viewing players on the market

Players to be listed on the market for between 3, 4 or 5 days, at the choice of the selling manager.

Bids to have a random close time: literally they will close without warning at any minute of the day or night on the final day.

Buyers to have the ability to short-list/watch a player.

Buyers also to have the ability to mark a player as Not interesting to avoid repeatedly reviewing the same player in the market.

Sellers to have the ability to cancel listings if no bids have been made.

Sellers to have the option of listing a player on all league markets, 50% of markets, or just the home market, The cost of the listing would be dependent both on the number of leagues listed in and on the player's selling price. In addition to that, if the player is sold then a sales tax would apply. A percentage of the final selling fee would be deducted. The exact percentage would again depend on the number of markets in which the player is listed.

2. Bidding Information

The current number of bids to be displayed, and a bid history to be made available, including bid values, but preserving the anonymity of bidders.

Also to be displayed - the number of times a player has been reported on by scouts.

Also to be displayed - the number of times a player has been viewed by managers.

Bidding information to be visible to all managers.

3. Bidding Mechanics

Bids to have a minimum increment of the higher of 10,000 units or 5% of the current highest bid. This would be capped at 250,000.

Automatic bidding. A manager would specify his/her maximum bid. Whenever the manager is outbid, the bid would automatically be increased until the manager's maximum bid is reached. Earlier placed bids would take precedence over later ones of the same value: partial bids would not be possible taking into account the minimum increment stipulation.

All bids to be binding, i.e. a bid cannot be withdrawn.

Messages on-screen requiring conformation of bid.

Bids to be throttled, that is to say a manager must wait a certain time period before bidding again (this includes maximum bid increases). This length of this period is yet to be determined.

Managers to receive an email or PM when they are outbid - and to be able to opt out of doing so.

Swap deals within a 56 day period between two clubs will not be permitted.

4. Player Negotiations

Prior to placing a bid, the manager will negotiate the player contract with the player. This will now be an online function, with immediate feedback. There will be a limit to the number of negotiation attempts. If the player and potential manager cannot agree then the manager willbe unable to bid. The manger will offer a deal to the player, once the player accepts the terms then no further changes can be made to it. All bids for the player will be on the basis of this player contract.

This allows managers to still get the opportunity to negotiate the player deal, and it allows us to enforce binding purchase bids which is crucial.

5. Player contract duration

The board to apply the following rules.

For players aged 28. The board will allow a max of a 4 year deal
For players aged 29. The board will allow a max of a 3 year deal
For players aged 30. The board will allow a max of a 2 year deal
For players aged 31 and over. The board will allow a max of a 1 year deal, which will be renewable until the player announces his retirement.
(GK's will use a slightly older age range.)

Players to inform their club 56 days prior to retiring. The club will not be able to sell the player after this announcement.

The purpose of this is to limit a managers knowledge about players' retirement plans.
Existing contracts will not be effected, this will be implemented for new contracts and contract renewals. The retirement age of the players is NOT being changed. This is a change to how contracts are negotiated for older players.


6. Other features

Transfer events can feed into a news feed, or mobile alerts. That's a long term goal.

Transfers will move and conclude quicker.

Transfer Rating will be redundant and will therefore be removed.

More online activity for those that want it, but the automatic bid function and outbid notifications mean that visits are not required or wasted.

It's more exciting again!

===============================================

all sounds good to me

Again, very good and well thought out.

So if a bidding war occurs and the random closing time happens first thing after the update you are losing a whole day worth of potential income. On a star players with max bids of 250k when it reaches 5m you have the potential to lose millions as a seller.

I think if it was a star player there'd be quite a few bids anyway. The price isn't capped at 5 million just the minimum bid increase is capped at 250k.

You can still bid more than the minimum if you wish, just not automatically.

Look at the same thing from the buyers' point of view, and most of them would realise the danger of missing out on the player, so they would get bids in on the penultimate day.
From the seller's point of view, any incremental increases enjoyed on the last day could be seen as a bonus.

How many transfer markets will buyers be able to see on a daily basis ?

Maybe my wording is wrong... A few bids would be correct thus there being action on the last day all the more likely. If 3 people are bidding you are missing out potentially more money in minutes.




Yes, so making the transfer market fairer is having the ability to be at your computer on the last day of bidding to out bid people.

If the people complained about prices before they are going to be shocked at the newer open markets.

Can we have blind bidding where you set your min bid and your max bid. It will start off at the highest min bid registered by a manager who has placed a bid. It will then auto bid for you in the increments specified and have a timer on for bids. Keep it totally hidden fair and exactly what the purchaser is willing to pay for. No random close times and no silly bidding wars based on access. You will be able to track how high your bid is at the current time and that would be it.

Please don't over complicate things. Makes coding much easier too.

Edit. You would also get 1 bid. If you are topped out you can no longer bid and your funds are no longer locked in.

"Sellers to have the option of listing a player on all league markets, 50% of markets, or just the home market, The cost of the listing would be dependent both on the number of leagues listed in and on the player's selling price. In addition to that, if the player is sold then a sales tax would apply. A percentage of the final selling fee would be deducted. The exact percentage would again depend on the number of markets in which the player is listed."

Extra cost for multiple markets is ok. But paying more sales tax for listing in multiple markets is effectively paying double for the same thing. If you do introduce a sales tax, this should be a consistent % regardless of the number of markets you list in. The seller is already paying tax for listing in multiple markets.

However, I do believe that all a sales tax will result in is sellers upping their asking prices to compensate...so the buyers will lose out in the end.

"Bids to have a minimum increment of the higher of 10,000 units or 5% of the current highest bid. This would be capped at 250,000."

I don't understand this. I don't think that there's any need for a minimum increment. It achieves nothing.

"Bids to be throttled, that is to say a manager must wait a certain time period before bidding again (this includes maximum bid increases). This length of this period is yet to be determined. "

I'm not sure how this is going to work in conjunction with automatic bidding, it feels counter intuitive. I think this will only cause frustration and confusion.

"For players aged 31 and over. The board will allow a max of a 1 year deal, which will be renewable until the player announces his retirement. "

I think this will make old players less worthy / demanded with price inflation skewed towards the younger age by a lot.

Yeah, I'm not sure about forcing the term based on age either. Feels too rigid to me. Every player is different.

Dont agree with this at all so a rich manager comes on sets his minimum bid then sets his highest at a point way over the top and just sits back and waits no need to do anything more safe in the knowledge he has probably trumped everone and all going well scared others off and got a bargin. Not convinced with this silly access thing that gets brought up constantly in transfer discussions. That people are sitting waiting on line to put bids in or because of their location its better for them.I am all for truly random closing and have no issue with it so what if it closes earlier than some expected maybe they should have put their bid in instead of hanging back hoping they might pick up a bargin. Which would happen if people were aware of what closing times were.

Instead of having a sales tax, could we instead have a luxury tax. We need to get more fair / good players on the markets, I don't see how a taxation is going to encourage this, by all means tax any transaction say over 2 million, thats sounds fair to me.

Looks like a good plan to me. One question:

Will the renewal be on current terms or will the contract be renegotiated?

Thanks

You sure do make me laugh. If the case was that only one manager had all the money I would see your point. How can he sit back and be safe if there are other managers who also are in the same boat looking to out price each other? The manager blindly now has the risk of setting his max too low. How could he scare people off if it is blind?

Its funny how when referring to mine you make it seem like now the maximum bid is way out of sight. What would be the difference in the proposed system if right off the bat I just put in a bid way above everyone and scare them off?



So the system has minimum bid increments but not maximums as told to me above. There is also going to be a system in place where the manager sets their max bid. (wait, didn't I just say that and you struck it down?) So the system then would actually as you say price out people only allowing rich managers to get them (are you saying the player should go for less to allow poorer managers to get the player?). But wait it gets worse - now your bid cannot be withdrawn. Imagine having all the money locked in to a bid without you able to compete because you ran out of funds.

If a manager has large funds why would he wait around and have his bids go up by tiny increments? Seems like a lot of wasted time here which will look even more discouraging.

I expect the terms to be similar, the aging process puts the player in a weaker position each year, having said that though other factors would normally increase a players demands, but as I say the net effect bw roughly even. THe amount a player plays would effect his bargaining power, if he is a regular he will command more than a bit part player.

Ron

It prevents +1 bidding.

In the previous version of IAG there was a lot of frustration caused by the so-called +1 bidders, who were camped out all day at their screens, automatically outbidding anyone else by 1 unit. The imposition of minimum bid increments stops that happening - yes, they can still camp out and outbid, but a couple of bids like that could see the player's price go up by 1 million.