Subpage under development, new version coming soon!
Subject: [DEV] International Cup
We are using current Home Matches as reference to compare revenues from League + International Cup. Current number is 11 (League Matches only, because we are still not getting money from IC).
If revenues stay the same (third column in the first table), then:
> Teams that only play in Group Stage get 11+3=14 Home Matches
> Teams that play until Knockout of 64 get 11+3+0.5=14.5 Home Matches
> etc.
If revenues go down to 80% (fourth column in the first table), then:
> Teams that only play in Group Stage get 80%*14=11.2 Home Matches
> Teams that play until Knockout of 64 get 80%*14.5=11.6 Home Matches
> etc.
The weighted average of 11.6 (second table) means that overall revenues would slightly increase next season, but not much.
If revenues stay the same (third column in the first table), then:
> Teams that only play in Group Stage get 11+3=14 Home Matches
> Teams that play until Knockout of 64 get 11+3+0.5=14.5 Home Matches
> etc.
If revenues go down to 80% (fourth column in the first table), then:
> Teams that only play in Group Stage get 80%*14=11.2 Home Matches
> Teams that play until Knockout of 64 get 80%*14.5=11.6 Home Matches
> etc.
The weighted average of 11.6 (second table) means that overall revenues would slightly increase next season, but not much.
and the injuries also will increase. i will get 11 sh.t players for domestic cup and IC
@robacho
There is no need to make three different consecutive posts, you could write in only one.
@Godscar
I understand the number now, thanks.
But I don't get why we should decrease the revenues for all the games? If I have a higher risk of injury (because there is) and I invest more time in preparing of extra games, at least I could remain with some extra money to justify the extra players I should have for staying competitive in three competitions. Otherwise we would be forced to choose one competition to sacrifice or even two, and Sokker is not gaining anything out of it.
Don't get me wrong, I am not complaining, I am one of the users happy with this new International competition. But any effort has to have a rewards that pays it.
But I am just saying how it would have been logical for me.
There is no need to make three different consecutive posts, you could write in only one.
@Godscar
I understand the number now, thanks.
But I don't get why we should decrease the revenues for all the games? If I have a higher risk of injury (because there is) and I invest more time in preparing of extra games, at least I could remain with some extra money to justify the extra players I should have for staying competitive in three competitions. Otherwise we would be forced to choose one competition to sacrifice or even two, and Sokker is not gaining anything out of it.
Don't get me wrong, I am not complaining, I am one of the users happy with this new International competition. But any effort has to have a rewards that pays it.
But I am just saying how it would have been logical for me.
I think that a different way of "compensation" for extra competition would be more valuable. Maybe -20% is harsh and -15% would be enough.
Financially my issue is that if you add another extra game / ticket income, we will end up with another huge inflation, just like it happened after adding 2nd weekly league game. With time prices went up to 25m+ euro and they had to lower the income (by changing fanmood to lower on average). In other words this is "empty money". You get more on paper, but it is worth less.
What would be more interesting IMO is another training slot available, maybe even 2 more slots. Since we need more players / benches, then more players must be trained so there is enough supply of players for the demands of teams.
Otherwise - if the income rises and the demand rises, but the player supply stays the same, it must lead to an inflation.
(edited)
Financially my issue is that if you add another extra game / ticket income, we will end up with another huge inflation, just like it happened after adding 2nd weekly league game. With time prices went up to 25m+ euro and they had to lower the income (by changing fanmood to lower on average). In other words this is "empty money". You get more on paper, but it is worth less.
What would be more interesting IMO is another training slot available, maybe even 2 more slots. Since we need more players / benches, then more players must be trained so there is enough supply of players for the demands of teams.
Otherwise - if the income rises and the demand rises, but the player supply stays the same, it must lead to an inflation.
(edited)
don't forget that many of us have big stadiums and it would be frustrating if we see that we have to tear them off partially with new spectators formula. It will be ok to get more money while we all need larger squads if we want to compete in all leagues and cups (and devs want us to compete as far as I remember...)
What would be more interesting IMO is another training slot available, maybe even 2 more slots. Since we need more players / benches, then more players must be trained so there is enough supply of players for the demands of teams.
+1
You can say that again ;)
+1
You can say that again ;)
another training slot would balance it if we don't get more money to spend, ok for me too
Yes, practically this could be some indirect money, for you to invest in training players to sell or to use in all these three competitions.
If everyone gets more money, no one will be able to build larger squad with that money because good players are scarce and their prices will rise significantly - just as happened last time they gave free money to everyone.
If the players pool is the same, the average quality of teams cannot be improved.
If the players pool is the same, the average quality of teams cannot be improved.
this will be an effect, but I don't think that all of the extra money only will make prices rise. And there are also teams from low leagues that don't need to spend much money to buy adequate players, but to pay the wages.
Its not about money, its about the scarcity of players. If you want one more good ATT in your team, someone else has to lose one. Because there are only a fixed number of them.
In the same way if many teams want a stronger/larger squad, many others have to be weakened because players won’t come out of nowhere. Thats a fact no matter how much money you throw at the teams.
In the same way if many teams want a stronger/larger squad, many others have to be weakened because players won’t come out of nowhere. Thats a fact no matter how much money you throw at the teams.
1 or 2 more slots is a must i think...
No one can be against that, if u make a votation it will be 100% votes to add 1 or 2 slots, but idk if that can/will happen
(edited)
No one can be against that, if u make a votation it will be 100% votes to add 1 or 2 slots, but idk if that can/will happen
(edited)