BuzzerBeater Forums

I find it laughable that people are responding with "relisting a player multiple times would not affect you, just scroll past". Speak for yourselves, just because it doesn't affect you doesn't mean it won't affect other people.

Recently I had a MVP potential draftee (not drafted by my club, but as a U21 manager, he's potentially one of my future players) be bought up by a day trader. It's all good, except that dude tried to flip the kid for a really huge amount. He practically got relisted for the whole season between 350k to 500k (imagine trying to sell for this price from mid to late season), and when he was finally listed for 100k, someone finally bid on him only for the owner to buy him back (no one else bid after that). It was essentially 1 season (and running) of training wasted. And from a micronation where a number of our MVP/HOF draftees fall into bots hands, it's really not helping. Don't come up with the counter argument that we should have our own local trainer pool snap them up - we do have a team of local trainers and its constantly at full capacity.

Another was a case which happened some time ago, one of the U21 players got relisted again and again, revealing his skills throughout the season.

I'm not really on board with merch hits or the GS hits. In the second scenario, GS hits will just drag down the NT, while it won't even affect the seller in the first scenario. Merch hits might sound cool but BB merch has always been proportional to salary - so it won't be logical for the team to have a greater hit in merch than what they're already earning from the player (especially when you can see the breakdown now), hence it won't really impact both (unless the NT player has a high salary)

The reduction in percentage earned isn't too bad an idea though, I guess it could be expanded on, or maybe have a maximum number of relists for a period (limiting to 3 every 30 days). Implementing one of these two should be able to reduce the impact of day trading.

As for the argument about multiple relisting to "find the right timing to get the highest price for the player", you don't need to repeatedly relist them. Keep track of the site user count, player sales trends, and list them so that their bidding time ends at the time which you feel will fetch the highest price. If you scout your opponents, it's not impossible to do such things as well. Of course, if you really still want to push your luck further by using the relist tactic, then my suggestion (maximum number of listings per 30 days) should have less impact on this as you will still get 97% of the sales amount, and you can still relist them without much worry (albeit less often).

Last edited by BuzzRBeater at 12/4/2022 7:49:38 PM

Imaginary scenario: I have a great 28yo player with ~200k salary and value more than 3M, that I want to sell. There are not a lot of teams that can afford his salary and are less that have that amount of money to buy him. That means that I have to be patient till he got sold, sometimes I have to list and relist him many times just to be sold at a fair price. Why should I punished for that with lower GS or financially or with a relisting limit? I am not doing anything wrong.

I am against of taking measures about transfer listing, but if BBs want to they can just put a low net cost 5.000 or 10.000$ every time a player is listed (lets say a payment for agents to look for a buyer). This is a very low cost for high value players that it is not easy to sell but it is a significant cost for day traders that trying to sell draftees

The most important part here is how did you come up with the value of more than 3M? From the latest market trends? Or was it from 1 player you saw being sold 2 seasons ago just before the playoff deadline? The former should give you a higher chance of him being sold, even as a 200k salary player, off while the latter could be an inaccurate measure. Plus, if you got the figure from recent market trends, even if you need to adjust the price, it won't take that many adjustments and relisting to get a market buyer. Tho if you just cooked up that 3M "because you feel he's worth 3M" then it's not a matter of trying to find a buyer - that's just pure delusion.

Eg: right now we're in a pretty quiet time of the season. Those who got extra cash from promotion has already spent it, those who are ready for an all season push has already done it too. Anyone who wants to make a late run for the title via the playoffs will not buy so early, and while it's pretty close to the cup finals, there aren't many people out there who will splash for an all out run for the cup.
We have 16 players earning above 190k salary, and only 4 players have bids - the first two are around 50k-60k, another at 500k, and one last one at 1.5m, who is a NT player.

So do you see a player similar to yours? Is his price higher or lower than your ideal price? Does he have a bid?

If there's a similar player to yours having a lower valuation than yours not having any bids, you should probably not list your player if you're not going to go below his price because chances are you'd be wasting your time anyway.

That said, your suggestion isn't too bad, but I would prefer it to only affect relisting (maybe within a certain period of time). Having a blanket fee would badly affect those teams releasing usable U21 trainees for micronations (yes, for micronations, even 6'10" 18 year olds with 2k+ salary and a decent starting skill distribution are potential U21 players, poor people just can't choose). Either that or only impose it on a fee above a certain amount (1% if the listed amount is above 100k, with a cap at 10k?). Might need to explore from more angles but I feel it has potential.

Sorry, I probably rekindled a somewhat dormant post by opening a difficult discussion.

The question that was asked some time ago in other threads was to help new managers not to fall into the traps of old users who list players at inflated prices hoping that sooner or later some manager with little experience will fall into the trap.
My intent in proposing a graph for the progress of the "put on transfer list" was precisely to help this type of situation.
And it also affected the number of "put on lists", without forbidding it, but showing the times the player had gone unsold at that price.

For the question of "how much is a player worth", I think no one has the truth.
A seller would always like his player to be sold for a higher price, and a buyer would always like the price to be lower.
What is the limit? The market.
If a player is put up for sale for three, four, five, ten times the same price and always ends up going unsold that price is probably higher than his market value.
We all know there are hottest moments in transitions (end of BBM/BBB brackets, playoffs, start of season)… where prices for some reason inflate for certain types of players, but in the rest of the season prices usually have a more constant trend.

Unfortunately there are few successful transfers on BuzzeBeater with so many characteristics to look at (each player has 12 playing characteristics, potential, age and height; not counting salary and DMI) that need to match to be trusted to create an accurate value estimate.. and too few really similar players are sold in the last few weeks..

I reiterate that my proposal was to help better evaluate the purchase of a player, without forbidding managers to re-propose a player for the same amount indefinitely..

But the game is rightly focused on managers' personal teams.

Oh boy did I fall into a bait or something xD I hope you're not really serious about this. I wonder what will happen if you find out that there are updates and changes involving NTs as well. That said, if you are serious about it, then sorry to burst your bubble but this game doesn't only revolve around personal teams (I still have a hard time believing that it's serious, but I'll still address your concerns in case you're just playing devil's advocate or something).

That said,

If you were so concerned about this player, then you should have bought them and trained them.

I've already pointed out the flaw in this argument in my last post.

Regardless, whatever team did this probably ended up losing money compared to what they would have if they'd trained them. Furthermore, there are rules for buying and selling untrained players like this for too much profit.

I mean, you're not wrong about losing money, but then if that was the only effect, it wouldn't warrant a change. But it goes beyond just "the team doing that losing money". Tho may I know what rules prevent untrained players from being listed for too much profit? I know there is a report cheater tool to report players sold at absurd amounts, but in this case the players aren't sold yet.

And keep scrolling down when you search the transfer list.

Again I apologize if you were just playing around, but I just can't not bite onto this bait xD

"You yourself can't even scroll down when you have nothing to contribute to discussions in the forum, how do you expect other people to scroll down when they browse the transfer list?"

For the question of "how much is a player worth", I think no one has the truth.
A seller would always like his player to be sold for a higher price, and a buyer would always like the price to be lower.
What is the limit? The market.

I think you hit the nail on the head with this one. Somehow quite a number of people don't understand "market value" and think that the real value of their players are the inflated prices from the hottest moments of the transfer list.

That said, I agree that its totally impossible to cook up a chart for identical players as there are too many parameters and even with the amount of players, the number of recent transfers can be little. But adding "put on transfer list" to the current Transfer Price Estimate might be able to give people a better gauge of a player's value. Again, it would not be exactly accurate, but with the price of "what they did not go for recently" listed out, it should give people a better idea instead of being hung on inflated values.

Last edited by BuzzRBeater at 12/5/2022 8:30:26 AM

Oh I actually meant the value. Say...

Transfer Price Estimate:
There have been 30 recent transfers of 30-32 year old players of any potential with 20000-35000 salary and 75-84 guard and 25-29 forward skill points. Buzz R Beater is probably better than all 30 of these players, but the few that are most similar have been selling for around $ 30 000 to $ 200 000. There has also been 50 similar players who were listed between $ 300 000 to $ 1 500 000 who failed to get sold.

The final sentence tells you what price you shouldn't be selling at.

I think it's pointless to tell people "this player has been listed X number of times", because you're not going to go "oh this player has never been listed before, I'm willing to pay more for him" or "ew this player has been listed 10 times this season, I don't want to buy him anymore. That piece of info isn't going to help anyone or make or break any sale. But actually telling people how much their players won't go for would give them an idea of the recent market.

Also, if you look at the example I give above... Would you sell him at 200k or less? Would you risk it by going just under 300k and see if he sells?

It would at least give you a more informed decision on selling players. Plus we should have less "Very few players like Buzz R Beater have been transferred/transfer listed recently" notifications, since unsold players would also makes up the statistics. So you'd at least know what to avoid.

But then again, it will not solve the two situations I brought up as Transfer Estimates do currently exist and yet people still believe that their players are worth and inflated amount despite the transfer estimates telling them otherwise (a quick search on the TL would bring you to quite a number of players who are listed way above the transfer estimate).