Well that would just extend the time it takes for me to be competitive. I am not hoarding money. I currently have less than 200k, so the only way for me to become immediately competitive would be to sell off my trainees which seems like kind of a waste. Again, I think raising the salary floor is good for higher divisions, but I think it is already high enough for lower divisions.
Salary floor augmentation is not only to stop tanking, but to rise competition. As you say, if you are able to be highly ranked in your league is not because of the quality of your team, but lack of quality in your opponents.
You might not be tanking, but you are not being competitive either. You lost by 60 points your game against the team ranked #1 (you are #2) while putting more effort.
You would constantly get leapfrogged by managers who have extra funds to burn on the transfer market.
My profits would go down by 50% and his would only go down by 15%.
The salary floor is good, but raising it too much rewards the top teams by forcing the lower teams to play at a level they can't yet afford.
No. It takes money from everyone at that level equally.
As I said earlier taking money from everyone equally does not mean each team is equally effected. Taking money from each team equally (through the salary floor) will have the greatest impact on those making the least money.
You have the same earning potential as your competition.
An established player in your league can potentially make around $200k every week
I do think that if they raise the salary floor , they should count trainers salary towards the salary floor since it encourages training and I think it will help keep users involved in the game.
If these teams are tanking, very little manger engagement is needed. They just need to log on every few weeks. This is a very boring strategy and many of these managers, whose interest in the game has likely waned, just end up quitting.
If we count trainer salary towards the floor, it now makes good financial sense to train.