BuzzerBeater Forums

I agree, turn it read and point an arrow with text "bidder is the selling team" etc.

Mods:

Please change the name of this thread to 'Tempest in a Teapot.'

Some of you guys obviously dont know much about economics. In a frst price auction like this the market price is not what the highest bidder is willing to pay but rather whatever the second highest bidder is willing to pay + 1.

And this option to bid on your own player totally disrupts that.

Isn't what you just said the same as BB vs real basketball discussion ??

In any case, the debate is pointless. The transfer market holds risks for both the buyer and the seller, the main thing to consider is thinking for 2 seconds before clicking on sell or buy.


GL!

I think one of the most telling points of this debate is that nobody has anything good to say about being able to bid on your own player, some managers defend it, but not actually state a positive for its presence!!

For me, when the best that can be done is to defend something, but not claim a positive position for it being part of the game then this is something that should be looked at.

I think many managers would be happier if it was not possible to bid on your own players, but from this debate, I am not sure anyone would be unhappy should it be stopped?

that doesn't count, this was said before^^

Nice reply, you really touched all the important issues, and like I said before in my replies, I essentially agree with your views.

The one thing I don't fully agree with is the price to set when transfer listing players (and this isn't even related to the main topic itself). I don't know how this goes in the top divisions, but for the kind of players I buy or sell, listing them at a low price has the risk of ending up with an "unfair" bid, but it also helps gather more bidders. You may notice that when players come on the TL as FA, some players place lots of 1k bids to keep tabs on the players, I have done it myself. If one starts with a higher asking price, fewer people may notice it, and there's a bigger chance the player will go unnoticed if people set a low limit because of the newly arrived free agents.

Other than that, the idea of having a warning sign saying "Warning: the player owner is bidding on the player!" could be introduced, but I don't see much need for it, to be honest. If the bidders notice, they should stop bidding. If they don't and the price is not overblown, they're free to keep bidding. If the price goes over any reasonable valuation and someone still bids, then that's just throwing money away.

Other than that, the idea of having a warning sign saying "Warning: the player owner is bidding on the player!" could be introduced, but I don't see much need for it, to be honest.

you could see clearly the teamname, where he is and who is bidding.

And as it stated in the thread, there are other ways of achieving this without allowing the " sleazy" behaviour that we all agree upon.

I stated earlier , I have no issue with being able to buy the player back.

Saying the argument has no credence is a ridiculous comment, also, you state that the only reason someone would keep bidding is if they feel the player hadnt met the market value, but that is not the point of this. The true value of a player is what you fairly get him for, I do not class fairly as interference from the owner of that player for the sheer intention of completing more money. If you was going to get X player for say 400k but ended up paying 500k because of the owner hicking the bids, then you have spent 100K MORE than a fair market place was asking for at that given time. He may well have been worth 500k, but thats not the point, it is outside interference in the variable that is the tranfer market.

It is clear that the system isnt the best way to offer a buy back option to teams, and that a buy back option could be facilitated without involving the ability for a manager to encourage a price hick on his player, an action which nobody thinks is positive.

With that being the case, why the reluctance to address the system to offer a buy back system and stop this " sleazy 2 behaviour" from the game???