BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Economy - Next steps

Economy - Next steps

Set priority
Show messages by
From: ned

This Post:
00
102952.7 in reply to 102952.6
Date: 7/27/2009 10:04:15 AM
Freccia Azzurra
IV.18
Overall Posts Rated:
823823
Second Team:
Slaytanic
Not now... He should pay about 640k/week, before to buy Romagnoli he has a roster similar to ours speaking about salary.

Anyway I don't want to focus my attention to the arena, now I should earn about 30k/week, with these money I will update mine and in the year 2020, I'll be the same arena that you
What do you think about marchanding related to the power to the player you've in roster? How do you think he will be implemented?

1990-2022 Stalinorgel - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pV-Xppl6h8Et
From: CrazyEye

To: ned
This Post:
00
102952.8 in reply to 102952.7
Date: 7/27/2009 10:05:45 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
I think it will basing on salary with an Bonus for NT players, but to be honest i have no idea how they do it really^^

From: Pallu

To: ned
This Post:
00
102952.9 in reply to 102952.5
Date: 7/27/2009 10:06:15 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
2525
(...) invest on the arena or on the roster. Only now is completely clear that the first choice was much better, (...)


I disagree. All those that invested in roster without thinking about financial consequences (wages) are now happy. TV-Revenues are an immediate payback based on wages - and Arena revenues will be cut soon.

A very populist measure to keep everybody (who overspent) happy.

From: ned

This Post:
00
102952.10 in reply to 102952.9
Date: 7/27/2009 10:09:42 AM
Freccia Azzurra
IV.18
Overall Posts Rated:
823823
Second Team:
Slaytanic
Once again, for me it's ok also to give a premium to everyone that invested in the arena but we should have a stop in the buildings, 60k, 100k but at the end we can't continue to raise the gap increasing the arena. As far as I know who has the big arena can now sell the seats and having back the money.

1990-2022 Stalinorgel - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pV-Xppl6h8Et
From: CrazyEye

To: ned
This Post:
00
102952.11 in reply to 102952.10
Date: 7/27/2009 10:14:31 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
959959
Once again, for me it's ok also to give a premium to everyone that invested in the arena but we should have a stop in the buildings


we had one, the tall blacks reached it for example in the VIP section(or nearly) with hundreds seats. And the investment was huge, for a small advantage against my 50 seats so i also don't expect much teams to build their arena to the end.

Last edited by CrazyEye at 7/27/2009 10:14:58 AM

From: Pallu

To: ned
This Post:
00
102952.12 in reply to 102952.10
Date: 7/27/2009 10:17:10 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
2525

Taking some action against huge Arenas was reasonable.

I just don't like the idea that two ways of extreme management (huge arenas or overspending on wages) are treated differently. Arena style is cut, wage style is subsidied.


From: rwystyrk

This Post:
00
102952.13 in reply to 102952.12
Date: 7/27/2009 10:53:37 AM
BC Hostivař
II.2
Overall Posts Rated:
12031203
Second Team:
Jirkov
I don't agree that taking action against huge Arenas was reasonable. Because building too large arenas wasn't reasonable, bacause of lower ticket prices.

For example comparing my team and Tall Blacks. He invest to the arena about 9M $ dollars more than me. This month he gains 673k for match with good Fan Survey, 543k for match with worse Fan Survey. I earned 555k for match with good Fan Survey.
This season I have had all the matches fans in good mood (except of round 1 after Fan Survey reset). He plays 3 times (tomorrow next one) with bad mood and 4 times with good mood. Last season he plays 6 times in good fans mood and 5 times in bad mood. And in playoff he plays only 1 away match.
My team played only 1 match in bad mood (and again 1 match in reseted mood) and 9 times in good mood. And I played 4 home and 1 away match in playoff.
So it takes him very long time to give his 9M $ back. Maybe he would not gain him at all.

In my eyes even without planned changes it wasn't reasonable to build arena larger than something around 30k.

From: Pallu

This Post:
00
102952.15 in reply to 102952.13
Date: 7/27/2009 12:23:53 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
2525

I would have preferred a more subtle handling of the issue as well. What you describe shows that the former economy was able to deal with different Arena sizes.

I see the entire changes as a tribute to teams ignoring wages and then complain about the economy. We had a wage issue, not an Arena issue. Exceptions to the rule can be found of course.

This Post:
00
102952.16 in reply to 102952.15
Date: 7/27/2009 12:31:24 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
404404
Few users have big wage(fanesi,cardenas,ecc...) issues,who have a huge arenas
Many users,also with a good gestion of economy have incomes issues because only to stay in a certain division they can not invest a great amount of money for palace


This Post:
00
102952.17 in reply to 102952.16
Date: 7/27/2009 3:33:24 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
154154
I didn't know such a manager. I guess bad management in matches caused their problems to stay. And if they were top level (I.1) teams I don't think these changes will change that.

Advertisement