BuzzerBeater Forums

Player Salaries: $ 283 878 Attendance: $ 533 350
Staff Salaries: $ 42 974 Merchandise: $ 113 199
Scouting: $ 10 000 TV Contract: $ 108 086
Total: $ 336 852 Total: $ 754 635
Typical Weekly Net Income: $ 417 783

The best team in CBBA has around 100k salaries more than me.(i am 3rd, but 4-5 teams are like 10k max away) To be able to catch that team i need to spend money on the market. My net income is 151k more than you, but you have 279k more salaries than me. As you can see you have more income than me 45k per week. To be able to have a team close to yours i will need an other 3-4 seasons, but i will never be on a position to spend as much as you because in 3-4 seasons you will have 1.5-2M more than me. By the time that i will buying better players my profit will be even lower.

I think that you have 1 less team to worry about...

At this point, is it possible that a BB sums the different appreciations they have of the issues we've been talking about?

-Economic

-Competitions and incentives for big community/smaller community teams

-Are we really playing a different game because of the structure of BB+external factors (where your team is from)?

-How different and mainly, how does it (negatively) affect both approximations to Buzzerbeater when they face each other? e.g. effort/success, both in the court or also market stuff.

We are talking about it since season 3 or 4 and finally it seems to me that BBs realised that there was something wrong so they decided to introduced different TV revenue and different merchandising but once again it seems to me that the situation didn't change a lot. I don't care about BBB you can see the economic power when you want to buy a great player on the market, that's the point.

You make more than 400k of active per week, while a Div. I of Italy or USA or Spain make something like 200k less than you.

The point is that for having that rosters in the major division most of players have had to play for seasons, while you'll receive something like 5M of revenue in a single season and you (a general you, I'm talking bout your case but I could talk of several others) with that type of income, won't take so long, if you have a good knowledge of the game and of the GE, to reach first the top of your I division and than to partecipate to B3. For a spanish, italian, ... user that is unthinkable and it's kinda dream.

Me and thousands of other users of the most "BBpopulated countries" started from IV or V div. and we have been playing for seasons, maybe (or surely) more than you, but "unfortunately" we borned in a big country and for us it is harder than it is for you to reach the top, that's because you make +420k/week while for example in my II division the league average income is of +40k/week.
How could I only have the illusion to think I'll win the Championship or partecipate to the B3 in only few seasons? As I've already said it would be only an illusion, but for you it is something so close to the reality, cause you play in a small country.

I surely think that is much more exciting to play to play in a big country rather than a small one, but I think that is wrong that there's such a wide "disparity in treatment".

I stated that i consider that as a bigger problem than our income. Its not my fault that i am coming from a small country, as its not your fault that your coming from the big one. That doesnt mean that they have to punish the small countries on your favor.

Maybe they should change something, that will force the elite teams to regress by the time, and give more chances to the lower divisions for success. But again thats not related to the small countries. We are the least of the games problems.

Last edited by JohnnyB at 1/28/2010 8:02:10 AM

I stated that i consider that as a bigger problem than our income. Its not my fault that i am coming from a small country, as its not your fault that your coming from the big one. That doesnt mean that they have to punish the small countries on your favor.

Maybe they should change something, that will force the elite teams to regress by the time, and give more chances to the lower divisions for success. But again thats not related to the small countries. We are the least of the games problems.

You see, Johnny, you haven't read a thing about what we are saying here. You just keep repeating again and again the same. Don't punish small countries.
As said before, it's no one's fault to have a team in whatever country.
As said before, it's not a matter of punish¡ng.

If you think small countries is not a problem, this morning I was going for this player.
Tiro: 11 Alcance de tiro: 3
Def. exterior: 7 Manejo: 4
Penetración: 6 Pases: 7
Tiro interior: 18 Def. interior: 8
Rebotes: 5 Tapones: 7
Resistencia: 4 Tiros libres: 3

bet 2,6, all I have, and a Asian team got him for 2,7, and would surely have gone to 3,5 or even more. It's a matter about effort time dedicated to the game with different/unfair success in a same market/court.
Before writing, understand what is said here in reply to you.


Last edited by Pappa Flaah at 1/28/2010 8:10:36 AM

What you have to understand its that the game is global. I want to have success as much as you do. You are not playing alone, and thats why i am expecting some kind of respect. Small doesnt mean poor.

Edit: I dont have anything more to say about the subject. I had made clear my argumentation so if the game masters they want to change something lets be it, if not even better.

Last edited by JohnnyB at 1/28/2010 8:15:36 AM

No, it does not. That's not the debate.

The debate is, show me your time is worthier than mine, and then small countries could fairly be in the nowadays situation.

Since very few liked my idea of cancelling the B3 and melding all the countries into one (big surprise), here is another possibility:

-instead of the B3, have many parallel international tournaments running at the same time
-seed teams based not if they won their league/cup, but their world record and how they did in the international tournament last season
-home court is based on the seed, or have the matches played at a neutral site
-the higher your seed, the higher level tournament you participate in (ie: highest seeds play in B3, next highest play in 2nd tournament, etc. A few teams do not qualify for a tournament)
-make them all attendance based (split the money 50-50)
-higher attendance for the higher level tournaments (for example, B3 gets x2 the revenue of the next tournament, etc)
-this model would make it so a team that goes out in the 1st round of the B3 would not get the same revenue as a team that goes a few rounds in the 2nd tournament. However, that team would (most likely) play in the 2nd tournament the next season. But, if you went really far in the B3, you would really cash in.

Since this would inject more revenue into BB, reduce the amount of revenue in league games and/or increase salaries to compensate.

So what? I have lost bids to teams from Italy and Spain and the USA. Give me a break. I hate the fact that 90% of the players I would like to buy have auctions that end at 3am my time, but I am not going to blame geography. Maybe you ought to go for a player who costs 1.5 million so that you can engage in a bidding war if need be. Or at least know that if you are bidding your whole wad there is a good chance you will be outbid.

And, Jonidas, maybe you ought to build a few more courtside and box seats. You have sold them out for about 10 games in a row. One of the first things I read in the rules back in season three was that when you start selling out your seats, it's time to add more. And, while putting players on the TL might lower one part of your fan survey it raises another ( " doing everything he can..." ) so that argument is not only ridiculous, it is wrong.

And if the Spanish and Italian cups are more prestigious than B3 (which I completely agree they are) why even begin to bring "making the B3" into the discussion at all?

Certainly one of the best parts of this game is the community aspect. My community has NO activity at all. None. No trash talk, no tactical or management discussion, no NT concern, nothing. No matter what your team can accomplish (which, if you are competing against similar quality teams should be statisfying enough ), managers in large countries have active and entertaining and helpful communities, which I imagine (really have no idea since I don't have that experience) is arewarding part of your online management simulation experience.

Last edited by somdetsfinest at 1/28/2010 8:31:20 AM

So what? I have lost bids to teams from Italy and Spain and the USA. Give me a break. I hate the fact that 90% of the players I would like to buy have auctions that end at 3am my time, but I am not going to blame geography. Maybe you ought to go for a player who costs 1.5 million so that you can engage in a bidding war if need be. Or at least know that if you are bidding your whole wad there is a good chance you will be outbid.

So what??
Aye, I'll repeat it again.
You do know those bids you lose with teams from a major community is because the money they would have come as a result of macro-competition, right?

And again. Now, the "so-what-case" I have. The money I have comes also from the major competition against my major community. And I tried to give an example of what always happen. I decide to make a market movement (selecting objetives). If I'm lucky, I would have signed this (overpaid) player for 2,6. If your "market movement" goes wrong (now, I would have to select other player, not the ideal one) I may have to say goodbye to my aspirations.
What I try to let you know is how different one team gets the money through time or by geography.