Game economy

I've been reading on the curated blog posts from Sudoku FC and stumbled on this article https://www.virtualmanager.com/blog/455-capacity-and-economy-before-and-after-the-new-stadium-system
--quote--
Effect on the individual club
There is no denying that this change will affect most clubs' finances. If we look only at the profits generated from ticket sales, small clubs will likely see a little increase while larger ones will see a minor decrease.

The small clubs should not celebrate too soon however, because the prices for upgrading your stadium has generally become more expensive. More money will be required to get a large stadium.

Some larger clubs will observe that they cannot meet the ticket demand because their stadiums are smaller. This will reduce their profit. However, this drop can be somehow minimized by just increasing ticket prices.

Aggregately, the clubs that are hit the most will of course still be able to earn more than their fixed expenses.

Effect on the game's economy in general
There will be generated less Credits. And while that might sound a bit depressing, we believe it is a nice side benefit of the new stadium system. It helps fight the inflation we have in the game (decreasing value of Credits, increasing player prices).

Some managers are nervous that this might give the clubs who trade a lot an advantage since their income is not directly hit be this change. We're sure they won't. The money that these so-called "trade clubs" earn come, when all comes to all, from the same source all other Credits come from: ticket sales. A certain reduction of the general production of Credits will thus hit the trade clubs just as hard as clubs that do not trade so much.
--quote--

It us undeniable that the last part was proven completely untrue, the Trading clubs are hoarding billions of credits that don't go back into the game's economy thus reducing prices overall.
I don't see why if the VIFA ranks are halved every week to not allow older clubs to get out of the reach of newer clubs, why the same doesn't happen to the accumulated credits?

I don't mean halving them, but having some sort of 'tax' over a certain amount. this will force player to either inject money into the economy or risk losing them.
What's the point of 10 clubs hoarding 15 billion credits?
How many lifetimes of 1st division players does that buy? I'm expecting at least 10 years IRL...
Meantime a club that doesn't trade but trains players will be disadvantaged by the lower prices and higher salary.

And as a side effect, those taxed credits should be redistributed in a way to all users based on some achievements criteria.
And to promote training of players, 10% of player's trading price should go to previous clubs that trained the player based on training increase. It will be using the existing data like player history.

Viva la revolucion

FC Viitorul Constanta wrote:

What's the point of 10 clubs hoarding 15 billion credits?

It's more than 15 billion.

FC Viitorul Constanta wrote:

Trading clubs are hoarding billions of credits that don't go back into the game's economy thus reducing prices overall

You... want higher player prices? Staying in the top leagues isn't hard enough for you already? 'Cause I'm pretty sure you said it was too hard?

Bayern Munich wrote:

FC Viitorul Constanta wrote:

What's the point of 10 clubs hoarding 15 billion credits?

It's more than 15 billion.

FC Viitorul Constanta wrote:

Trading clubs are hoarding billions of credits that don't go back into the game's economy thus reducing prices overall

You... want higher player prices? Staying in the top leagues isn't hard enough for you already? 'Cause I'm pretty sure you said it was too hard?

I also have a squad full of players that I'm selling for basically nothing. Indeed increasing player's prices would allow me to train and sell 3 players in exchange for buying one first team player. Otherwise all the top players will get max prices that are basically untouchables unless the prices for other players also increases when new money comes and stays into the game. There is only a limited infrastructure upgrades that clubs can make...

L.E. What I want is more balance in the game and improve the side of the balance favoring training players instead of trading them. Or if you want, a game that is more closely related to a football manager and less closely related to a stockexchange :p

If your currently worthless players become worth more due to more money in the economy then the players you want to buy will also be worth proportionately more.

The only thing that'll make the game favor training over trading is decreasing the number of non-talents created and decreasing the gap between an average talent and top talent.

Bayern Munich wrote:

If your currently worthless players become worth more due to more money in the economy then the players you want to buy will also be worth proportionately more.

The only thing that'll make the game favor training over trading is decreasing the number of non-talents created and decreasing the gap between an average talent and top talent.

Also a 10% of each resale going to previous clubs that trained the club will achieve similar results. It's already implemented in other online managers, where 2% go to promoting club each sale, and 8% to the previous club.

FC Viitorul Constanta wrote:

Also a 10% of each resale going to previous clubs that trained the club will achieve similar results.

Show your math.

Bayern Munich wrote:

FC Viitorul Constanta wrote:

Also a 10% of each resale going to previous clubs that trained the club will achieve similar results.

Show your math.

Club promotes a player. Trains for 5 days and sells. He goes for 10m
Next club sells for 20m. 2m go to previous club 8m profit.
Next club trains up to 23yo sells for 25m. First club gets 1M, second one nothing cause he didn't trained just resold. Club that traîned most gets 4M profit. Next club sels at 27 for 35M. Previous club gets another 3,5M, club selling only gets 6,5M profit.
It's a simple examples with values taken out of my head. But the purpose is that not training and only trading will diminish the percentage of profits. On other managers the penalty is a lot higher maybe even 40%, only selling after a week or a month will yield 87%. This will completely kill trading but it's not necessarily what I'm asking for. But a more fair balance so that clubs spending time just trading to not have the upper hand just by having the best players in game. Cause then it is a trading game and not a manager game. Irl there are limits of how often you can transfer and how many teams a player can register for. That would be another way to curb the advantage of trading clubs. Limiting to 20-22 trades per week would be another way.

IMO, trading is the only real way to "get ahead" for new managers joining this game (apart from getting
Very lucky - several times over! - with creating your own Wonderkids and selling them for millions of Credits early in your career).
So, if you cut that out - or limit it - with the intention of making long term training up of your players a more important aspect of the game, > I think that what you will achieve is further advancement for the already established clubs - they being the ones with top training facilities already.
There is no point new managers thinking they can sign youngsters and train them up for several months to increase their values, without having good training facilities, and without being able to trade to gain credits, they'll never manage to get the cash for the required facilities.
This is the only real time FM game I've found that actually has a real incentive for managers to spend more time playing than their peers - with actual proper rewards for doing so
Cut the player trading and that disappears leaving no real possibility of new managers ever catching up with the older clubs.

Whilst I understand your thoughts on how the game should be changed, I would advise you to be careful what you wish for.