MSWL UNITEDMSWL U2 TMBL MSWL The Manager
Wednesday, October 17th, 2018 - 01:46:47 AM (gmt)
 
ball MSWL UNITED ① - Landing
 
Home Auctions Blog Forum History Login Rules Scores Stats Tables Teams
 
Coaches Directory Donate Guest Rankings Schedule Updates Waitlist Wall
 

Join
MSWL
UNITED!

Recent Entries

Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Mike Parnaby
3 Comments
Brian Beerman
6 Comments
Tim Batth
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
1 Comment
Rob Baptiste
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
8 Comments
Brian Beerman
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
3 Comments
Paul Cockayne
3 Comments
Paul Cockayne
3 Comments
Dave Dowson
4 Comments
Roy Rolsten
2 Comments
Dave Dowson
4 Comments
Brian Beerman
1 Comment
Brian Beerman
1 Comment
Dave Dohm
2 Comments
Brian Beerman
3 Comments
Brian Beerman
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Brian Hayes
1 Comment
Brian Beerman
2 Comments
Brian Beerman
1 Comment
Brian Beerman
3 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Rob Baptiste
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
12 Comments
Allan Sellers
8 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Andy Bate
3 Comments
Rob Peterson
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
8 Comments
Allan Sellers
1 Comment
Graham Wilkes
4 Comments
Brian Beerman
19 Comments
Brian Beerman
20 Comments
Allan Sellers
7 Comments
Andy Bate
1 Comment
Kevin Martin
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
21 Comments
Allan Sellers
14 Comments
Allan Sellers
12 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
11 Comments
Brian Beerman
9 Comments
Brian Beerman
3 Comments
Graham Wilkes
1 Comment
Jose Freitas
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Dave Dohm
10 Comments
Brian Beerman
2 Comments
Rob Baptiste
8 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Graham Wilkes
6 Comments
Graham Wilkes
5 Comments
Dave Dohm
11 Comments
Allan Sellers
11 Comments
Rob Peterson
5 Comments
Brian Beerman
11 Comments
John Holden
3 Comments
Brian Beerman
13 Comments
Allan Sellers
13 Comments
Kevin Martin
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Kevin Martin
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
19 Comments
Allan Sellers
13 Comments
Allan Sellers
12 Comments
Allan Sellers
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
8 Comments
Rob Baptiste
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
16 Comments
Allan Sellers
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
11 Comments
Allan Sellers
14 Comments
Rob Baptiste
5 Comments
Mark Stretch
5 Comments
Jake Hanny
1 Comment
Andy Bate
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
25 Comments
Graham Wilkes
2 Comments
Brian Beerman
6 Comments
Brian Beerman
9 Comments
Allan Sellers
12 Comments
Allan Sellers
10 Comments
Allan Sellers
13 Comments
Allan Sellers
16 Comments
Brian Beerman
7 Comments
David Blair
2 Comments
Brian Beerman
12 Comments
Brian Beerman
5 Comments
David Blair
8 Comments
Allan Sellers
18 Comments
Graham Wilkes
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
3 Comments
Mark Stretch
17 Comments
John Holden
16 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Rob Peterson
1 Comment
Brian Beerman
11 Comments
Allan Sellers
11 Comments
Allan Sellers
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
25 Comments
Allan Sellers
30 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
7 Comments
Brian Beerman
9 Comments
Allan Sellers
8 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
10 Comments
Allan Sellers
9 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
9 Comments
Allan Sellers
12 Comments
Allan Sellers
15 Comments
Andy Bate
12 Comments
Allan Sellers
10 Comments
Mike Cabral
4 Comments
Andy Bate
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
14 Comments
Kevin Martin
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
26 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Brian Beerman
3 Comments
Allan Sellers
11 Comments
Allan Sellers
10 Comments
Allan Sellers
23 Comments
Kevin Martin
6 Comments
Dave Dohm
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
7 Comments
Brian Beerman
4 Comments
Brian Beerman
14 Comments
Brian Beerman
2 Comments
Andy Bate
2 Comments
Andy Bate
2 Comments
Kevin Martin
3 Comments
Dave Dowson
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
14 Comments
Allan Sellers
12 Comments
John Holden
4 Comments
Mike Cabral
9 Comments
Andy Bate
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
23 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Simon Compton
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
2 Comments
Abe Hamdali
1 Comment
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Roy Rolsten
6 Comments
Andy Bate
5 Comments
Roy Rolsten
2 Comments
Andy Bate
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
20 Comments
Andy Bate
3 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Allan Sellers
3 Comments
Andy Bate
7 Comments
Andy Bate
3 Comments
Andy Bate
2 Comments
Andy Lewis
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
4 Comments
Simon Compton
4 Comments
Kevin Martin
12 Comments
Simon Compton
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Simon Compton
1 Comment
Simon Compton
1 Comment
Dave Dowson
2 Comments
Kevin Martin
7 Comments
Allan Sellers
11 Comments
Rene Wilkens
5 Comments
Trevor Taylor
3 Comments
Rob Peterson
17 Comments
Allan Sellers
16 Comments
Allan Sellers
9 Comments
Trevor Taylor
7 Comments
Trevor Taylor
2 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
3 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Allan Sellers
27 Comments
Allan Sellers
6 Comments
Dan Fitzgerald
9 Comments
Allan Sellers
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
13 Comments
Alon Atie
5 Comments
Allan Sellers
9 Comments
Rob Peterson
10 Comments
Allan Sellers
8 Comments
 
Marketing Manager
Posted by Kevin Martin on Friday, Jul. 3rd, 2009 at 8:40 AM

In the Backroom Boy discussion, Andy threw out an idea for a new BRB:

Andy: "Marketing Manager: Increase a team's income each session by £x."

Al likes the idea enough to immediately consider the possibility, and I'm intrigued as well.  There are several questions which will have to be answered first though, most importantly: how much of a bonus.  Here are some possible ideas for this BRB type to throw around and see what you'd like to use as well.

1) Should this be per session or per match?  Per session gives a flat rate.  Per match gives a small extra bonus and makes one team's BRB a little more valuable than another team's BRB.  My main reason for suggesting this is that right now we have a flat rate income of 80k per session for all teams regardless of whether or not a team is just playing 2 league games in a session or playing 4 matches for three straight sessions in Cup competitions.  Those teams lasting in Cup competitions and getting some extra matches would see a little more revenue to reflect better team results this way.  If we're talking about 5k or so per match (see below), then the absolute maximum amount that one team could get over another would be 70k (24 match minimum for all teams, 38 theoretical max if you hit all FA Cup replays and make every single final for the FA Cup, AP Cup, and Youth Cup = 14 match difference x 5k/match = 70k).  As most teams get a few more than 24 matches and no one is getting more than 32 or so this year, the difference would be far closer to 30k this season between least and most.  30k is less than half a session's income and would not give any signficant edge to a team over any other team that also had a Marketing BRB.

2) How much per session or match would the BRB be able to bring in?  The total value has to exceed the cost of making the player in the first place.  Here are some figures to consider that any Marketing Manager BRB would have to exceed to be worth purchasing:

Auction, Age I BRB will be valued at 275k (per the latest on the forum posts by Al).  Age II BRB will start at 225k.  If this BRB cannot generate more than 225k in a full season, then no one will ever buy an age II at auction.

The lowest possible non-league sale values for a player to become a BRB are 150k for an age IV, SL 7 (who will become a V, 2 and survive aging to be converted into a BRB) and 120k for an age V, SL 8 (who becomes age VI, SL 2).  Players one or two SL higher are obviously worth a bit more.  If anyone is going to make this BRB on their own, they will need a player to survive aging and become a BRB.  If the Marketing Manager cannot earn much more than 150k in two seasons, then a team is better off selling the player before session 8 the prior season and using the cash to get a better player in the off-season auctions.

If a BRB can generate 15k per session (10 sessions per season), then the 150k earned the first season would make up for what the converted player could have been sold for.  The second season then becomes pure profit.  However, if one is purchased at auction then you will barely get any extra cash if you bought an age I, and will lose 75k on the deal for an age II.  Similarly, if you set the bar at 5k per match if we take that route, then teams will see between 120k (24 match minimum) and 150k (30 match practical max) per season.  Again, this is great for BRBs that are made by a team, and lousy for the auction buys.

How to balance that out is the big question.  Do we set the income value so high that it could cover an auction buy (300k in a season)?  If so, then teams making their own could get a 450k+ profit out of this BRB, which is the total income of over half a season's combined session income (all teams get 800k currently).  That's pretty steep and would easily create a competitive disadvantage in the auctions for those teams who did not have one.  Do we instead set the income value low (15k per session or 5k per match) so that we will see a very modest and manageable 120k-150k profit over two seasons' time and just not offer these BRBs at auction at all?  There really isn't much middle ground as anything less than covering the cost of the auction buy would make them 'unsellable' and would just increase the total profit of teams making their own Marketing Manager anyway.

The only way I can think to keep total profit down while covering the auction cost for Age II's is to make age I and II guys earn different amounts, which is likely a pain for Al to program (unless you can make the per session/match income multiply by the age of the BRB so it doubles for an age II?).  If an age I BRB brings in 15k per session or 5k per match, then the age II BRB brings in 30k per session or 10k per match.  This would cover the cost of an age II purchased in the off-season or sessions 1 or 2 (300k, 270k or 240k income respectively to cover the 225k auction cost), while reducing the total profit that a self-made BRB could generate (~120k-150k in age I, ~240k-300k in age II, likely 150k+ loss in order to make one in the first place leaves a total 300k profit at practical max, with most teams seeing a 250k or so profit if we use the per match bonus instead of per session).  In essence, your age I BRB is learning the job and gets twice as effective in his second year.

So what do you think, and is there a fourth option or more that you can see that would work?  In proposing ideas, please keep the competitive balance of the league in mind.  We cannot create a free cash cow that some teams will have and others not.  The total profit of these players has to be manageable. It should give enough bonus to be worth the time and cost to create one, without making it so that a team cannot be successful without one of their own.

Readers Comments

Neat idea Kevin.
 

Sorry I never replied sooner, but it took 6 months to fully read your post.....

Mark Creasey on Sunday, Jan. 31st, 2010 at 12:39 AM
 

To be fair, I think there's already too much cash floating around this league. Cash under UNITED is not the important resource it is in OLMEC since youth development is more important, and you can't buy/sell CP's (if you can, no one does). It'd be interesting to see the CP market open up to see if one exists, to be honest.

John Holden on Sunday, Jan. 31st, 2010 at 10:29 AM
 
 
 
Terms and Conditions