Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Re: Finances

The latest update to the finances (transfers) has destroyed the game for some people. I'm speaking about those who like to play the game using whit and skill and do not rely on a simple roll of the dice.

The part exchange transfer change has made it pointless to look for risers to make some cash. Even if a player does rise a few levels' date=' the value doesn't increase much so there's no money to be made. Shame, as this was the most fun part of the game previously, searching for risers. Then they changed the riser system so we didn't know what leagues to search through and now they change the p/e value of players so you cant make money.

Unfortunately as the match engine is pretty random, where my 92 rated team gets beat in one GW and my 87 rated team are on fire in another, then we are now left to just roll a dice for every match and the one who rolls the most sixes gets the title.

The very beginning of the fall of SM. Not fun anymore.

So does anyone know another football manager game online that is any good?[/quote']

Totally agree, my sentiments exactly, SM going badly wrong. :(

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 383
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Re: Finances

Re: Finances I guess the glory days are over then. No more making a fortune out of every riser possible!! Actually, I hope some of these new features do make money worth something again, but for tha

Re: New Finances (Loans / Contracts) Is this thread not getting mixed up with the 'Player Valuation in P/E Transfers' thread?

Re: Finances

I've just taken my Derby County to a English Div 1 title after many years of hard work in creating the title winning squad.

My reward: A measly £2.9m!

To add insult to this, I find out the team who finished 8th were awarded £1.9m.

So, for winning the title I am rewarded with a stunning financial package that eclipses that of 8th position by a staggering £1m.

Fantastic!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Finances

To add insult to this' date=' I find out the team who finished 8th were awarded £1.9m.

So, for winning the title I am rewarded with a stunning financial package that eclipses that of 8th position by a staggering £1m.

Fantastic![/quote']

It has been obvious & I have referred to it many times (many months ago) that SM Punish successful / trading managers & support poor managers. It's like a Handicap Race in Horse Racing. SM do this in a myriad of ways, too numerous to mention.

SM require as many customers as they can, whether 10yo or 90yo, whether savvy or the opposite. What they don't want is permanently successful managers who turn these customers away from the game.

Problem is, they have had to become more & more severe & use every tool at their disposal, in their handicapping to achieve their aim!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Finances

Hi Soccahappy,

I was just reading your post and thought I would reaffirm that we try to make as inclusive a game as possible which all managers enjoy. As you mention, not everyone wants the same level of experience and I'm sure everyone has a different idea as to what makes the game enjoyable.

I think an important thing to highlight about the recent changes is that there has been a method of managing clubs (player farming, p/e transfer manipulation, loan system manipulation) which has led to a sure-fire way to get your club towards the top with lots of players and lots of money - and - eventually even a monopoly on the transfer market in that GW. Not all managers have managed their clubs in this way, but those that have will likely have felt these changes the most. This is a genuine attempt to restore the balance between teams in the GW and level the playing field so to speak.

The key elements from our perspective being that the core concepts of the game remain the same...scouting risers, having a well balanced squad and negotiating shrewdly in an active transfer market etc.

:)

Eric

It has been obvious & I have referred to it many times (many months ago) that SM Punish successful / trading managers & support poor managers. It's like a Handicap Race in Horse Racing. SM do this in a myriad of ways' date=' too numerous to mention.

SM require as many customers as they can, whether 10yo or 90yo, whether savvy or the opposite. What they don't want is permanently successful managers who turn these customers away from the game.

Problem is, they have had to become more & more severe & use every tool at their disposal, in their handicapping to achieve their aim![/quote']

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Finances

I think an important thing to highlight about the recent changes is that there has been a method of managing clubs (player farming' date=' p/e transfer manipulation, loan system manipulation) which has led to a sure-fire way to get your club towards the top with lots of players and lots of money - and - eventually even a monopoly on the transfer market in that GW. Not all managers have managed their clubs in this way, but those that have will likely have felt these changes the most. This is a genuine attempt to restore the balance between teams in the GW and level the playing field so to speak.

The key elements from our perspective being that the core concepts of the game remain the same...scouting risers, having a well balanced squad and negotiating shrewdly in an active transfer market etc.

:)

Eric[/quote']

From the other side of the coin this could also be seen as restricting smaller clubs so they now can't compete with larger clubs financially. I don't see the balance your trying to restore sadly, only see it growing further and further.

The only clubs who have a guaranteed income which can fully take advantage of the new system are the elite clubs because of the income they get from gate receipts. Smaller clubs just won't be able to compete and that's why when I hear the "level the playing field" term it just makes me think your making it easier for people who want to own larger clubs, while crippling smaller teams with the methods they use to try and make money.

Larger clubs won't be affected by this at all in my opinion but only time will tell.

Player farming (If you take over Real Madrid you have over 60 players in your squad, 30ish on loan. Isn't that player farming? )

p/e transfer manipulation By Removing the p/e values it means clubs have to find extra income to do a deal making Larger clubs have more of stronger footing in the transfer marker because of their rolling income from gate receipts, Sponsors etc. A better way to make managers to use cash more would of been to remove two players being involved in any player exchange. Make it a player and cash deal only. I can't think when any club in recent years that has bought a top player by exchanging two players instead of cash.

loan system manipulation Again with it being 50/50 it's going to hit smaller clubs harder than it would with larger, an improved idea on the system would be the following.

If a division 1 club sent a player to the lower leagues they should pay more of his wages, compared to it being 50/50 if the player is sent to a club within the same division.

Player sent from division 1 to other club

Division 1 50/50 wages

Division 2 60/40 wages

Division 3 70/30 wages

As in my opinion smaller clubs already struggle with money income while in a lower division so they should have the weight lifted off them financially by the larger club.

I think it's coming the time for managers to imposed causes to players contracts when sold to other clubs. As i can see this slowly increasing within the game as the shift is slowly going that cash is key.

So you can have the flat fee for a player but then add on causes for if that player win's a cup, or league, top goal scorer etc. That would be a more realist approach and would help smaller clubs massively when they sell players to bigger clubs.

The Chairman having more control over finances is a good idea, but at the moment the manager can just get rid of all the money in a few simple clicks, then leave the club. Leaving the next manager to take over with the impossible task of trying to restore some balance to the club without it slipping further into the red.

I have the following idea

At the start of the season you have a choice where you think your club will finish, reflecting on that your chairmen will give you funds for that season and no more. So if you had 50m in the bank at the start of the season and you feel you might finish in the top half of the table then you'd get 25m to spend, the rest would be locked out. It would make managers be more responsible for how they decided to use the money they had and made sure the signings they did were the right ones.

It would also allow managers to budget for stadium upgrades which might be introduced in the future.

There is one key element to which would have to be done to make it work. A chairman would have to invest in the club, something i have yet to ever see in SM. I have taken small club from div3 to div1 and won titles and cups but have yet to see any investment from my chairman nor seen my sponsors rise more than 40K a home game.

Example for team which has been in division 1 for a few seasons.

30 in the bank

Title challenge = 20M

Mid table finish = 12M

Avoid the bottom 3 = 8M

But the opinions would be different if you just got promoted as the focus would be on avoiding the bottom 3. Just as it would be different if you had won the league or a cup.

But again all these ideas come in-line with clubs having a fairer balance of income to reflect their status in the league that they play in. So with more chairman investment, which can come from him or if a club has been taken over the rest would come from an increase in gate receipts TV Revenue and Sponsors.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Finances

Hi Soccahappy' date='

I was just reading your post and thought I would reaffirm that we try to make as inclusive a game as possible which all managers enjoy. As you mention, not everyone wants the same level of experience and I'm sure everyone has a different idea as to what makes the game enjoyable.

I think an important thing to highlight about the recent changes is that there has been a method of managing clubs (player farming, p/e transfer manipulation, loan system manipulation) which has led to a sure-fire way to get your club towards the top with lots of players and lots of money - and - eventually even a monopoly on the transfer market in that GW. Not all managers have managed their clubs in this way, but those that have will likely have felt these changes the most. This is a genuine attempt to restore the balance between teams in the GW and level the playing field so to speak.

The key elements from our perspective being that the core concepts of the game remain the same...scouting risers, having a well balanced squad and negotiating shrewdly in an active transfer market etc.

:)

Eric[/quote']

Genuinely Appreciate your reply Eric, which is better than the nothings I've had in the past, but can't see anything to persuade me away from the opinion I set out. In a way I understand, you are a business & IF SM feel this is the best way of furthering your business then you should continue along this path. I really don't know whether I'm in the majority view or the minority & only time will tell.

It just seems to me long term customers might not be pleased with all the changes of recent months & years, whereas new customers won't know any different. Anyway for the first time I will not re-new my GM when it runs out in about 70days or so I think. It really is a "pittance" to me & if I still had "the old game" I would have re-newed over & again without hesitation. I just feel it's the only way I can make my dis-satisfaction felt.

I know when u used to publish figures on the opening page SM customers were rising every time I looked. That was a year or 2 ago & nothing since. Did u start to lose customers & decided to make all these changes or was it just thinking it would make the game better? Last figure I noted was 392,986 Active members & 17,189 Gold Members, published on the SM website on the 5th July 2011.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Finances

Hi Soccahappy' date='

I think an important thing to highlight about the recent changes is that there has been a method of managing clubs (player farming, p/e transfer manipulation, loan system manipulation) which has led to a sure-fire way to get your club towards the top with lots of players and lots of money - and - eventually even a monopoly on the transfer market in that GW. Not all managers have managed their clubs in this way, but those that have will likely have felt these changes the most. This is a genuine attempt to restore the balance between teams in the GW and level the playing field so to speak.

The key elements from our perspective being that the core concepts of the game remain the same...scouting risers, having a well balanced squad and negotiating shrewdly in an active transfer market etc. [/quote']

The problem is your "one size fits all" approach to this balancing has had minimal impact on the big clubs, and almost completely crippled smaller clubs financially, making it impossible to compete.

Scouting risers is one thing, but the completely random ratings now make this as a form of income for small clubs nigh on impossible - by the time you've paid their wages for a couple of seasons whilst waiting for them to rise (and including the 3 or 4 wage increases your chairman would have given them in this time ;) ) you break even if you're lucky.

I have a first team squad of 23 players now, max rating 94, average rating of 91, £1m a turn wages. I have 55 players loaned out (I'd love to sell the majority of them but I need to wait for them to rise as a form of income), £300k a turn.

Wages equate to best part of £2.7m a week. I lose £400k per home game minimum, and over £1m per away game.

I've only been playing since 2010, and in those three years as pretty much a one club manager, I'm strangely proud of the outcome of my time and effort over those three years to turn Charlton from a D3 team avg low 80's into a really competitive team avg 91 with hard work in the transfer market, scouting, careful selection of players and tactics - just as you suggest you want the game to played - yet I now feel totally screwed by the changes, and am basically having to watch my money flood away week by week with no hope of the financial situation changing.

My options? Hope I can get really lucky with risers in the random and impossible risers market, or sell off my best players to generate income until I'm left with an average 87 rated team that has no hope of competing the way my current team can but is sustainable with an income that is still at the D3 level it started at.

How is that finding a balance for those of us who want the challenge of playing a smaller club?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Finances

The problem is your "one size fits all" approach to this balancing has had minimal impact on the big clubs' date=' and almost completely crippled smaller clubs financially, making it impossible to compete.

Scouting risers is one thing, but the completely random ratings now make this as a form of income for small clubs nigh on impossible - by the time you've paid their wages for a couple of seasons whilst waiting for them to rise (and including the 3 or 4 wage increases your chairman would have given them in this time ;) ) you break even if you're lucky.

I have a first team squad of 23 players now, max rating 94, average rating of 91, £1m a turn wages. I have 55 players loaned out (I'd love to sell the majority of them but I need to wait for them to rise as a form of income), £300k a turn.

Wages equate to best part of £2.7m a week. I lose £400k per home game minimum, and over £1m per away game.

I've only been playing since 2010, and in those three years as pretty much a one club manager, I'm strangely proud of the outcome of my time and effort over those three years to turn Charlton from a D3 team avg low 80's into a really competitive team avg 91 with hard work in the transfer market, scouting, careful selection of players and tactics - just as you suggest you want the game to played - yet I now feel totally screwed by the changes, and am basically having to watch my money flood away week by week with no hope of the financial situation changing.

My options? Hope I can get really lucky with risers in the random and impossible risers market, or sell off my best players to generate income until I'm left with an average 87 rated team that has no hope of competing the way my current team can but is sustainable with an income that is still at the D3 level it started at.

How is that finding a balance for those of us who want the challenge of playing a smaller club?[/quote']

Great post and I echo these comments. It seems as though SM are forgetting about the lesser clubs with minimal income.

It's going to force small clubs that have excelled back into a small club mentality by selling off all their star players in order to cope with the awful financial system SM has implemented.

Why is it acceptable to be rewarded with only £2.9m for winning D1 with my Derby County? Where is my increased sponsorship, gate receipts, season tickets, ticket prices, stadium capacity (for being competitive in Div 1 for 3 years), merchandise??

It's all take, take, take and it's killing the small clubs that have been successful and produced competitive teams via scouting, shrewd transfer deals and hours of dedication.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Finances

The problem is your "one size fits all" approach to this balancing has had minimal impact on the big clubs' date=' and almost completely crippled smaller clubs financially, making it impossible to compete.

Scouting risers is one thing, but the completely random ratings now make this as a form of income for small clubs nigh on impossible - by the time you've paid their wages for a couple of seasons whilst waiting for them to rise (and including the 3 or 4 wage increases your chairman would have given them in this time ;) ) you break even if you're lucky.

I have a first team squad of 23 players now, max rating 94, average rating of 91, £1m a turn wages. I have 55 players loaned out (I'd love to sell the majority of them but I need to wait for them to rise as a form of income), £300k a turn.

Wages equate to best part of £2.7m a week. I lose £400k per home game minimum, and over £1m per away game.

I've only been playing since 2010, and in those three years as pretty much a one club manager, I'm strangely proud of the outcome of my time and effort over those three years to turn Charlton from a D3 team avg low 80's into a really competitive team avg 91 with hard work in the transfer market, scouting, careful selection of players and tactics - just as you suggest you want the game to played - yet I now feel totally screwed by the changes, and am basically having to watch my money flood away week by week with no hope of the financial situation changing.

My options? Hope I can get really lucky with risers in the random and impossible risers market, or sell off my best players to generate income until I'm left with an average 87 rated team that has no hope of competing the way my current team can but is sustainable with an income that is still at the D3 level it started at.

How is that finding a balance for those of us who want the challenge of playing a smaller club?[/quote']

...

Spot on, mate - I've just quit a GW where I'd carefully micro-managed my team at break-even from day 1 for nearly 300 games. Overnight this changed to a deficit of £400k per week. Thanks, SM - all that effort down the porcelain. The GW had a max rating for signings of 75 so all the managers had put years of hard time in developing their first elevens up to low-mid 80's average rating.

I simply couldn't be bothered to dismantle all the hard work I'd put in, selling my best players off and playing as a pauper again.

Why would you do that to the very people who work the hardest at the game? No glory players, no silly great squads, scarce resources and just as we start to enjoy the fruits of our labours you drive a steamroller through the whole bloomin' thing.

Well done !!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Finances

The player exchange rule isn't going to work against small clubs really.

It only hurts teams who buy a lot of players and are trying to sell these lower rated players. So big teams could buy risers who in real life are at smaller teams, and then use them in exchange, and the value of that player could even double when doing so. I did this and it was an easy way to building a great team. I know a lot of people did the same. It does take away the challenge.

At small teams you tend to keep a small squad if you are wise and the value of your players are higher with you than their real life club, so if you wanted to exchange these players their value was less than just transfer listing him and selling him this way.

I however hate the rule where the chairman intervenes to offer new contracts. I'd be fine with the players morale being effected and maybe even his performances and then you as the manager are left to decide but if you buy a riser with a division 5 team and they rise quickly, I dont think it's realistic if the chairman bows down to the demands of a player and offers 4x more to 1 individual.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Finances

this is really the end for me adios SM.

I sold players for about 60 mil and my balance is the same but when i took a look at my starting balance it decreased by the same amount as the cash i received for selling those players. LOL i'm selling my players for free in order to cut the wage bill:confused::mad::(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Finances

this is really the end for me adios SM.

I sold players for about 60 mil and my balance is the same but when i took a look at my starting balance it decreased by the same amount as the cash i received for selling those players. LOL i'm selling my players for free in order to cut the wage bill:confused::mad::(

Send a bug ticket see if that helps?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Finances

The playing field is not level, even after 20 seasons, the big teams in real life still have the big stadiums and biggest support.

If Man Utd get demoted to the 4th division and Exeter to the first division, then the stadiums should change accordingly.

If you want it level, then everyone should have a stadium of 30,000 and attendance should depend on your current position, form, reputation.

That's a level playing field, not the punishment of managers that have the foresight to play the game, or "manipulate" the game as SM would like to call it.

I'm all for money being worth something again, and the new wages are good at punishing teams with lots of young risers. However, I have found it pointless now to look for risers in lower leagues as the money they are worth is next to nothing and if they rise by 1-3 then they are worth less than what you bought them for?!?!

On top of that, in p/e with another manager, my chairman values players much higher than he does when just selling them straight. I wish he's make his mind up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Finances

I guess the glory days are over then. No more making a fortune out of every riser possible!!

Actually, I hope some of these new features do make money worth something again, but for that to happen, the manager needs full control over his clubs finances.

I would prefer to see the new wage automatic adjustment feature removed. Rather than punishing a manager financially, wouldn't it be better to punish there performance instead. I would like to see players morale drop more if they have concerns and with it, their form on the pitch. Then the manager can make the decision either to address the concerns or risk losing the player's abilities.

Edit Note:

Of course if their morale is dropping because they are worried about the lack of games, perhaps this should not affect their performance. They ought to try harder to get into the squad!

The chairman already has too much influence in this game. SM is becoming too automatic.

image.php?u=20113&type=sigpic&dateline=1372795388

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Finances

I guess the glory days are over then. No more making a fortune out of every riser possible!!

Actually' date=' I hope some of these new features do make money worth something again, but for that to happen, the manager needs full control over his clubs finances.

[b']I would prefer to see the new wage automatic adjustment feature removed. Rather than punishing a manager financially, wouldn't it be better to punish there performance instead. I would like to see players morale drop more if they have concerns and with it, their form on the pitch[/b]. Then the manager can make the decision either to address the concerns or risk losing the player's abilities.

The chairman already has too much influence in this game. SM is becoming too automatic.

image.php?u=20113&type=sigpic&dateline=1372795388

I like this.

More realistic. Players are more likely to underperform and sulk if they are 'underpaid' in RL, so why not on here?

Fine idea.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Finances

Im unsure if im the only the only person in this predicament...or my maths is just plain bad but...this is my Finances after 2 home games at Forest Green Rovers - English Championship 27777.

After 2 HOME games only:

vsvMnsI.jpg

Now it shows im making (roughly per home game):

Gate receipts - 30k

TV Revenue - 40k

Sponsor - 11k

Merchandise - 4k

Home game total = 85k

- Ground maintenance = 70k

So if my math is correct, this means every away fixture, I shouldnt be losing more than 70k ( to balance the books).

How is this possible?? When the cheapest wage a player demands is 3-4k (70 rated an below).

OK you could probs have a squad of 20 players at 70 rating..but this isnt VERY desirable.

I think the wages of 74 rated an below players should be dropped some..because for the smallest teams at least, will all be bankrupt (badly) by the end of the season.

As for the auto contracts...complete nonsense !!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Finances

Great post and I echo these comments. It seems as though SM are forgetting about the lesser clubs with minimal income.

It's going to force small clubs that have excelled back into a small club mentality by selling off all their star players in order to cope with the awful financial system SM has implemented.

Why is it acceptable to be rewarded with only £2.9m for winning D1 with my Derby County? Where is my increased sponsorship' date=' gate receipts, season tickets, ticket prices, stadium capacity (for being competitive in Div 1 for 3 years), merchandise??

It's all take, take, take and it's killing the small clubs that have been successful and produced competitive teams via scouting, shrewd transfer deals and hours of dedication.[/quote']

100% agree, the soccer manager is not done the big teams!! the pleasure to play with teams average 89 and a fight to the big sharks, this spirit was up with the new method of payment ordered!

The small teams are not going to be used, is a measure to increase the reserve of big teams, not to make the game fairer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Finances

This is not 100% directly related to the debate, but would like some ideas / advice on what I should do with my finances at the moment in line with this thread.

I have a Div 5 team, and have recently won the league, so now in English Div 4 - not very competitive until you get to Div's 2 + 1.

I think I got about 400-500k for winning the league - I would like to maintain the team for a few years to get them as high as possible.

I have just sold 5 players (3 of my best, and 2 fringe first teamers) and raised about 5million, so my balance is about 5.3million, whilst still mainting a first team average of about 79, with subs around the 74-77 mark.

In a week I spend roughly 380k (£376k last week) and my income is roughly the same (last weeks income was £375k) - although I did get a bit for merchandising for some reason.. ANYWAY.

Now I have money, what should I do with it? Any additional players are going to stop me breaking even and into debt - which I accept is going to happen. Player swaps seem out of the question curently for me, so this has to be taken into account as well. Is it just a case of waiting to buy a nailed on cert for raising (some young superstar like Halilovic / Jedvaj / Meyer etc) who is bound to rise) and when they do sell the player that is then fringe?

My fear is my income is going to stay the same if / when I move up a league (Or go up by say 40k a turn max if I fill my 4k capacity ground with a few more fans than the 2.8k now) Buying 2-3 good players (78-80 potential risers) is going to get me in the red fairly quickly after transfer fee's and wages, as is buying one v.good player (lets say an older prem striker for 4m 86 rated) who's wages will be about the same.

The only way I can now see me improving, is if I literally keep all my money now, and just play with the squad of got for about 3-4 seasons, see if I can maybe get up to div 3 (with luck) and make about a million a season by not spending anything and getting say 500k for finshing mid table at best.. So I would get maybe 2-3 million if I do well after 3-4 seasons, with my 5million current, what do I do then? Buy players to get me into debt to sell them off again? Just not sure what at all to do...

Any help appreciated..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Finances

This is not 100% directly related to the debate' date=' but would like some ideas / advice on what I should do with my finances at the moment in line with this thread.

I have a Div 5 team, and have recently won the league, so now in English Div 4 - not very competitive until you get to Div's 2 + 1.

I think I got about 400-500k for winning the league - I would like to maintain the team for a few years to get them as high as possible.

I have just sold 5 players (3 of my best, and 2 fringe first teamers) and raised about 5million, so my balance is about 5.3million, whilst still mainting a first team average of about 79, with subs around the 74-77 mark.

In a week I spend roughly 380k (£376k last week) and my income is roughly the same (last weeks income was £375k) - although I did get a bit for merchandising for some reason.. ANYWAY.

Now I have money, what should I do with it? Any additional players are going to stop me breaking even and into debt - which I accept is going to happen. Player swaps seem out of the question curently for me, so this has to be taken into account as well. Is it just a case of waiting to buy a nailed on cert for raising (some young superstar like Halilovic / Jedvaj / Meyer etc) who is bound to rise) and when they do sell the player that is then fringe?

My fear is my income is going to stay the same if / when I move up a league (Or go up by say 40k a turn max if I fill my 4k capacity ground with a few more fans than the 2.8k now) Buying 2-3 good players (78-80 potential risers) is going to get me in the red fairly quickly after transfer fee's and wages, as is buying one v.good player (lets say an older prem striker for 4m 86 rated) who's wages will be about the same.

The only way I can now see me improving, is if I literally keep all my money now, and just play with the squad of got for about 3-4 seasons, see if I can maybe get up to div 3 (with luck) and make about a million a season by not spending anything and getting say 500k for finshing mid table at best.. So I would get maybe 2-3 million if I do well after 3-4 seasons, with my 5million current, what do I do then? Buy players to get me into debt to sell them off again? Just not sure what at all to do...

Any help appreciated..[/quote']

Being pro active and a bit risky is probably the best idea.

I'd suggest:

Loan out everyone you're not playing.

Check the free player list - your chairman will over value them with your low rated squad and you get to buy them at 75% of their value = profit in 20 weeks. Especially if they rise in rating in that time.

The number one way is to buy risers. Its much harder now because SM have changed it to be a completely random rating schedule but checking the player ratings forums for 70 rated risers is your best bet. You could buy a lot of low risers for £5m, loan them out and sell them on in 20 weeks or when they rise.

If you can buy someone from a big team that suddenly becomes popular you might be able to sell him to a big club for a nice profit - someone like Varela at Man Utd for example.

Managing small clubs is a lot more challenging than it used to be so good luck!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...