BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Norge > Det knurres i økonomiavdelingen!

Det knurres i økonomiavdelingen!

Set priority
Show messages by
From: Unkel
This Post:
00
47543.1
Date: 8/28/2008 4:15:00 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
2020
Det skurrer i ørene og ville nok ha skapt voldsom røre i virkeligheten hvis et lag fyller stadion med 8660 tilskuere, selger billetter for 256 453 og sitter igjen med 25 000.
Men slik er det i dette spillet. Det var ikke slik vi tenkte det da vi bygget ut arenaene.
Jeg har lest og forstått reglene og endringene, men forstår likevel ikke sammenhengen.
Var det noen andre som hadde spilt lenge, eller i noen andre land hvor spillet har eksistert lenge som fikk for mye dollar mellom hendene? Jeg forstår ikke hvordan nybegynnere skal kunne "ta igjen" gamle lag med en slik økonomisk innstramming.
Vel, vel, Vito var vel tross alt heldig som startet mens det var penger å tjene og rikelig med dessert på bordet ...

This Post:
00
47543.2 in reply to 47543.1
Date: 8/28/2008 7:45:13 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
11
Ja, jeg lurte også på hvorfor jeg bare fikk 25.000 for hjemmekampen. Regler er likt for alle, men denne vil nok ikke gjøre store utslag for de rike eller fattige. De rike vil uansett tjene mer penger i serien, så jeg ser ikke helt vitsen. Er det 25.000 i alle rundene?

Fant reglene:

* Final Game: $ 250 000
* Semi-Final: $ 100 000
* Quarter-Final: $ 75 000
* 16-team round: $ 50 000
* 32-team round: $ 45 000
* 64-team round: $ 40 000
* 128-team round: $ 35 000
* 256-team round: $ 30 000
* 512-team round: $ 25 000
* All lower rounds: $ 25 000

Last edited by Mod-Anelka at 8/28/2008 7:47:14 PM

This Post:
00
47543.3 in reply to 47543.2
Date: 8/29/2008 6:42:01 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
Dette blir det ikke mye penger av...

This Post:
00
47543.4 in reply to 47543.3
Date: 8/29/2008 10:30:07 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
Skal vel ikke syte, men dette blir for dumt.. Dette henger ikke på grep. Da kommer økonomien til å rase for de fleste av oss og det kommer til å bli vanvittig vanskelig for nye lag....
Dette bør endres mener jeg.

From: Switch
This Post:
00
47543.5 in reply to 47543.4
Date: 8/29/2008 3:48:55 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
33
Det utgjør ikke noe særlig bedre økonomi for fattige lag enn rike lag.
Jeg er enig med at det burde endres.

switch

From: 23Larsen

This Post:
00
47543.6 in reply to 47543.5
Date: 8/29/2008 4:49:38 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
1717
Poenget med endringene var at inntektene sto overhodet ikke i stil med utgiftene. Spesielt for de øverste lagene. Når det begynnte å gå mot playoff sist sesong var prisene for spillere rett og slett astronomiske, nettopp fordi flere og flere klubber hadde tjent gode penger.

Fra nyhetenene:

We see a core part of our job as the maintenance of the BuzzerBeater economy. We have observed over the past few weeks that we are heading out of a period of mild inflation and into a period of massive, runaway inflation. Many of you have seen this in other online games, along with its inevitable successor, massive, runaway deflation. We have been determined from the outset not to allow this to happen in BuzzerBeater.

The average DI team took in $6.7M last season and netted a $3.7M profit. The team with the highest payroll in the game last season took in $13M, earning a $8.2M profit. The average DI team earned $4.2M from league games, including both gate receipts and TV money. Taking 40% of all league game income away from Division I teams last season would still have resulted in every single Division I team in a mature league earning a profit.

Further, we're not taking away 40% of all income. While the new attendance formula will leave the global average attendance in the same spot, the opponent's fan base will have a larger impact, which will result in higher-division teams seeing slightly higher attendance. This is also the reason that the TV money is flat; the new attendance system has a different way of incorporating TV revenue. Much of this will make more sense when that new system is unveiled in a couple of weeks. In the Cup, the income will depend on the round reached and therefore reduce the variance, but this also means that the 40% gate receipts reduction will not alter that income.

Finally, we should again stress that this is temporary. The problem in effect is that a team earning $13M per season can afford to pay $750k/week in salary, but is incapable of doing so with the talent currently in BuzzerBeater. As training catches up and the game reaches equilibrium, the players union will need less and less of a cut, eventually going away, because the players themselves will be earning that money. The players union right now is simply stepping in and taking up the remaining money that should be used for salaries but is not. Since there are plenty of players who are skilled enough to fill Division IV, it is already in equilibrium and spending an appropriate amount on salaries. But this is not yet the case in the highest divisions, and until it is, the players union is there to take up the extra salary and keep things in balance.



Den siste biten er verd å legge merke til ettersom den sier at neste sesong vil billettinntektene øke for å holde tritt med dine spilleres utvikling og dermed høyere lønninger.


Tar med også denne fra BB-Charles:


This Post:
00
47543.7 in reply to 47543.6
Date: 8/29/2008 4:50:43 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
1717

For those trying to understand the economic system, I think I'd mention a couple more things here:

​

​1) It's probably worth mentioning the skill of your PR guy when trying to look at attendance. Some top teams invest heavily and some do not, and his skill definitely affects the formulas.

​

​2) One of the problems with the attendance system is that a number of pieces started out at N/A, since this was a new system and we wanted to reduce the burden on teams due to their past without any announcement as to what might be important. As these pieces all fill up, I suspect that for a well-run team, the attendance will increase a bit more.

​

​3) I think one of the pieces of confusion here is that since the top teams have been able in the past to essentially have a blank check (or blank cheque, as Sascha and Mark keep correcting me), they have become accustomed to being able to afford to pay $40k/week in scouting and for a level 10 staff member of each type, along with being able to pay for the best talent available and still have some money to fund further improvements. We hope to have designed the game so that all teams need to make choices, including the top ones, and while a top team is more likely to be able to benefit from better staff, this still does not mean that three level 10 staff members and $40k/week is going to be a budget compatible with a good product on the court. The average Division I team spends $800k/season on staff right now and $1.7M/season on player salaries. As the salaries grow quite quickly at the top level of staff, I might suggest that top teams looking to bring in a little bit more player salary while keeping the books balanced have an obvious place to turn. It's also the case that teams who expect to finish near the top of Division I might save the approximately $300k that they average spending on scouting, when they're going to be stuck at the bottom of the draft order. We've reduced the budget to the point where you have to make decisions instead of blindly spending on everything in sight, but I would hope top managers like yourselves would see this as a challenge rather than an insult. :)

​

​Finally, since I have access to global numbers, I have compared the average attendance for regular-season games played in the last 30 days (end of season 5 vs. first two games of season 6). I used the end of season 5 because arena expansion is a strong effect.

​

​In division I, the average attendance is 7% higher so far in season 6 for human home teams. This is over a different set of arenas, but arenas have gone from 82.1% of capacity to 89.2% of capacity globally.

​

​In division II, the average attendance is up 6%, going from 84.7% of capacity to 89.2% of capacity.

​

​In division III, the average attendance is up 0.6%, from 82.3% of capacity to 82.8%.

​

​In lower divisions, the average attendance is down 1.5%, with the typical team under their initial capacity of 5000 seats.

​

​Finally -- and as you know we're not going to post any official estimates until the all-star break, and the final numbers at the trading deadline -- as I mentioned at the outset, the players union is only taking a share until player salaries catch up, and as they catch up, the players union share will decrease. Based upon current training rates, I would estimate that the division I tax is most likely to be in the 15-30% range for season 7, with the division II tax most likely to be in the 5-20% range. These numbers depend upon the rate at which the high-wage-earning players are increasing in salary, and as the season progresses, it will become easier to predict what the final numbers will be. I will -- one more time -- issue the disclaimer that ​this is a rough, back-of-the-envelope estimate and that I am not responsible for anybody who gives it any credibility whatsoever.​




This Post:
00
47543.8 in reply to 47543.7
Date: 8/29/2008 4:51:56 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
1717
For min egen del har jeg merket den nye økonomiske virkeligheten godt, men ønsker den forsåvidt velkommen ettersom den neppe kunne fortsatt slik det gjorde for meg i fjor. Nå må jeg, slik BB-Charles skriver, gjøre valg jeg ikke trengte å gjøre tidligere.

Dummet meg forøvrig ut da endringene slapp. Overtolket betydningen av tilskuerøkningen samt at jeg over lengre tid har undret meg over store klubbers enorme stadioner uten at de fikk spesielt mye igjen for sine investeringer. Hva viste de som jeg ikke gjorde?

Da disse nyhetene ble postet tenkte jeg at dette var grunnen til den evige utbyggingen og knallet til med en utbygging på 6000 bleachers, disse er enda ikke ferdigbygd og de pengene ser jeg nok ikke igjen.

Jeg lurer, hva er vitsen med en slik stadion?

(26161)

From: Milly

This Post:
00
47543.9 in reply to 47543.7
Date: 8/29/2008 8:41:53 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
4646
​1) It's probably worth mentioning the skill of your PR guy when trying to look at attendance.
Vi har en lvl 10 talsmann og henter $ 30 292 i solgte varer på det. Trekker man fra ukelønn: $ 22 507 blir det ikke mye netto, men vi håper at hjemmekampene i serien har fulle tribuner takket være Maximo Oneil.
Trolig vil det bli endringer i økonomien etterhvert. Den som føler seg kallet kan jo kanskje referere denne meningsutvekslingen på et engelsk forum?

Older than the rest ...
This Post:
00
47543.10 in reply to 47543.9
Date: 8/30/2008 3:05:36 AM
Nøtterøy Funkadelics
BLNO
Overall Posts Rated:
108108
Second Team:
Nøtterøy Funkadelics II
Jeg fikk inn $49,000 fra marketing forrige uke...

Med mitt lønnsbudsjett øker pengebingen jevnt og trutt,
dog i et ganske bedagelig tempo sammenlignet med forrige sesong.

Verdt å ta i betraktning at prisene nå også er av annen kaliber.

Landslagets point guard Anders Linnet ble, som flere la merke til, lagt ut for
salg med 3 x tremendous skills. Prisantydning 7,9 mill, resultatet var ingen bud.
Han ble lagt ut rett etter til 4,4 mill. Fortsatt ingen bud (!)

Nå tar det meg uansett like lang til å spare 4,5 mill nå, som det tok å spare
10 mill forrige sesong, som antagelig ville vært prisen hans da.

From: 23Larsen

This Post:
00
47543.11 in reply to 47543.9
Date: 8/30/2008 12:47:13 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
1717

Trolig vil det bli endringer i økonomien etterhvert. Den som føler seg kallet kan jo kanskje referere denne meningsutvekslingen på et engelsk forum?


Den diskusjonen er godt i gang allerede:-)