BuzzerBeater Forums

so who gets a monthly increase in their salary?

ahhhh

sales people . . . from commision i guess :D

so who gets a monthly increase in their salary?

Another example of using the 'realism' argument only when it fits you. Remember it's still a game. We can go on and use this argument for 90% of the game, in both positive and negative ways, but why would we?

Another example of using the 'realism' argument only when it fits you. Remember it's still a game. We can go on and use this argument for 90% of the game, in both positive and negative ways, but why would we?

isn't "realism" the ultimate basis of a "simulation" game? but i'm not going into that anymore because there is no sense in going against the system...time to bite the bullet and move on...

ahhhh

sales people . . . from commision i guess

commission is not part of an employee's salary(basic pay)...

There are alot of healthy opinions and good comments in this one.. I would like to get my vote in on the next "big rfc and release" to be on the basketball/coaching side of the game. When all is said and done I think that is what draws in managers as well.. their interrest for basketball.

Peace,

-P

The new system puts new teams at an even bigger disadvantage than before, and it keeps 'old money' in the hands of those currently with it.

New teams will need to LEARN the system. Not that it's something complex, but it is different from the way most people are hired -- especialyl with a system of ever-increasing wages -- regardless of merit or anything other than time employed. Nice for a union job.

Most teams will be unable to bid on the higher end trainers. So the idea of doing something to make the game easier for the lower end managers is weakened with this addition because supply outweights damand greatly, thus only those with money will be able to buy the top open staff.

While this may seem like a way to initially get huge portions of money off the market, in reality it is not becasue there are still several people who bit wuite high who did not win and because of a lack of supply they will still have their money. Because of this they will be resigned to buy a lower tier staff member thus driving up that price, and with the remaining money will buying the newly trained players who trained at a quicker rate fromt he top level staff (still emplyed by the teams with the 'old money').

Based on the above, the average team will now be falling behind not just in revenue but in their ability to train quickly enough to keep up with the old, monied teams who have the best trainers. This will result in money flowing BACK to the old teams in larger sums and more frequently (quicker traininr and / or more trainees coming out of those clubs with top-end trainers).

I surely cannot bid on the top end trainers, so I will need to make due with the second tier (or worse) so I'll never be able to catch up with those with better trainers in either talent for my team (they train quicker than my guys) or talent to sell and thus improve my non-trained positions (they train quicker and / or more thus they get revenue more frequently, and in larger chunks).

I don't see how making it harder for a new team to compete (or even a team of a few seasons) will promote longevity, but perhaps I'm mistaken.

Most teams will be unable to bid on the higher end trainers. So the idea of doing something to make the game easier for the lower end managers is weakened with this addition because supply outweights damand greatly, thus only those with money will be able to buy the top open staff.

the top staff ain't usefull for that prices the different ain't huge, just in the price so now you had tomluck wath staff helps me most and how much i could spend on it.

I would say that actually people makes the ebst buissnes who hire level four trainer, when they need a new one ...

The benefit of old teams would be history after dismissing their first free level 5 Staff members.

If you invest that money into skill, the managers with top treainers won't catch up your trainees.

There are alot of healthy opinions and good comments in this one.. I would like to get my vote in on the next "big rfc and release" to be on the basketball/coaching side of the game. When all is said and done I think that is what draws in managers as well.. their interrest for basketball.

Peace,

-P

Here's to hoping the BBs read this thread and get some direction out of it.

Here is my personal thinking.

The new system isn't bad but very unfair. Why? Because a team must have lot of money to improve his training. When a manager take a team, he hasn't much money. In that order, he won't hire the optimal trainer and the old managers (they that have already played 3 seasons or more) have bigger arenas, a better roster and so.

The will hire the level 7 coach and will make a profitable step trading. But in this moment, other people - like me - can't do that even if we win matches, with this small arena and with less supporters we won't get that level. This means that always will exist a deep difference between us.

In summary... if we hire high level trainer we can't afford players or make a big arena. The economy will be very affected by this measure... Remember that the BB's reduced the incomes in teams...

Sorry for my english!