|
General Transfer Discussion (2019)
|
|
| Ad Bot |
Posted on 25-11-2024 11:04
|
Bot Agent
Posts: Countless
Joined: 23.11.09
|
|
| IP: None |
|
|
| OlegTinkov |
Posted on 24-09-2019 06:26
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2666
Joined: 31-12-2007
PCM$: 450.00
|
No no no, let me explain myself in the most simple way possible and keep in mind these rules:
No rider can be traded for 0. For riders of 100.000 wage or less, minimum rider transfer fee is their wage!
For riders with more than 100.000 wage, minimum transfer fee is 100.000.
A team's total income from transfers will be taxed at the following rates:
Less than 500,000: No tax
500,000 - 1,000,000: 10% tax
1,000,000+: 20% tax
Situation 1a:
Team A buys Rider X from Team B and his wage is 50.000 and they agree on the minimum fee;
Team A will have Rider X and pays 50.000
Team B gets 50.000 (which is added to their total income from transfers)
Later in the transfer season Team B buys Rider Y from Team A and his wage is 50.000 and they agree on the minimum fee
Team B will have Rider Y and pays 50.000
Team A gets 50.000 (which is added to their total income from transfers)
So both teams now have gained 50.000 (which is added to their total income from transfers)
Situation 1b:
A combined deal is made between Team A and Team B
Team A buys Rider X from Team B and his wage is 50.000, Team B buys Rider Y from Team A and his wage is 50.000 and they agree on the minimum fees
Team A gets Rider X and pays 50.000 / Team B gets Rider Y and pays 50.000
So again both teams now have gained 50.000 (which is added to their total income from transfers)
This is the way it should be imo, because it doesn't matter if Rider Y is sold to Team B combined or later in the transfer season or sold at any other team (C/D/etc.)
-----------------------------------------------------------
Your 3,000,000 and 2,900,000 example; if a team traded the best rider in the game for the second best rider in the game and they decided the best rider has 100,000 more "value" in their opinion -> Team A is paying the minimum of 100.000+100.000 "value compensation" =200.000 and Team B pays the minimum of 100.000 very simple. I do not might that in combined deals the "market value" isn't totally paid to each other, but I do might that there is an idea that rule nr.13 doesn't apply to combined deals
Situation Ulrich Ulriksen:
A combined deal is made between Team A and Team B
Team A buys Rider X (best rider) from Team B and his wage is 900.000, Team B buys Rider Y (second best rider) from Team A and his wage is 800.000 and they agree on the minimum fees+100.000 for compensation ->
Team A gets Rider X and pays 200.000 / Team B gets Rider Y and pays 100.000
So Team A now have gained 100.000 (which is added to their total income from transfers)
And Team B now have gained 200.000 (which is added to their total income from transfers)
But again if everybody is fine with combined deals without the "No rider can be traded for 0" rule let's continue with that 
Edited by OlegTinkov on 24-09-2019 06:57
|
| |
|
|
| knockout |
Posted on 24-09-2019 06:39
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7735
Joined: 21-12-2010
PCM$: 400.00
|
OlegTinkov wrote:
It just feels very strange to me that stand-alone deals (1 rider) have to follow the "No rider can be traded for 0€" and combined deals not.
Easy solution: Remove the "no rider can be traded for 0€" rule. Why is that rule even there?...
A Big Thank You To All MG Reporters! |
| |
|
|
| OlegTinkov |
Posted on 24-09-2019 06:42
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2666
Joined: 31-12-2007
PCM$: 450.00
|
knockout wrote:
OlegTinkov wrote:
It just feels very strange to me that stand-alone deals (1 rider) have to follow the "No rider can be traded for 0€" and combined deals not.
Easy solution: Remove the "no rider can be traded for 0€" rule. Why is that rule even there?...
Edited by OlegTinkov on 24-09-2019 06:44
|
| |
|
|
| roturn |
Posted on 24-09-2019 06:43
|
Team Manager
Posts: 22246
Joined: 24-11-2007
PCM$: 3900.00
|
In especially as my team is one part of that discussion hard for me to take party here really even though the swap never was meant to be any border line or something and still think it isn`t as riders value is defined by more than just wage.
The "No Rider can be raded for 0€" rule came in due to some riders being given away for free late in the transfers to avoid a sacking fee and so shouldn`t be gotten on FA market beforehand or being sacked. Basically the reason why for those fee only deals, a minimum fee of <100k wage = rider wage and >100k wage = 100k fee was introduced. |
| |
|
|
| OlegTinkov |
Posted on 24-09-2019 06:53
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2666
Joined: 31-12-2007
PCM$: 450.00
|
I think the rules are good, we just have to stick with them even with combined deals.
|
| |
|
|
| TheManxMissile |
Posted on 24-09-2019 07:09
|
Tour de France Champion
Posts: 18187
Joined: 12-05-2012
PCM$: 0.00
|
I'd like to see the minimum fee scrapped as well, maybe just activate it for the final 5 days to avoid the sacking problem but still allow not great 50k wager's to move to focus teams that are otherwise turned off by the fee.
Certainly it would help clear up the Rider Swap confusion, although I don't think managers are doing Swaps to get around the Transfer Tax given it's relatively small impact.
|
| |
|
|
| SotD |
Posted on 24-09-2019 07:37
|
World Champion
Posts: 12188
Joined: 29-11-2006
PCM$: 2980.00
|
I really dont see the need for overcomplicating things. Yes people May use the swap solution to avoid paying as much tax (although this imo is more of a thinking experiment than anything else!). This however is also the case IRL where there are numerous ways of getting lesser taxed benefits if you can accept not having the cold cash in your hands. Pensions, insurances, real estate, hard groceries etc.
In this case two riders swap home, and according to Danish law (which is the only thing I know of), the formula is counted as a weighted sum after both tax outcome, and tax reduction.
The rules May have a minor fault in the wording, but I feel it would be overcomplicating things if we force tax, and thus fictive fees to be calculated between teams is needed. If anything I think we should go the other direction, as for me the off season has already gotten to rigid and unflexible, which removes a bit of urgence, and takes people off the usual “disastermode”, which to me is the charming bit. Theres too big of a risk of failing due to technicalities, rather than failing due to incompetence/inexperience - and it would be foolish to add further dimensions to peoples general risk-reluctance!
|
| |
|
|
| OlegTinkov |
Posted on 24-09-2019 07:39
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2666
Joined: 31-12-2007
PCM$: 450.00
|
Ok I'll cease my crusade 
|
| |
|
|
| Luis Leon Sanchez |
Posted on 24-09-2019 10:14
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5533
Joined: 12-06-2013
PCM$: 500.00
|
Having followed the transfer adventures of other CT managers, the CT division is once again going to be strong and full of competition from relegated teams, existing CT teams and even the newer ones!
Really looking forward to it 
|
| |
|
|
| knockout |
Posted on 24-09-2019 10:26
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7735
Joined: 21-12-2010
PCM$: 400.00
|
roturn wrote:
In especially as my team is one part of that discussion hard for me to take party here really even though the swap never was meant to be any border line or something and still think it isn`t as riders value is defined by more than just wage.
The "No Rider can be raded for 0€" rule came in due to some riders being given away for free late in the transfers to avoid a sacking fee and so shouldn`t be gotten on FA market beforehand or being sacked. Basically the reason why for those fee only deals, a minimum fee of <100k wage = rider wage and >100k wage = 100k fee was introduced.
And that is a bad thing?
Agree with SotD that some rules are there to make the transfers more rigid and unflexible and i loved when someone offered to pay someone to take a rider. Sacking should just be a last resort failsafe in my opinion so i dont see why there should be a rule to prevent those sort of no fee deals.
A Big Thank You To All MG Reporters! |
| |
|
|
| cio93 |
Posted on 24-09-2019 12:08
|
World Champion
Posts: 10845
Joined: 29-10-2007
PCM$: 500.00
|
Best thread title in the history of the ManGame.
|
| |
|
|
| jandal7 |
Posted on 24-09-2019 12:08
|
World Champion
Posts: 11395
Joined: 17-12-2014
PCM$: 1020.00
|
So much to dissect in that thread. Truly something special.
24/02/21 - kandesbunzler said “I don't drink famous people."
15/08/22 - SotD said "Your [jandal's] humour is overrated"
11/06/24 - knockout said "Winning is fine I guess. Truth be told this felt completely unimportant."
[ICL] Santos-Euskadi | [PT]  Xero Racing
5x  x5
2x  x2
2x  x2 |
| |
|
|
| Marcovdw |
Posted on 24-09-2019 22:44
|
Grand Tour Champion
Posts: 7593
Joined: 04-07-2012
PCM$: 15445.00
|
Ciolek the most-earning rider in MG at 2.2 million 
|
| |
|
|
| cio93 |
Posted on 24-09-2019 22:46
|
World Champion
Posts: 10845
Joined: 29-10-2007
PCM$: 500.00
|
Well, I was quite fond of him when he was in my team, but never THAT fond!
|
| |
|
|
| tsmoha |
Posted on 24-09-2019 22:48
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 11819
Joined: 19-07-2010
PCM$: 300.00
|
|
| |
|
|
| Scorchio |
Posted on 24-09-2019 22:48
|
Small Tour Specialist
Posts: 2073
Joined: 14-09-2013
PCM$: 4500.00
|
Now we know where Vantomme's agent went to!
Manager of ISA - Hexacta in the MG |
| |
|
|
| hillis91 |
Posted on 24-09-2019 23:16
|
Team Leader
Posts: 5897
Joined: 30-11-2006
PCM$: 1500.00
|
OlegTinkov the Gangstar 
|
| |
|
|
| sammyt93 |
Posted on 24-09-2019 23:19
|
Classics Specialist
Posts: 3634
Joined: 03-07-2012
PCM$: 300.00
|
What is the PT wage cap? Can you even get close to the minimum rider limit with Ciolek?
|
| |
|
|
| cio93 |
Posted on 24-09-2019 23:20
|
World Champion
Posts: 10845
Joined: 29-10-2007
PCM$: 500.00
|
The problem here is that a PT team could actually afford a 2.2m rider 
|
| |
|
|
| matt17br |
Posted on 24-09-2019 23:23
|
Directeur Sportif
Posts: 10525
Joined: 28-09-2013
PCM$: 200.00
|
sammyt93 wrote:
What is the PT wage cap? Can you even get close to the minimum rider limit with Ciolek?
3.5m cap, one Ciolek and 19 65k riders and you can still afford another 50k rider and a stagiare
|
| |
|
![imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg](https://imgur.com/KlJUqDx.jpg[/img[img]]https://imgur.com/yUygrQ.jpg)
