no content
AdBlocker active?
It seems you are using software to block advertisements. You could help us if you could switch it off when visiting redzoneaction.org.
The reason is very simple: Advertisements help us running the site, to offer you the game in a good quality for free. So if you like the game, please support us by purchasing a Supporter Account or disabling the AdBlocker on this site.
Thank you very much!
| Main / Discussions / Limiting the financial power of rich teams Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 13 14 15 > >| | |
| Poster | Message |
|
andrew2scott2
|
posted: 2017-01-06 20:26:40 (ID: 100095285) Edits found: 1 Report Abuse |
|
pete wrote:
In my opinion you are all right and wrong at the same time. You guys discuss single terms...but it is more than that. Taxes on gains Costs for the Commish + possible volunteery bribes to make him more effective Taxes on daytrading players and some more I dislike to talk at the moment. That may be so. My though on any tax added. It would only effect spending or income. So if a team has plans just want to sit on his saving. He can do so without fear of losing money. P.S. the under line problem is inflation of simply to much money coming into the game not enough leaving it. Some thing that in it own right very hard to control. Last edited on 2017-01-06 20:27:10 by andrew2scott2 |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2017-01-06 20:30:20 (ID: 100095286) Report Abuse | |
|
I said many times that we need to reduce the value of the money on bank accounts, which translates to inflation..
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
andrew2scott2
|
posted: 2017-01-06 20:44:40 (ID: 100095290) Edits found: 2 Report Abuse |
|
that is a quick way to do it. I wont argue what is true.
depending how it done. could send a lot of mangers running. Or even worst on a spending spree. Which will shift money around for all non FA buys. I know I would spend money on a player and sell him later before losing out large chuck of my savings. I know many player would do the same. But then again i am around 600m and have only made 15m since season 18. And knowing this I am every selective of my TM buys. I know there are teams with more money than me. And are turning a profit better than me. We are all out for our self. Last edited on 2017-01-06 20:48:25 by andrew2scott2 |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2017-01-06 20:46:48 (ID: 100095291) Report Abuse | |
|
pete wrote:
I said many times that we need to reduce the value of the money on bank accounts, which translates to inflation.. Time to shift my RZA millions into gold! Steve SD Blitz |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2017-01-06 20:49:29 (ID: 100095293) Report Abuse | |
|
Yes...
 |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2017-01-06 20:51:06 (ID: 100095294) Report Abuse | |
|
pete wrote:
I said many times that we need to reduce the value of the money on bank accounts, which translates to inflation.. Use experience as part of the wage. Also a salary cap of around 7 million would also limit the amount of impact a big bank can do. But other than that I can't imagine why anyone would much care about how much $$ someone is sitting on. And no I don't have a monster bank. I'm currently @ 295 mill - much lower than many and I don't much care if some have a billion $$. If it's really a concern than put a hard cap on banks but That would probably be counter productive in the grand scheme of things though. Specifically in TM spending which would still hurt the lower money teams. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Rock777
|
posted: 2017-01-07 02:30:31 (ID: 100095302) Report Abuse |
|
Nope, we are talking about teams that have played for 2 years IRL. And any team can splash 50 million after a few seasons. As a new team you should be making 100 million a year unless you are being very wasteful. 50 million is just half a season's income.
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Rock777
|
posted: 2017-01-07 02:35:08 (ID: 100095303) Report Abuse |
|
Meitheisman wrote:
Were you here when Barcelona Yellow Jackets had a team full of superstars and paid something like $15M in salaries and made it to Elite before Pete found out he was cheating? And even if a team can only do that for a short period of time because it's expensive, it takes time to raise TC etc... the point is that a salary cap would prevent this without hurting any of the managers playing the game "normally" so it's a win-win to me and I don't really see the advantage of not having a salary cap. Why wait until another manager decides to do it when there is a pretty easy way to stop the possibility of anyone spending more than $x on weekly salaries? I think I was here when he got banned. Another player was also cheating but didn't get banned right? But as someone else here commented, that was really an issue with cheating to get money, not so much about being frugal and having a bank. My first instinct was to back away from a cap, but I agree it would provide insurance for such behavior. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Meitheisman
|
posted: 2017-01-07 02:50:49 (ID: 100095304) Report Abuse |
 |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
mikemike778
|
posted: 2017-01-07 09:49:38 (ID: 100095313) Report Abuse |
|
Apply inflation.
Increase all revenue and costs by between 1 and 3 pc a season. Would devalue savings. Combine this with a sensible salary cap and add more ways to spend money. I would honestly ditch the coach max points. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< < 1 2 3 13 14 15 > >| | |
| Main / Discussions / Limiting the financial power of rich teams | |
