andoz2000 Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 Hi First of all let me say that up until now, when I have bought a player I have always payed the full amount up-front (Example £20m). I have always thought of it as being nice and tidy and therefore I wont have to worry about money still being payed out for a player after 12,24,36 or 48 months. But I am now not sure that this is the best way to complete a transaction. I stumbled across a thread (can't be 100% sure where it was) that suggested that if you payed in monthly installments (eg. £10m up-front and then another £10m over 48 months) then it would financially, work out better for you in the long run when it comes to the start of the next season in respect transfer budgets. Could anyone clarify if this is the best approach when purchasing a player in regards to receiving a larger transfer budget next time around? Thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
baker.simon Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 Hmm, im not so sure. Spreading payments over years is a disaster waiting to happen, and players that finance these huge deals will be finding out when they are shelling out money every month for years to come. I can only see this having a negative effect on your balance. Money goes out during the season, pushing your balance lower meaning that more of your prize money is used topping that up to the level it was. I generally try and buy players outright but if i do need to stretch my bidget, i always at least make sure i pay as much as i can up front leaving less of a monthly outlay. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hehehemann Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 So with a $30m transfer budget and you buy a player for $10m upfront then $10m over 24 months how does that reflect on the clubs transfer budget now and over the next few seasons? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheInvisibleMan Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 Depends how rich your club are. If you're someone like Man City then paying over 48 months won't harm you at all because our chairman will just top the budget it up. If you aren't so rich then you can spend a lot of money but it will ruin your club completely. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katarian Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 So with a $30m transfer budget and you buy a player for $10m upfront then $10m over 24 months how does that reflect on the clubs transfer budget now and over the next few seasons? In that example you lose $15m, $10m upfront and $5m from the monthly payments, from this seasons budget and $5m from next seasons. I nearly always try to pay all the money up front for incoming transfers. Outgoing I quite like monthly payments to reduce the clubs monthly losses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hehehemann Posted December 24, 2009 Share Posted December 24, 2009 Ok. Thats what I thought. I always have lived with the attitude if you dont have the money now you dont get it. Better to apply that philosophy to FM too Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.