Unrealistic contract negotiation evolution

[Prej]

Yeah, that's a mouthful, but hear me out.

So, there's a defender I'd like to sign. He's slightly interested, but it's worth a shot.

I agree to him being an Important Player (their demand), and throw in a language course.

Their opening demands are as follows:

That's cool, I can take that.

But.

Let's change that release clause.

By one tick.

€500k.

That's 1.5%.

This is their reaction:

Ok, let's take a closer look at this:

For a change of €500k in a minimum release clause, they demand an increase of:

- €81k monthly wage

- €900k signing on fee

- €175k agent fee

- €3.75k appearance fee

- €0.9k unused sub fee

All this for a change of €500k (or 1.5%) of the minimum release clause.

Did that escalate pretty quickly or am I missing something here?

 

But ok, let's do that again.

Same situation, but let's change the unused sub fee by one tick. That's €0.1k. Yep, a hundred Euros.

Their reaction:

 

Call me old-fashioned, but I wouldn't say that's a reasonable counteroffer to a change of €100 (in an unimportant clause) in a contract deal worth a quarter million Euros a month.

[Freakiie]

It is indeed unrealistic that you would negotiate the clause down by 500k.

Wait, that wasn't your question?

The player is slightly interested, basically telling you his terms and you can take them or leave it. No idea what his agent stats are or his relationship with you, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's not the most patient agent either. Yes it is a bit arbitrary that any lowering of their initial secondary demands raises the wage demands that much, but then again, unrealistic input, unrealistic output, no real life club would go to the agent and be like "yeah this looks great, but I'm afraid we're gonna have to pay €100 unused substitute fee less, is this fine with you?". They'd just think you're taking the **** with them.

[Prej]

1 hour ago, Freakiie said:

It is indeed unrealistic that you would negotiate the clause down by 500k.

Wait, that wasn't your question?

The player is slightly interested, basically telling you his terms and you can take them or leave it. No idea what his agent stats are or his relationship with you, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's not the most patient agent either. Yes it is a bit arbitrary that any lowering of their initial secondary demands raises the wage demands that much, but then again, unrealistic input, unrealistic output, no real life club would go to the agent and be like "yeah this looks great, but I'm afraid we're gonna have to pay €100 unused substitute fee less, is this fine with you?". They'd just think you're taking the **** with them.

Got you there, amigo.

So, let's just say I wanted to be a really good employer and sweeten the deal with a Team of the Year Bonus. I'm being a very generous guy, so I'm offering the highest bonus I can, €875k.

Everything else stays as in their initial demands.

Their response:

 

So, as per your logic of "unrealistic input vs. unrealistic output", the unrealistic aspect here is the fact that I want to pay him even more than he's demanding, therefore I'm surely taking the ****, right?

 

EDIT: You know what? Let's not be mean to the poor guy, Christmas is coming, let's offer him a higher wage than he's initially demanding.

Instead of this

let's bless him with this

Merry Christmas, Jose Cordoba! Looking forward to you signing the cont...

Oh, I see. You didn't like me taking the **** and offering you a higher wage than you demanded, sorry for that.

Edited November 19, 2023 by Prej

[Ngoc]

I got a lot of crazy stuff when buying player for my u18/u20 they are extremely cheap so I practically redo both the team at start of the first year and I see player going do 110k euro I offer 1/3+ in this case 40k they always accept but sometimes they come back wanting crazy amounts but if I offer 45 they are okey and they were replaying asking for 200+ if I offer 40

And in few cases I have to accept what they ask for 110k because any number I try eve 105k they will rebut they want 400k but if I accept 110k they are fine 

I think they are simulating moody or unreasonable managers that doesn’t like to be talk back or haggle 

[Brasilia88]

As a Gloucester manager, Vanarama South, these numbers for one dude can hold up my entire club and then some. 

[Dagenham_Dave]

@Prej - When you discussed this with the agent beforehand, were the demands in yellow (non negotiable)? If so, changing anything can annoy the agent leading them to ask for more. Perhaps the player has had a salary in mind, and the agent has talked him into accepting the lower salary ONLY if all the other demands are specifically met. And the example of you offering him more salary, perhaps by offering more money than before, the agent is thinking, well if you can afford that, you can afford what my client initially wanted. Pays to pay VERY close attention to the agent's response in the little pre-contract 'remote chat' you have with them, particularly when you're involving players with those sorts of telephone numbers as wages. 

Or it could just be wonky coding. 

In situations where it's the latter, I build it into the narrative to make it sound like the former. You get less annoyed that way 

[Razor940]

Thankfully this only happened to me once.

[potbellypigs]

It seems like you went looking for this, as if you know that this happens.

If you play FM long enough then you'll find out that you can click certain buttons in a certain way to get a certain outcome. I know that for example that if I click buttons a certain way when it comes to a signing on fee and a massively reduced weekly wage, then I can get a desired outcome. The outcome of changing the minimum release clause is as such, regardless of the silly outcome that you're seeing. 

[Prej]

@Dagenham_Dave You can see their initial demands in my opening post. The only locked option was the contract length. Everything else was open.

[Cometdude]

What is really weird is that the minimum fee release clause favours the player yet they throw a tantrum. 

 

Playing in lower leagues I regularly have to reduce release clauses to get players to accept lower wages and I would consider that to be sound logic. This appears to be a bug in my mind. 

[Prej]

1 hour ago, Cometdude said:

What is really weird is that the minimum fee release clause favours the player yet they throw a tantrum. 

More so offering him a substantially higher wage.

- I'd like to earn €5.

- I'll give you €8.

- F*** you, I want €15 now, or else!

[KingCanary]

I'm experiencing this at the moment.

Am trying to sign a player on a free having just secured promotion to the Premier League. His initial demands seem reasonable (£54k p/w, 3 years, signing on fee not bad) but in the interest of realism I ask to put in a 25% top division wage drop.

This leads to his agent not only removing the clause I added but demanding £66k p.w along with a larger agent, signing, appearence, clean sheet and unused sub fee. 

I'd get asking for increases in some parts in order to make the relegation wage drop more bearable but to remove that and substantially increase his demands in every field? Huh?

[Meanonsunday]

I'm not sure why some people feel the need to defend this kind of basic error in logic.  There are a few principles in negotiating that we should all be able to agree and that should be built into the way agents behave:

1) If we are negotiating then the agent must have some contract that he will accept.  He is a professional agent not some amateur doing it for ***** and giggles.

2) The agent does not start with an offer equal to the lowest price he will accept.  He would be immediately fired by the player for such a stupid tactic; giving away your lowest price is the worst thing you can do as a seller.  You or I might do this negotiating with a friend or family member, but a professional always starts higher ... because maybe you will accept.

3) The agent NEVER asks for more than his initial proposal.  Only a small child negotiates this way.  No, he does not  get "angry" and ask for more, he is not a big baby.  If the session ends with no agreement then its reasonable that he might put up the price in a future negotiation, but not within a single session.

4) If at any point in the session you offer as much (or more) than the original proposal he will accept.  Again, the player would fire him (and probably sue) if he rejected a price the player wanted to accept and then ended negotiations.

[Dagenham_Dave]

17 hours ago, Meanonsunday said:

I'm not sure why some people feel the need to defend this kind of basic error in logic.  There are a few principles in negotiating that we should all be able to agree and that should be built into the way agents behave:

1) If we are negotiating then the agent must have some contract that he will accept.  He is a professional agent not some amateur doing it for ***** and giggles.

2) The agent does not start with an offer equal to the lowest price he will accept.  He would be immediately fired by the player for such a stupid tactic; giving away your lowest price is the worst thing you can do as a seller.  You or I might do this negotiating with a friend or family member, but a professional always starts higher ... because maybe you will accept.

3) The agent NEVER asks for more than his initial proposal.  Only a small child negotiates this way.  No, he does not  get "angry" and ask for more, he is not a big baby.  If the session ends with no agreement then its reasonable that he might put up the price in a future negotiation, but not within a single session.

4) If at any point in the session you offer as much (or more) than the original proposal he will accept.  Again, the player would fire him (and probably sue) if he rejected a price the player wanted to accept and then ended negotiations.

That all makes sense if all you are offering the player is a basic wage, but when you add in the mountain of other clauses, this is where figures can rise and fall more drastically. It's maybe not ultra realistic (you're dealing with code, not people after all) but if the agent and the player have agreed on a package, they have every right to move the goalposts if you start to hardball them, particularly if you've already agreed beforehand with the agent on what the player wants. 

Now, I'm neither an agent nor a player, so I've no real idea how this works behind the scenes in real life (and let's be honest here, neither do you), but I'd wager there's a lot of back and forth between clubs, agents, and players before a deal is inked, and even disputes over previously agreed figures. 

The system isn't perfect, and like anything else, can always be improved, but this is where you need more intelligent AI to be able to deal with this. Some people would be happy following the FIFA model of the players and agents blissfully accepting 90% of your proposals first time, few of which make sense. 

[Prej]

12 hours ago, Dagenham_Dave said:

That all makes sense if all you are offering the player is a basic wage, but when you add in the mountain of other clauses, this is where figures can rise and fall more drastically. It's maybe not ultra realistic (you're dealing with code, not people after all) but if the agent and the player have agreed on a package, they have every right to move the goalposts if you start to hardball them, particularly if you've already agreed beforehand with the agent on what the player wants. 

Ok, but offering him a higher starting wage makes them move the goalposts too, which doesn't make any sense, or does it?

 

[GlennLUFC]

On 21/11/2023 at 12:43, Prej said:

More so offering him a substantially higher wage.

- I'd like to earn €5.

- I'll give you €8.

- F*** you, I want €15 now, or else!

Bit like the famous Seth Johnson to Leeds story where he and his agent had agreed on the way over to Leeds to ask for £15k a week. 
 

Leeds offered him £30k a week. Take it or leave it. Johnson and his agent left the room, came back and said £40k and you’ve got a deal. 
 

Johnson signed for the Leeds that afternoon. 

[Dagenham_Dave]

2 hours ago, Prej said:

Ok, but offering him a higher starting wage makes them move the goalposts too, which doesn't make any sense, or does it?

 

As I said before, that's probably wonky coding, but it could be the case of (as an example, not related to the numbers in your save)

Player wants 80k p/w

Agent has agreed with player this is unlikely so has agreed that if club offers 60k, they will take it

Negotiation screen comes along with 60k and you decide to bump that up to 65k

Player thinks, 'Well in that case, I'll just ask for what I originally wanted'. 

I have no idea if the coding in the background is as advanced as that, but even if it isn't, that's the narrative I would build in my head. 

[KingCanary]

On 23/11/2023 at 08:43, GlennLUFC said:

Bit like the famous Seth Johnson to Leeds story where he and his agent had agreed on the way over to Leeds to ask for £15k a week. 
 

Leeds offered him £30k a week. Take it or leave it. Johnson and his agent left the room, came back and said £40k and you’ve got a deal. 
 

Johnson signed for the Leeds that afternoon. 

The version I heard is they sat in stunned silence at the £30k offer as it was double what they were hoping for and the chairman paniced at this reaction and added another £10k.

Saying that I've also read that this is a total urban myth.