New season sponsorship

Stomalomalus
Posts: 324
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2017 7:20 am

Re: New season sponsorship

Postby Stomalomalus » Thu Jul 11, 2019 4:48 am

I started in the last throws of s14, when I was relegated from div3. I only played 3 games.

Last season, S20, I came 2nd in div1 sod and div1 dev.

It's possible to rise up relatively quickly. I've always paid attention to my finances, trying to not spend too much on filler where ever possible. I made a lot of small mistakes, too, signing mediocre players because I felt I wanted their skill set. These set me back, I feel.

What I'm trying to say is... There is a good balance in this game between rising up and reaching the top.

Randall
Posts: 113
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2017 9:20 pm

Re: New season sponsorship

Postby Randall » Thu Jul 11, 2019 7:09 am

mike778 wrote:
Randall wrote:
Randall wrote:Clearly we don't have the insight you have into the details Rob we can only guess at the reasons for your cash graph - but potentially average cash might only reflect the rich getting richer - ( the poor remain poor and those at the top of the tree continue to increase their bank balance as if you stay in the game and make it to Div 1 you find yourself with a healthy excess of income over costs).

The cash graph runs from 2015 - as the burn rate of young teams is high but veteran teams is low it can well be this graph merely represents the continuing accumulation of cash in the top echelons of the game.For those at the top £100k is neither here nor there , they are waiting to spend millions on a DEV player with the potential for 50+. Increasingly larger sums would potentially be held 'waiting for that opportunity'

What would be interesting is to know the average cash balance of (for example) the bottom ranked (active) 50 teams

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To continue the theme I would suspect the demographic of the 'Stumped' population has developed considerably over the 4 years since 2015 (rather like our own world population over a longer period in terms of average age )

A distribution which would have begun looking like a pyramid will have possibly evolved into a tower with a rather thin base. 4 years ago those who had been playing the game for less than a year would have made up a far bigger % of the total number of players.

as each year goes on , those who play gain more experience and more money. Those with less than 1 year experience remain in the lower levels and will (by either the passage of time or churn) not be the same players who were then in 2015 /16/17 or even 18. They will remain small fish in a goldfish bowl where the older teams have got forever bigger.

Put simply those at the bottom will probably have around the same average cash amount give or take a few thousand - those at the top will have more average cash - meaning the average cash balance increased even though the standard deviation around the average cash balance for all active players will have increased. The net purchasing power of the 'small fish' will have decreased.

Without seeing the stats it is a supposition but tha's the fun of the forum! It would (again) certainly be interesting to see the average cash balance year on year of active teams by smaller bands say - 0-50, 51-100, 101-150, 151-200 and so on.


Well I suppose in theory, the game design stops teams getting bigger. Members are capped at about 1750 so once you are there then your income isn't going to go up. You can hoard cash I suppose but not really get bigger.

One of the good things about Stumped is that a new team can build their way up and overake older teams. There are only 8 spots in division 1 per nation so if you can shoulder barge someone at the way then a new team can move up the bigness ladder and older teams down it. There should be a finite number of spots for 'big clubs'.

On the flip side, there are 64 division 1 teams if you count all countries and somewhere between 150 and 240 active teams. That a big percentage of teams in a Division 1. Ideally you want Division 1 to be harder to get into. Know its been discussed before but a tighter structure with say 4 time zones would be better. You don't really want situations like some of the asian leagues where its easy to get to division with the associated financial benefits. Maybe franchises might solve it providing the franchises were in the less densely populated nations.

Ideally, it would be good to have something else to spend your money on as well. Although not down the facilities route as that wedges a gap between the haves and have nots.


Good points Mike. you have opened out a discussion on what new challenge and way to spend cash could be made at the highest level. I don't have the experience to speak on that but it seems a good point. you mentioned largeness in terms of member numbers , but largness in terms of bank balance is not capped. My specific point really was to counter the argument that a comparison of average cash balance demonstrates that everyone is better off. average cash balance is just total cash / number of active members. In any given city you can have an increase of people living under the poverty line whilst at the same time the number of people who bought rolls royces increased. there is always plenty of talk and heresay on the forums about how hard the game is to begin with cash wise and if this is a significant factor in manager 'burn'. The data used to create the 'average cash balance' would be ideal to confirm what active teams at different levels actually have as cash balances and hence whether it is a factor.

DEV-R0b1et
Site Admin
Posts: 1116
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2016 11:16 pm

Re: New season sponsorship

Postby DEV-R0b1et » Thu Jul 11, 2019 10:56 am

The game hasn't split the cash by top 50 and next 50 for very long (I set it us about 2.5 seasons ago), but, I can tell you, the richest 50 teams (which change each week) in that time have gained a little money (~10%) but the next 50 (51st-100th richest) is basically consistent since that measure was started - its actually very similar in pattern and value to the overall average - this does suggest that anyone out of the top 100 is getting a little poorer.

I've never been against increasing the money lower down, just very wary of making camping viable, something I consider to completely ruin many such games.

Stomalomalus
Posts: 324
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2017 7:20 am

Re: New season sponsorship

Postby Stomalomalus » Thu Jul 11, 2019 12:46 pm

DEV-R0b1et wrote:The game hasn't split the cash by top 50 and next 50 for very long (I set it us about 2.5 seasons ago), but, I can tell you, the richest 50 teams (which change each week) in that time have gained a little money (~10%) but the next 50 (51st-100th richest) is basically consistent since that measure was started - its actually very similar in pattern and value to the overall average - this does suggest that anyone out of the top 100 is getting a little poorer.

I've never been against increasing the money lower down, just very wary of making camping viable, something I consider to completely ruin many such games.


Oh yes. It's really really good that it's relatively easy to get to Div1 but the rewards when you're there are really good. And if you manage it well, you can create something really lasting. It feels more realistic.

DEV-R0b1et
Site Admin
Posts: 1116
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2016 11:16 pm

Re: New season sponsorship

Postby DEV-R0b1et » Thu Jul 11, 2019 1:23 pm

GOod, that's the aim. Aim is that it is NEVER worth losing on purpose.

Randall
Posts: 113
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2017 9:20 pm

Re: New season sponsorship

Postby Randall » Fri Jul 12, 2019 12:59 am

DEV-R0b1et wrote:The game hasn't split the cash by top 50 and next 50 for very long (I set it us about 2.5 seasons ago), but, I can tell you, the richest 50 teams (which change each week) in that time have gained a little money (~10%) but the next 50 (51st-100th richest) is basically consistent since that measure was started - its actually very similar in pattern and value to the overall average - this does suggest that anyone out of the top 100 is getting a little poorer.

I've never been against increasing the money lower down, just very wary of making camping viable, something I consider to completely ruin many such games.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That's odd - when i look at the graph you sent it shows average cash balance at £2m million in Jan 2017 and then £2.5m in June 2019 - an average increase of 25% for all teams

I'm not sure how that is reconciling to the 10% increase you mention for teams in positions 0-50 , 0% for 51-100 and the undisclosed fall for those at the bottom. It would be much easier to follow if we could see the average cash held by the 0-50, 51-100 101-150 and so on each time for the past 5 half seasons since you set it up.

as an example: 0-50 Jan 17 £5m Jun 17 £5.1m Jan 18 £5.2m Jun 18 £5.3m Jan 19 £5.4m Jun 19 £5.5m (inc 10%)
51-100 £0.5m £0.5m £0.5m £0.5m £0.5m £0.5m (no change)
151-200 £20k £19k £18k £17k £16k £16k (dec 20%)

I don't have a fixed view on increasing the money or not , but knowing how much money these teams have on average compared to the past and to those higher up the rankings would help (me anyway) have a more informed view based on financial facts as to how easy/difficult it is to compete and how that trend is evolving and whether it gives authenticity to the views that teams leave because they dont have money.

Of course I appreciate why they dont have money and how they spend it is a different kettle of fish ( buying too highly skilled players/ coaches/ covers/ too many in the squad etc which comes up frequently as well!)

DEV-R0b1et
Site Admin
Posts: 1116
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2016 11:16 pm

Re: New season sponsorship

Postby DEV-R0b1et » Fri Jul 12, 2019 10:02 am

Without meaning to be as harsh as I am about to be:

Randall wrote:That's odd - when i look at the graph you sent it shows average cash balance at £2m million in Jan 2017 and then £2.5m in June 2019 - an average increase of 25% for all teams

I'm not sure how that is reconciling to the 10% increase you mention for teams in positions 0-50 , 0% for 51-100 and the undisclosed fall for those at the bottom.[...] and so on each time for the past 5 half seasons since you set it up.

DEV-R0b1et wrote:The game hasn't split the cash by top 50 and next 50 for very long (I set it us about 2.5 seasons ago)


That's where your error occurred, and why they reconcile.
During this time there's been very little overall inflation.

DEV-R0b1et
Site Admin
Posts: 1116
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2016 11:16 pm

Re: New season sponsorship

Postby DEV-R0b1et » Fri Jul 12, 2019 10:04 am

I also believe that the top 10 isn't an ideal measure, it can be quite volatile (in terms of who is top 50) on market activity.

Randall
Posts: 113
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2017 9:20 pm

Re: New season sponsorship

Postby Randall » Sat Jul 13, 2019 9:49 am

DEV-R0b1et wrote:Without meaning to be as harsh as I am about to be:

Randall wrote:That's odd - when i look at the graph you sent it shows average cash balance at £2m million in Jan 2017 and then £2.5m in June 2019 - an average increase of 25% for all teams

I'm not sure how that is reconciling to the 10% increase you mention for teams in positions 0-50 , 0% for 51-100 and the undisclosed fall for those at the bottom.[...] and so on each time for the past 5 half seasons since you set it up.

DEV-R0b1et wrote:The game hasn't split the cash by top 50 and next 50 for very long (I set it us about 2.5 seasons ago)


That's where your error occurred, and why they reconcile.
During this time there's been very little overall inflation.



Hi Rob

I did not think you were harsh at all. I made a schoolboy error for some reason of assuming half a year was a season ! Average cash balance in the calendar year Jul 18 - Jul 19 looked to have increased about 10% as you say.

My main point is not really about the timings it is about the relative share of income between teams. This average cash balance is just a number that pops up when you divide total cash in the game by number of active teams. It doesn't really tell you that much about how old the average team now is , and I suspect there is a big correlation between average age of a team and the size of its bank balance. another correlation will also obviously be what division(s) your team is playing in.

Lets assume for simplicity there are 150 active teams and they split into Top 50, Middle 50 and Bottom 50 and this stayed the same in the past year.

In Jul 19 the Top 50 teams could have an average cash balance of £7,400,000 the middle 50 £99,999 and the bottom 50 £1 ! - this would create an average cash balance of £2.5 m.

I suspect the increase in average cash balance is driven by an increase in the average cash balance in the Top 50 (you said yourself it is the top teams who are increasing their wealth - the bottom teams have a reduced average cash balance)

So really the dates and the timings are secondary - it is more relevant to consider the incredible disparities in wealth.

Before considering if anything or nothing could or should be done about that the first point is to actually have the figures to base any ideas and conclusions upon.

Could you provide the average cash balances you have calculated for the end of each season since you have been collecting this data for Top 50 / next 50 and so on down to the bottom

Great!

bumpuss
Posts: 339
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2016 12:30 am

Re: New season sponsorship

Postby bumpuss » Sun Jul 14, 2019 9:30 am

I dont think the average cash balance is relevent...

If you have a high cash balance, it just means you are not spending much - this is the case most of the time. The only other time if you have a big cash balance is if from the transfer market (a big positive cash balance).

The amount being spent is always more relevent when judging the strenght of an economy.

How much are we spending on coaches? Player wages? Ground maintenance. Has this increased over time? (it should hopefully). This is the money that is "lost" from the game.


Return to “Suggestions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests