bumpuss wrote: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.
Re: New season sponsorship
Post by Randall » Sat Jul 13, 2019 9:49 am
Bumpuss being a high ranked manager and having played the game for many years you are possibly in the luxurious position of having the revenue to hold a high cash balance and have the choice of spending it or not. I don't think it is the case that the folk with a low balance have made the decision to spend it all , they just never had it in the first place! (By the way I am not criticising you playing the game a long time or having reached a high rank. That's what we all aspire to - to enjoy this game for a long time and to be the best and defeat our peers in cups and leagues)
Relevant to your point (but something you could only dig deeper into based on some actual number rather than pontification) is what we could do to give folk with a lot of money the opportunity to use their cash. Suspect like in real life this is ever more elite leagues or cups which give more fame but require greater money to be successful in (in effect a Level 1+) But as i dont have that experience I'd leave that up to be debated by yourself and others in that boat. In the meantime my focus is just on some stats so we can see where we are as a basis for discussion /debate particularly on the Bob Cratchett's of the game instead of the Jacob Marley's!
The amount being spent as you mentioned above will be very low by the bottom 50 - you cannot spend what you have not generated in the first place!. It will be a fraction of the spend of the Top 50 . The 'economy' of Stumped (as in real life) is a very diverse one - multi economies - based around length of membership and league position. I'm not saying that could or should be changed , but if we have a lot of folk with more money than they can spend and others leaving because they dont make progress based on a lack of funds ( I am not saying that myself - it is general conjecture that I have seen and heard on the site for all the time I have played) then it would be useful to see those numbers in black and white as the basis for informed debate - rather than the usual 'gut ' feels we are all necessarily reduced to in the absence of numerical fact.
The points you make at the end are good example of how managers at the beginning of the game 'waste' money and certainly there are many good posts to try and help them avoid overspend in these areas in the early days and suggestions (which run from laissez-faire to nanny state in their approach . Again in that way Stumped mirrors human nature in terms of there are many folk who fall to the lure of easy credit a good life and over spend and end up going bankrupt!