| Forum » Suggestions » For the economists | Date | |
|---|---|---|
|
Username
4820 msgs.
Best scorer
|
So all the economists out there who didn't got the chance to become the finance minister of their country, use those cobweb covered brains and sheel out some suggestions to curb this rising inflation... P.S. I want this thread to be a serious one. (This is Specially for Hew and Reb) List of Suggestions :- 1. Tax to be imposed on capital gains + Tax slabs 2. Payment of signing bonus = 1 season salary to player on every resign and purchase, max contract length = 2/3 season. 3. Rotation of all 50+ avg free agents in market rather than deleteing after first 3 day auction. 4. Low quality juniors from scout. 5. Different formula for calculating release clause. (page 3) 6. Loan rate = twice deposit rates. Edited by bluegene 07-09-2011 10:33 Edited by bluegene 07-09-2011 12:35 Edited by bluegene 08-09-2011 07:16 Edited by bluegene 08-09-2011 07:25 |
07/09/2011 10:31 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
921 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
Introduce taxes? In fact any payment that works as a proportion of earnings rather than a fixed amount is what I'd look at. | 07/09/2011 11:14 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
1835 msgs.
International
|
Looking from a simple demand supply angle... Cost of players (specially CFs) is rising. THe demand for CF is approx 2 per team. There are quite a few teams which train 5-6 CFs. So, in a season's time or so, I think cost of 60-70 avg CF should come down. This is, provided that the CFs are not deleted from the system.. There is major deflation of IMs and DFMs.. if one is careful, you can steal a 65/20 for 10-12 million. Again, its not worth training them anymore, and the cost will rise after 2 seasons as many teams are shying away from training them. Also, people like Gunner will reject a midfielder simply coz of high Charisma.. But one of the major reason for inflation is the amount of players that get deleted each season. It is okay to delete a 30-45 avg player as fresh managers get them. But when a 50+ player is deleted, it is really a loss, as supply is reduced, demand is still there, and hence the price rise. As for the amount of money flowing in the game, I dont think i am one to comment, as my deposits rarely see a sum of over 10 million... |
07/09/2011 11:19 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
1835 msgs.
International
|
slipi said: Introduce taxes? In fact any payment that works as a proportion of earnings rather than a fixed amount is what I'd look at. A tax something like 5% * (Revenue from selling a player - cost at which a player was bought - total salary paid to the player) |
07/09/2011 11:21 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
921 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
sanyam said: slipi said: Introduce taxes? In fact any payment that works as a proportion of earnings rather than a fixed amount is what I'd look at. A tax something like 5% * (Revenue from selling a player - cost at which a player was bought - total salary paid to the player) Thanks  But I mean it's clearly not working. Where was the last country you saw that had capital gains tax of only 5%? How about income tax (stadia?). |
07/09/2011 11:25 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
1835 msgs.
International
|
It will be tough to calculate income because how do you factor in the fact that Players are non-depreciating assets.. And that is where majority of managers invest.. Also, if you decrease the income across all levels, the effective inflation will remain the same.. (ie), if you tax 20% on all income, and players' cost come down by 20%, it is actually useless... I think the best way to approach is the demand-supply model. |
07/09/2011 11:30 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
921 msgs.
MVP of the game
|
sanyam said: It will be tough to calculate income because how do you factor in the fact that Players are non-depreciating assets.. And that is where majority of managers invest.. Can't you model players with depreciation relative to the age range 18-28 for effective service? Training only matters upon resale, which is where capital gains tax can come into play? Dunno exactly, my economics knowledge is pretty basic... |
07/09/2011 11:39 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
1835 msgs.
International
|
slipi said: sanyam said: It will be tough to calculate income because how do you factor in the fact that Players are non-depreciating assets.. And that is where majority of managers invest.. Can't you model players with depreciation relative to the age range 18-28 for effective service? Training only matters upon resale, which is where capital gains tax can come into play? Dunno exactly, my economics knowledge is pretty basic... Too complicated, and can be unfair at times.. Atleast thats what I think.. and this taxation Might lead to higher prices. Since the bargaining power is with the seller, he will price the player higher so as to get more money in return. One more method to control the cost can be that the buyer has to pay one season's worth of salary to the player at the time of execution of the deal.. This will also be applicable for re-signs. This will disable the managers from paying very high salaries for just keeping Hostile Clause too high.. |
07/09/2011 12:06 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
4820 msgs.
Best scorer
|
If the seller has also to pay taxes it will drain money out of the system. It will at first increase the prices as seller has to recover his cost of tax as well. But as players will have less money, any amount out of system will be effective in some way. in long run. Also proper slab rates in taxes must be implemented, like :- 0 - 10 mil = 5 % 10mil - 25 mil = 7.5% 25mil - 50mil = 10% 50mil + = 20 % I know there is an increase in tax rates as the amount goes beyond 10 mil which I discussed before too in another thread. But a fixed slab will be better and more transparent. |
07/09/2011 12:13 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
|
Username
1835 msgs.
International
|
Tax Slabs are okay. But I dont think flat taxation will solve the issue.. Consider this. You have 5 million income per game. A player you want to buy is worth 30 million.. (ie), 6 games worth of income. Now, because of new taxation, you have 3 million per game. Now, if the value of same player is less than 6 games, (ie) 18 million, the inflation would be considered to come down. I really doubt if that will happen. Taxation exclusively on sales of players (Capital Gain), might work, because then, managers will invest more in stadium and such.. |
07/09/2011 12:21 |
| - Div/Gr | ||
1
