|
Post by Genomico on Jan 18, 2012 19:28:02 GMT 1
Great work! My cyclists can't wait to receive their orders for the first races
|
|
|
Post by frozen on Jan 18, 2012 19:29:48 GMT 1
Announcement is up Sponsordeals should be improved now. Sign money isn't, still 80/60/40, and weekly has, if at all, barely increased. Didn't remember those exactly though, so they may be slightly higher, but not recognizable. You sure they're correct now?
|
|
|
Post by Il Padrino on Jan 18, 2012 19:34:38 GMT 1
Well actually, I just looked in the code, and it seems that sponsors look at the final result of the previous season. The initial sponsorcontract (at the start of season 1) took place 20 to calculate the amounts, so with your final result the weekly money should already be higher. For the sign money, sponsors look at which division you won, which was still 5th. I'll discuss this with Nike... there are arguments to do it like this, or to look at the division of the new season instead.
|
|
|
Post by frozen on Jan 18, 2012 19:40:36 GMT 1
Well actually, I just looked in the code, and it seems that sponsors look at the final result of the previous season. The initial sponsorcontract (at the start of season 1) took place 20 to calculate the amounts, so with your final result the weekly money should already be higher. For the sign money, sponsors look at which division you won, which was still 5th. I'll discuss this with Nike... there are arguments to do it like this, or to look at the division of the new season instead. if the weekly money is higher, it's at best 1k a week. Sign money would not be so much of a problem, if it is higher than in 5th, but that would also mean that relegees from 4th would have better sponsors than promotees from 5th. my Sponsors have 80/11984, 60/15984 and 40/17984. I also think due to this that they all increased linearly, which would mean the long term sponsor would get more and more disadvantageous, since the others increase just as much. Its weekly should increase more than the others. again, I didn't remember the weeklies from before the update, so I'm not sure, but it would be 16k a season at best. I could do without those, which is usually a bad sign for a reward.
|
|
|
Post by VeryRisky on Jan 18, 2012 20:09:24 GMT 1
Announcement is up Sponsordeals should be improved now. They look the same to me or am I confused: 80k/12899/1y 60k/16899/2y 40k/18899/4y
|
|
|
Post by VeryRisky on Jan 18, 2012 20:10:22 GMT 1
How does this compare to someone that finished 5th last season?
|
|
|
Post by VeryRisky on Jan 18, 2012 20:13:02 GMT 1
For the sign money, sponsors look at which division you won, which was still 5th. I'll discuss this with Nike... there are arguments to do it like this, or to look at the division of the new season instead. for this season it won't matter too much, but next season you would have a big disadvantage to those that promoted from 5 as to those that stayed in 4. I think the next season's level makes more sense (also in a real-world logic as a demoted team will hardly be a better sponsorship target than a promoting one.
|
|
|
Post by NikeBoy on Jan 18, 2012 21:43:53 GMT 1
Well, the sponsor looks at the achievments at the end of the contract, in order to provide a new contract. So, for a team that has won its division in 5th, he proposes a contract which is equal to a first place in 5th division. If you finished 10th in 5th division, he will offer less.
The amount of money is based on position and division. If you have won your division in 5th and you choose a 1 year contract, the weekly money will be more or less the same as finishing 10th in 4th. So this means that a team which relegates will get less than one that promotes from a division lower !
|
|
|
Post by fingers on Jan 18, 2012 22:21:15 GMT 1
Is it safe to sign a contract yet?
|
|
|
Post by lee1950 on Jan 19, 2012 0:19:14 GMT 1
Well actually, I just looked in the code, and it seems that sponsors look at the final result of the previous season. The initial sponsorcontract (at the start of season 1) took place 20 to calculate the amounts, so with your final result the weekly money should already be higher. For the sign money, sponsors look at which division you won, which was still 5th. I'll discuss this with Nike... there are arguments to do it like this, or to look at the division of the new season instead. I agree, you can make arguments either way. Seems my Sponsor would not want to give me Div 4, 1st place sponsor money until seeing how I perform in Div 4, but might want to reward me for promotion.....so..... Would taking an average between the sponsor offer for #1 in Div 5 and the sponsor offer for midrange (say #10, or #11 for example?) in Div 4 make sense? It sounds like the sponsor offer for last in Div 4 is less than for 1st in Div 5, so maybe the difference between the current offer (linked to Div 5 finish) and a midrange (10th, 11th) offer in Div 4 is not so much. We might be happier with the offer on the table atm instead of a mid-range Div 4 offer. Sign money: $80,000 Weekly money: $12,899 Duration: 1 season
|
|
|
Post by frozen on Jan 19, 2012 9:26:30 GMT 1
The way I see it, if it were a real team I'd manage, I'd show those Sponsors the finger and tell them to shove off.
A promotion must make for at least 20% higher sponsorship deals. That's an unwritten rule in Sponsorship. Usually this is even exceeded. If my previous sponsor would offer me 80k sign money (as before) and only a 10% raise in weekly money (at best), I'd go ask the grandma-shop around the corner and get a better deal.
It just doesn't make any sense now. The increase, despite success, is insignificant. No Team with an economically skilled or even logically thinking manager would sign that deal.
|
|
|
Post by rarau on Jan 19, 2012 15:00:59 GMT 1
A promotion must make for at least 20% higher sponsorship deals. That's an unwritten rule in Sponsorship. Usually this is even exceeded. If my previous sponsor would offer me 80k sign money (as before) and only a 10% raise in weekly money (at best), The increase, despite success, is insignificant. ok i ask you smth if you have a team born in 2013 and this team want to reach 1.1 how many years need? 10 real life years? it´s normal that in division 5 to have from sponsor per week 10k and in division 1 number 1 to have 200k? (it´s only an example)
|
|
|
Post by frozen on Jan 19, 2012 15:27:49 GMT 1
A promotion must make for at least 20% higher sponsorship deals. That's an unwritten rule in Sponsorship. Usually this is even exceeded. If my previous sponsor would offer me 80k sign money (as before) and only a 10% raise in weekly money (at best), The increase, despite success, is insignificant. ok i ask you smth if you have a team born in 2013 and this team want to reach 1.1 how many years need? 10 real life years? it´s normal that in division 5 to have from sponsor per week 10k and in division 1 number 1 to have 200k? (it´s only an example) That's an average increase of 40%. Yet if you check my calculation, you recieve maybe 30k weekly. But you'd also recieve more sign money. The thought behind it is simple: The new contracts give you 16k more in a season, approximately. If you want, you can have my 16k, because they don't matter at all. With 20% more (weekly and sign), it'd be approximately 50k, which would be an amount that will not be the deciding Point in a Balance, but it is recognizable. You get what I mean? The Sponsors are a side-dish, but they should be progressively enough so they are more than just decorative.
|
|
|
Post by VeryRisky on Jan 20, 2012 12:02:16 GMT 1
could we be told the date of the first race. otherwise I'm continually checking the site to see if the calender is up as it takes a bit of time to work out your squads for the first couple of weeks.
|
|
|
Post by Mardandoo on Jan 20, 2012 12:44:15 GMT 1
It doesn't matter, VeryRisky, you'll lose anyway .
|
|