Post
by Robyklebt » Wed Nov 10, 2010 11:53 am
? Not sure I know what you're asking.?
Why we have the rule now?
Because it was introduced shortly after or together with the tax system. To lessen the impact of non-training youth riders mostly but not only on big rich teams that bought youth riders. After that it was never changed, even if the situation changed.
Why we still have it? Because it was never cut.
Why it should be cut?
1: It never did what it was intended to do. Basically it didn't work. 70% tax teams selling a non training climber for example is still an exception. Even getting 45%, more often than not they are kept. The rule is used mostly by smaller teams, where then they can replace the fired non training star with a new 21 year old. Replaced 1:1 or even making a profit. Taking away the 15% wouldn't change the fact that a non training star can be replaced by a smaller team. Which is good. But by covering maybe only 90%, only 80% (of the new rider, sell 4 Mio, get 60%, 2,4 Mio, buy a new one for 3, ok now it's get 75% get 3 Mio, 1:1, new you cover less and 40% is not that small anyway)etc. it would stop the extreme "toprider" crazyness a bit. Not a bad thing. Every month there are many 23-24 year olds sold, just because they are not training "perfectly" Only 84 with 24, sold. Missed one training due to risk with 22? Sold. Only 83 with 23? Sold. All riders that still can become 86 or even more. Actually an 84 end of 24 most likely will become an 85 during his career, don't know the percentages, so don't know if an 86 is even likelie, but think it actually is. The result is that instead of offering big teams an "insurance" not too lose too much money on bad training, we offer small teams an insurance against non perfect training. You can buy and rebuy x riders, sell them if they don't respond well to risk at 22, sell them if they have a average training with 23-24, meaning +4. Which then increases the pressure on all other teams on the youth transfer market as well, PLUS floods the TM with "wasted talents". Riders that could still have had success, but won't. That won't be bought since they cost more than a 21 year old, they have a name already, and just trained average or slightly below average. That's the result of the rule. That's not what it was introduced for. The rule failed. If the new goal is: Insurance with profit for slightly below average training for small teams: keep it. But don't thing that's a worthy goal.
.
2: Youth riders are the most popular riders anyway. The incentive, buy youth, is unnecessary. They are the potentially strongest riders. They are the cheapest riders that can be stars.
You see, I answer even if I don't actually know what you are asking.... is the answer to your question in there?
Kraftsystemrevision! Include the distance!
Basics reform: Give blue a chance!
Don't punish bugusers. We all have to use bugs, since most of them are declared as "features"!
Got a carrot from FL. But they threaten to take it away now.