retired_tricia_askew

I am just starting a new game with Luton in Div 2 - £1m in debt !! - I am restricted to signing free transfers & will eventually need to raise money to reduce the debt.
- Is it acceptable as a LLM to have half an high when signing frees on the possibility they may eventually bring in some money ?
- How long ethically should you leave it before considering selling a player to bring in funds but still maintain LLM realism ?

retired_marcias

Picking up free players just to sell them is rarely worth it in my experience. Transfer fees at that level are tiny, esp. for a player who was available to be picked up for free if people wanted them and the wages you have to pay them in the meantime make it more of a financial failure than success!

retired_kswansonwoolf

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>As long as freebies where found in a legit way (scouted and pointed by scouts) it's not a problem.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, it is. You don't see real life managers signing players, having in mind that they will sell them later on, in order to keep the balance afloat. It's not realistic.

retired_tricia_askew

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kfoolmoon:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>As long as freebies where found in a legit way (scouted and pointed by scouts) it's not a problem.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, it is. You don't see real life managers signing players, having in mind that they will sell them later on, in order to keep the balance afloat. It's not realistic.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I can't agree - I think managers/clubs DO sign young players with an economic view that they will eventually sell - e.g Crewe

retired_kswansonwoolf

They sign them in order to help them develop and become valuable to the team. They don't sign them just to sell them 6 months later and get the cash from them. They only sign players in order to use them- right away or in the future.

I thought lutonspurs implied the second case.

retired_tricia_askew

I take your point Kfoolmoon - I think I should give a new player atleast a year to see how they perform/settle before even considering selling them for any reason whether it be profit or lack of performance - however, if the player decides they want a transfer, or a club bids for him that will be different !

retired_berrysale

Teams sign players who are likely to play for the club.

They always however, take into consideration their possible sell-on value.

retired_sandra

Division 2 is pushing it immensely for LLM. There are two whole leagues beneath it that you can play in.

retired_tricia_askew

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Nobby_McDonald:
Division 2 is pushing it immensely for LLM. There are two whole leagues beneath it that you can play in.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You're a hard man Nobby ! - Luton are my team so seemed a logical choice, they ARE £1m in debt & they have lost their best player - I think that is quite challenging, but only time will tell !

[This message was edited by iajafer on 14 February 2004 at 23:32.]

retired_kswansonwoolf

Edit your post now. NO PLAYER NAMING in here!!