Press conference
Trade/Lending players:
Team made a trade offer
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
Started to play in a new team after a trade
--
69 S
3 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
Started to play in a new team after a trade
--
69 S
3 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
Started to play in a new team after a trade
--
69 S
3 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
Started to play in a new team after a trade
--
69 S
3 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
Trade offer accepted
--
69 S
3 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
Trade has been reverted by the "Fair play" committee
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
The Fair play committee decided that the trade is unfair and teams are given a warning.
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
两个8潜球员互换，怎么就不公平了？换飞升的就不公平了？
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+2
如果觉得不公平了，请明确违背了哪一点？
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+2
Press message hidden by federation volunteer or administrator
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+2
在交易撤销前，还浪费了两个俱乐部各两小时的时间讨论，请问，这两个小时你和交易双方讨论的结果支持这个交易是不公平了？
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+2
需要我告诉你球员的内潜，凭什么？这个球员以后到市场上你们交易委员会的人知道内潜，这公平吗？？
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+2
感觉这交易没什么问题
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+2
I think it is UNFAIR to tell FPC members the detail potentials of our players. FPC members are users, FPC members use their power to get more information, that is UNFAIR!
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+3
请你们委员会过盛的精力用在对的地方，管一管那些谁都能一眼看得出来明显不公平的交易，而不是吃饱了没事做盯着这些怎么都无所谓的正常交易上。
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+2
we can also discuss FPC make decision on their own opnion but not rules in 
https://www.basketpulse.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=13765
--
69 S
4 d.
https://www.basketpulse.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=43&t=13765
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+2
FPC decision is black box and black box will control the game！
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+2
FPC MAKE DECISION BY GUESSING OTHER THAN EVIDENCE, WHAT A SHAME! 委员会没有任何证据，靠猜想做判断，真是nb大了!
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+2
We all want to know how PFC works. There are rules that can be relied upon, rather than subjective judgment. Knowing the rules of judgment will allow the team managers to do the deal well, rather than making a stupid deal! Everyone knows the rules, and the workload of PFC will not be too big. Otherwise, PFC has countless cases to deal with every day, because managers don't know where the mistake is, and how to make a transaction is right.
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+4
I want to improve, I want to be a good trader, how to do it?
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+2
I want to know the voting results. For example，1 thinks fair，6 thinks unfair. It seem unfair. However,in 6 unfair votes, 2 thinks A win, 4 thinks B win. It's still a fair exchange.
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+1
First, I want you to relax a bit. The trade was just reverted, the users not punished. The consequences are low, you can go and make a better trade. The voting result was 5 revert vs 1 not revert. The other questions here will be adressed later.
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
"5 revert": they may have different opinion about who wins in this trade. maybe 3:2 or 1:4
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+1
现在的交易系统就和个傻子一样，建议取消交易系统，
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+2
5 revert: I suggest each vote notes why it should be revert and which team benefits.
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+1
Stop. It's not the Wish-What-You-Want-Show. We have other things to attend to in our lifes. You already had some answers about the doubts of the committee in private messages. Now please stop spamming every available place. Annoying.
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+0
we talk about fair. 5 vote revert may have different opinions about who wins in this trade. If not 5:0 and this is a generally fair trade
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+1
private messages show most of your own opinion. FPC make a decision on evidence or rules not just simple votes
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+1
https://www.basketpulse.com/en/Press-read-11130774.htm here is a vote. you can see most team managers thinks it's a fair trade
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+1
I think a good point is raised here，if a trade happened between team A and team B, and some members in FTC think it is good for A while some think it is good for B, they might all vote ‘unfair’ but in fact this case should be fair I think. I suggest FTC members give points for trade instead of just vote. For example, they can give 1-5, 1/5 means totally good for A/B, 2/4 means a little good for A/B, 3 means fair for both, and then we can average to points given by FTC members, the average between 2-4 might be considered fail trade.
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+2
Last statement about this trade.
Committee members from 5 different countries decided this deal was unbalanced.
We looked at a lot of factors to come to this conclusion. I will point them out here and not discuss this any further.
Only on first sight does this trade look balanced. Two 8 pots for two 8 pots. Now look closer and you will see that Da Mo Ke Li gives up disproportionally much:
1) It's two of his own scouted, chinese players for two foreign players. Scouted + inland players give a huge discount on contract extension, no matter if by extending before market or during the limited market.
2) When talking to Da Mo Ke Li he pointed out that two two players he traded away were not useful to him to play in his Youth Team. The PG Drofinsky he receives, however, will not be useful for him, too, making this deal effectively a 2-for-1 trade. Additionally, Drofinsky will cost Da Mo Ke Li 10.000€/week (for 50 days), while his two chinese players only cost him 1300€/week.
3) La La and Shei, on the other hand, would be instantly more useful to Kick Ash than the players he exchanged. They are also very cheap this season, so once they get the Youth Team reduction after 50 games, they will be very cheap in the next seasons for Kick Ash, no matter the extension costs on the Limited Market.
4) The chinese players have athletic inner potentials. 15yo Hartwig too. Now apart from the points described above Shei is and will be a much more useful player than Drofinsky (positionally and also already statistically). Hartwig and La La are practically the same type of player (Hartwig will grow to around 210cm like La La), but Hartwig is 15, while La La is 21. So La La will be useful much earlier than Hartwig, which means that the costs for retaining Hartwig until he's useful are much higher. Ergo La La's trade value right now is higher than Hartwigs.
Both chinese players posess more value not only compared individually, but even more combined. A better deal for them could and should be got; as this was the trade favored one site disproportionally while not making much sense for the other site as much financially as competively. (Personally, I am disappointed to see experienced users from WL1 make such a trade. I expected more thoughtfulness at this level.)
After all, all this complaining (and other petty actions like spamming reports in the wake of this revert) is a glaring sign of weakness. Nothing happened, really. No punishment, just a revert. So live with it and just make better trades that benefit both teams and all will be fine. If you are doubtful about offering/accepting a particular trade, there is always the possibility to contact a member of the FPC to find out how we would decide. You even did this today with another trade already, Kick Ash, and still you keep complaining. Very disappointing. -- 69 S 4 d.
Committee members from 5 different countries decided this deal was unbalanced.
We looked at a lot of factors to come to this conclusion. I will point them out here and not discuss this any further.
Only on first sight does this trade look balanced. Two 8 pots for two 8 pots. Now look closer and you will see that Da Mo Ke Li gives up disproportionally much:
1) It's two of his own scouted, chinese players for two foreign players. Scouted + inland players give a huge discount on contract extension, no matter if by extending before market or during the limited market.
2) When talking to Da Mo Ke Li he pointed out that two two players he traded away were not useful to him to play in his Youth Team. The PG Drofinsky he receives, however, will not be useful for him, too, making this deal effectively a 2-for-1 trade. Additionally, Drofinsky will cost Da Mo Ke Li 10.000€/week (for 50 days), while his two chinese players only cost him 1300€/week.
3) La La and Shei, on the other hand, would be instantly more useful to Kick Ash than the players he exchanged. They are also very cheap this season, so once they get the Youth Team reduction after 50 games, they will be very cheap in the next seasons for Kick Ash, no matter the extension costs on the Limited Market.
4) The chinese players have athletic inner potentials. 15yo Hartwig too. Now apart from the points described above Shei is and will be a much more useful player than Drofinsky (positionally and also already statistically). Hartwig and La La are practically the same type of player (Hartwig will grow to around 210cm like La La), but Hartwig is 15, while La La is 21. So La La will be useful much earlier than Hartwig, which means that the costs for retaining Hartwig until he's useful are much higher. Ergo La La's trade value right now is higher than Hartwigs.
Both chinese players posess more value not only compared individually, but even more combined. A better deal for them could and should be got; as this was the trade favored one site disproportionally while not making much sense for the other site as much financially as competively. (Personally, I am disappointed to see experienced users from WL1 make such a trade. I expected more thoughtfulness at this level.)
After all, all this complaining (and other petty actions like spamming reports in the wake of this revert) is a glaring sign of weakness. Nothing happened, really. No punishment, just a revert. So live with it and just make better trades that benefit both teams and all will be fine. If you are doubtful about offering/accepting a particular trade, there is always the possibility to contact a member of the FPC to find out how we would decide. You even did this today with another trade already, Kick Ash, and still you keep complaining. Very disappointing. -- 69 S 4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+8
LALA Is there any difference in how the salary will become at least 10,000 EU after 35 days? The youth team's first-line team of waste materials can't be used or it costs money. Finally, it is bought out.
--
69 S
4 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+2
“5 different countries decided this deal was unbalanced” but they do not agree on which team benefits on this trade. so it is generally a fair trade. you can see a survey here https://www.basketpulse.com/en/Press-read-11130774.htm, you could over simplified it as “4 different countries decided this deal was unbalanced”，actually 2 thinks one team benefits and 2 think the other team benefits more. Please do not over simplified this.
"Nothing happened, really. No punishment, just a revert." You think revert a trade is not a big thing. If you made a fair trade, then I revert it. You will know the feeling.
You can revert one exchange, then you can revert second exchange. In my opinion, over simplified voting and revert some fair trade will hurt team managers. -- 69 S 5 d.
https://www.basketpulse.com/en/Press-read-11130774.htm, you could over simplified it as “4 different countries decided this deal was unbalanced”，actually 2 thinks one team benefits and 2 think the other team benefits more. Please do not over simplified this. "Nothing happened, really. No punishment, just a revert." You think revert a trade is not a big thing. If you made a fair trade, then I revert it. You will know the feeling.
You can revert one exchange, then you can revert second exchange. In my opinion, over simplified voting and revert some fair trade will hurt team managers. -- 69 S 5 d.
--
(Translate)
(Translate EN)
+3