Continuous deflation?

[Dell19]

The problem with training is that in general people are training twice as many players as they need. Some train less because of lack of interest etc but people skill trade as well to even the numbers.

The second factor would be that the user base is growing and getting older so that the more established teams are getting better and the average quality increases so that previously 'high' skills are no longer as valuable.

Players do exit the game through retirement but they would probably be around 32 and if training lasts 4 or 5 years then there are three training cycles before the first lot of trainees retire.

New players increase demand by starting at the bottom however refering back to the second point, the game has an aging number of teams that gradually make up a larger percentage of the user base.

Finally teams can quit and take their players with them although they may decide to sell some and mainly it seems to be new teams that quit the most.


The obvious problem of all this is that teams that stockpile money will end up being able to buy much better players with that cash so we all may as well save our money, however that eliminates the point of the game. In terms of trading players it is okay since you can still buy and sell at the same levels however a stadium upgrade will gradually become more expensive compared to player purchases, as will the other fixed costs. Ideally this situation needs to resolved, perhaps by reducing the effectiveness of training?

[Shabbaman]

Hm, yeah. Undoubtly Kemal already calculated all of this ;) The idea that prices are dropping is strenghened through the usual end-of-season deflation.

Ugh, can't type, I'm ill today :(

[Kemal]

Hey, I'm no economist, you know!

I do think that the current market situation is at an all-time low, since it is has been several months since hattrick has stopped its explosive growth with regard to new members, whereas now the teams that have entered the game a few season ago begin to sell big time at about the same time. More players on market means lower prices, but as you say it goes for all types of players, so your training should keep the same value with regard to improving the team, I suppose.

Btw, I also think the problems are heavily exaggerated, I sold an outstanding PM with inadequate passing for 1.475M, a magnificent striker with weak passing for 2.375M, and several excellent forwards with no side skills for 150K this season. I can recall buying an excellent striker with no sub skills for <200K over a year ago as well, so it does still seem possible to sell at decent levels.

However, undoubtedly fixed costs have relatively gone up compared to training effectiveness, which is the reason I've already cut my coaching staff in half, and only upgrade the stadium when I have money to spare and know the stadium will be filled almost to the max even after the expansion.

[Pastorius]

How come noone has asked me to work some economist-magic?


Well then, no soup for you


Some thoughts though:

surplus supply (as in supply exceeding demand) usually should lead to prices dropping or inventory increasing (inventory can only increase for a finite amount of time)

The economy seems to be based on training to sell for profit.
Much like the real football economy, it may be a paper tiger.
However - much like in real life - there are fluctuations in the market.
Which should mean, using a variation of Col's famous words: sometimes it grows and sometimes it doesnt.

The general tendency seems to be positive growth though. Based on my having looked at a few posts about the activity you guys have had in terms of supply and demand.

Deflation is a very strong effect - and IMO it is too soon to announce a new trend as deflation.
Stagflation perhaps, but I think more time is needed to give a fundament for saying that it is indeed deflation.

Also, the reduction in new teams entering Hattrick could result in a stabilisation where price more appropriately reflects real value of a player. Which could mean in medium run that growth will still be positive, but smaller than before, as there is no element to create "overheating".

[Shabbaman]

Well, in fact there's not a real problem if prices would drop for all players. If you get only half for your forward, who cares, because you only need to pay half for your midfielders as well!
Unfortunately that wasn't the case: the market for forwards crashed earlier than that of midfielders. I think that's because the midfield is (seen) overly important in hattrick, so when income dropped people were postponing their forward purchases. Now, if I look at the market now prices have dropped for midfielders as much as they have for forwards.

The same point can be made for forwards compared to defenders: everyone and their mother is complaining about the drop in prices for forwards, and the huge amount of forward training. In fact there are only 8768 (or 1%) more forward trainers than defender trainers. Although the average team needs more defenders than forwards (resp. 3 and 2), training defenders is a lot more efficient. To be exact, 34% more efficient (talking about skill increase, not revenue) so that should balance it out perfectly.

On the same line of thought, training midfielders is 22% more efficient than training forwards, but you need a lot more midfielders than forwards. Counting wingers as half (not completely fair, but midfield trainers don't count their wingers as full training spots either) you need 4 midfielders, which is exactly twice as much as the number of forwards. Now, coincidentally there's twice as much midfield trainers as forward and defense trainers. So where does that 22% efficiency go? It looks like midfield trainers are the lucky bastards of hattrick in more than one aspect.

To conclude, the problem is not really caused by a difference in supply and demand, but by a failing evaluation of worth. IOW people aren't buying with their full minds, just on feeling.

[ProPain]

I;m no economist but I feel an effect of decreasing prices since I started 1,5 years ago.

I think the exposive growth of new hattrick participants is strengthening this effect as very low level teams only need very average, barely trained players to perform well. This means they train players faster than their teams need improvement. So basically they not training 50% for themselves and 50% the market but more like 25% for themselves and 75% for the market. So more trained players=more supply=lower prices. I think this effect is quite strong even because even I have sold more than half my trainees to just buy back an older player of equal rating for less money.

The fact that you train more than you need should be compensated by players that drop skills and retire but I have the impression that the skill drop rate is much lower than the skill gain rate from training. This means that we're in an upward 'average TSI' spiral, which will be compensated by lower prices per TSI point. Now TSI is limited by trainable years, so once the majority of the teams consist of players that have their 'maximum TSI for their age' the market should stabilise. With all those new players that could still take quite a while.

For those who play battrick: here you can witness this effect in another life phase. All participants are new, all players are crap, everybody needs trained players. So atm prices are high especially for players that have been trained by early participants and so have reached high levels that are still unique in the game. However in battrick it also appears that average skill drop rate is lower than skill gain rate so I expect similar effects as in hattrick in a few seasons.

[socralynnek]

I'm no economist either...

My explanation why prices drop:
If you train a player from formidable to outstanding, you think he'd be worth 500000 Euros more. But where should that money come from?
The players are getting better more than money comes into the system. If as much money came into the system as the assumed worth of a training then the prices would stay the same.
I guess, with the league reform we'll see a slowing down of the price decreasement, as the teams are getting more money via spectators.
But the prices might still go down as more and more money goes out of the system, either by higher wages or by managers saving the money for the moment when they have to pay high wages.

[Kingreno]

The problem is the salaries!!

Salaries increase very very rapidly arround the Titanic-ET-level.

Several years ago only the first 40 teams of the bigger countries had to deal with an economy based on Salaries; meaning they had to keep their head just above the water, and often save up for a couple of seasons to have a go at the title, and then disappear into the 3rd-4th division again. (There are exceptions but in general teams that were champion 3 to 2 seasons ago are now a division lower.)
As teams get better more and more have to base their economy on salaries, meaning that when they do make profit, a large sum is not transferred to another team, but to the players' bankaccounts!
This is where the problem is, as our teams don't have to take note of salaries all that often (YET!), we still generate a healthy positive ammount in those 2 weeks (one home match, one away) which we spend on a player from another team! Good for the economy! But the more big teams there come, the more money disappears to the bankaccounts of the players.
At this time, more money is leaving the game via Salaries and other expenses then is generated by Income. The only variable spending is the transfermarket (you cannot just stop paying for your stadium...) so that is where teams take a tighter budget...so the TM "collapses"

If I were Hattrick I'd somehow try to reinvest a part of the lost money into the game, and there are several ways to do just that.

[ProPain]

dunno KR, that would affect the really high level players (titanic+) more then the below titanic players as the teams buying those arent on a salary based economy. Seems to me all prices are dropping. Also I know the hattrick economy as whole is analysed after each season to prevent money drains/stacks on a macrolevel.

[Dell19]

quote:Originally posted by Shabbaman

Well, in fact there's not a real problem if prices would drop for all players. If you get only half for your forward, who cares, because you only need to pay half for your midfielders as well!

Thats true until you want to use the money to upgrade your stadium, pay player wages, promote a new coach or invest in the youth academy.

quote:
To conclude, the problem is not really caused by a difference in supply and demand, but by a failing evaluation of worth. IOW people aren't buying with their full minds, just on feeling.


Perhaps although if people are training twice as many players then values should decrease overtime which they have in my mind.