How much does form affect price?

[ur_land]

In response to my scoffing at the listed price of a GK in the transfer thread (partially b/c of his form) pattrick posted this:


Form doesn't affect the selling price. If a player's form is disastrous, it can get excellent in just three weeks' time, and a player in excellent form could see his form dropping to disastrous in three weeks as well.

The only reason to pay more for players in solid/excellent form is if you need them for one match only, but you buy players for the long term.

Actually, I think form does affect the sale price. Although I have not made a large survey, it has been my experience with both sales and purchases that the same skills will sell for a lot less if that player is in weak or lower form than in higher form, a lot less being in the ballpark of $50k-$100k for players in the solid/excellent range.

I don't think it should affect the price that much (although a player in weak form will probably take a lot longer to get to excellent than three weeks), but no (human) market behaves fully rationally. What is y'alls experience with form and price?

[junjunforever]

In response to my scoffing at the listed price of a GK in the transfer thread (partially b/c of his form) pattrick posted this:



Actually, I think form does affect the sale price. Although I have not made a large survey, it has been my experience with both sales and purchases that the same skills will sell for a lot less if that player is in weak or lower form than in higher form, a lot less being in the ballpark of $50k-$100k for players in the solid/excellent range.

I don't think it should affect the price that much (although a player in weak form will probably take a lot longer to get to excellent than three weeks), but no (human) market behaves fully rationally. What is y'alls experience with form and price?

agreed form affects price... especially players that freshly popped.

[phillips10]

form certainly does have a big effect on price, I was surpsied to see this argued in the transfer thread.

only in a perfect world could you buy a player on weak form and have him on excellent form in three weeks, you might want to double that waiting period to be safe. To me it doesnt make sense to buy players on weak form or lower, unless your looking really long term or found a real bargain.

[Qamle]

I had put a player on the TL last season who buddy rated as a $205k player. He had wretched form. I could not sell him for 100k. I tried twice. The good thing is, now his form is back on it's way up.

[kuhnscoot]

Yeah I've had trouble selling players in bad form, the good part is though, I got a good trainee pretty cheap because he had been in bad form, I trained him and got his form back up and sold him for a lot more. It's kinda nice to get a steal like that.

[Pattrick]

Well, form affects TSI and TSI affects selling price a bit, but I think it's stupid to give more money for a player in passable form than for a player in weak form.

I once bought a player in excellent form. During his first training, his form dropped to inadequate. I also bought a player in wretched form once, who rose to inad in his first training. I mean, form can change so fast that there's no reason to spend more money on it. The exception being a player that you need immediately, e.g. to replace an injured player.

Moreover, buying players is something you do for the long term. At least, if I buy a player, I plan on keeping him for at least a season before buying a better player on his position. Now tell me: how often does it happen that a player whose form is poor in week one remains in poor form for more than a season if he plays every week?

[ur_land]

Moreover, buying players is something you do for the long term.

I completely agree that when buying players for the long term you shouldn't worry about form. But you shouldn't overpay either. My point on the transfer thread was that you can find similar skilled (and similar in form) goalies for much cheaper than that guy wanted. Which I (may have clumsily) phrased as being overpriced for his skill and form.

[Pattrick]

I completely agree that when buying players for the long term you shouldn't worry about form. But you shouldn't overpay either. My point on the transfer thread was that you can find similar skilled (and similar in form) goalies for much cheaper than that guy wanted. Which I (may have clumsily) phrased as being overpriced for his skill and form.
Well, if you can choose from two identical players in different forms, you should indeed go for the better form if he doesn't cost a lot more...

[junjunforever]

actually, i think the problem is that people over estimate the difference in TSI in disastrous or wretched form. Many people will take a look at TSI to see if they are generally half way through their highest skill, or just freshly popped. Disastrous form players have TSI that's really low and its harder for people to expect their TSI in passable form.

[Pattrick]

actually, i think the problem is that people over estimate the difference in TSI in disastrous or wretched form. Many people will take a look at TSI to see if they are generally half way through their highest skill, or just freshly popped. Disastrous form players have TSI that's really low and its harder for people to expect their TSI in passable form.
Just an example: during yesterday's training, one of my players went from disastrous to weak form. His TSI increased by 77%.

[Craig P]

Well, form affects TSI and TSI affects selling price a bit, but I think it's stupid to give more money for a player in passable form than for a player in weak form.It depends on how much more money you mean. A player in weak form may not be ready to help your team immediately, so managers may prefer to stay away from such players, preferring somebody that won't require a (possibly extensive) reclamation. The reduced demand is certain to translate to lower prices.