Why not multi-season or lifetime prices for teams? Topic

This post has a rating of , which is below the default threshold.
Show
the_oat
Posts: 294 (0)
Hall of Famer
104 1 1 106
Prospect
Brilliant.
8/10/2010 6:28 PM
rdierkers
Posts: 106 (0)
Hall of Famer
36 177 135
Prospect
unsure i follow the logic...a player is more vested in a free (one time payment) season than in a season they purchased for $25? The game is no different than any other organization - join a league that is well run and you'll have a good experience.  poorly ran, not so much.

$25 for three months of entertainment is fairly cheap.
8/10/2010 6:32 PM
punkzip
Posts: 56 (0)
Rookie
2 1 6
Prospect
Posted by rdierkers on 8/10/2010 6:32:00 PM (view original):
unsure i follow the logic...a player is more vested in a free (one time payment) season than in a season they purchased for $25? The game is no different than any other organization - join a league that is well run and you'll have a good experience.  poorly ran, not so much.

$25 for three months of entertainment is fairly cheap.
I suppose it is always possible to find a good league if you spend enough time looking, which a newbie probably isn't going to do. Yes, IMO a manager will be more invested in a league if they pay for multiple seasons upfront. Psychologically, most of us want to get our "money's worth" and if you pay 50 bucks upfront you are less likely to abandon your team after 1 season. 

I don't agree that HBD is "cheap'. You have to ask, compared to what? If you compare it to OOTP, it isn't cheap at all. Nor is it cheap compared to a high-end online sports sim like Football Manager Live. Nor is $25 cheap if there is not much entertainment, which can happen with a bad team. 
8/10/2010 6:49 PM
rebelt
Posts: 61 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 70
Prospect
Posted by rdierkers on 8/10/2010 6:32:00 PM (view original):
unsure i follow the logic...a player is more vested in a free (one time payment) season than in a season they purchased for $25? The game is no different than any other organization - join a league that is well run and you'll have a good experience.  poorly ran, not so much.

$25 for three months of entertainment is fairly cheap.
$25 for 3 months is cheap until you want multiple teams. Some people can (and do) shell out a ton of money for it, but I'm not willing to do it. It's funny how this works, but they'd get more of my money if it were a little bit less expensive because I would have more teams and could justify the cost.
8/10/2010 7:14 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect

rebelt, if $8 a month scares you off, you shouldn't have more teams.   Anyway, if I pay $100 for a meal, I'm going to take my time and eat it.   If I pay $10 a meal, I'll stop eating it if something else I need/want to do pops up in the middle of the meal.

Same concept works for a HBD team.    The cheaper it gets, the less people will care about them. 

8/10/2010 7:37 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
And, without reading all of punkzip's post, the same thing applies to any cheapening of the cost.  I'd like cheaper teams because who doesn't want to pay less for everything?  But I also want the other owners in my worlds to have enough time/money invested into their teams so that they'll stay interested even if they're losing.
8/10/2010 7:39 PM
mitchrapp
Posts: 807 (0)
Hall of Famer
106 20 14 109
Prospect
25 is cheap. I live in the Midwest and 25 gets you nothing here. Cost 60 for Madden. And if you think HBD is nothing more than a text game then I think you're playing it wrong. 1 movie a month is more than HBD. Meal at Mickey D is running at 6, probably more elsewhere.

And as much I like OOTP, it's not as detailed and time consuming (thus the entertainment value) as HBD.
8/10/2010 7:49 PM
punkzip
Posts: 56 (0)
Rookie
2 1 6
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 8/10/2010 7:39:00 PM (view original):
And, without reading all of punkzip's post, the same thing applies to any cheapening of the cost.  I'd like cheaper teams because who doesn't want to pay less for everything?  But I also want the other owners in my worlds to have enough time/money invested into their teams so that they'll stay interested even if they're losing.
If I have a losing team that is not going to make the playoffs, I am likely to more interested in that team - for example, trading for the future, if I have already "prepaid" for 3 seasons as I can hope to have a better team for the next 2 seasons.  On the other hand, if I have only paid for the current season, I might decide that i should just cut my losses and not renew for the next season. We are really debating a matter here which can't be settled until it actually has been tried. Would you agree that many managers currently abandon losing teams after one season? What would you tell a manager who says that he just does not want to pay $25 to manage the team next season as it is going to take longer than that to get better? 
8/10/2010 8:16 PM
mitchrapp
Posts: 807 (0)
Hall of Famer
106 20 14 109
Prospect
If you are one of those, "cut your losses" then good luck and trying to get in the better worlds. You poser.
8/10/2010 8:31 PM
punkzip
Posts: 56 (0)
Rookie
2 1 6
Prospect
Posted by mitchrapp on 8/10/2010 7:49:00 PM (view original):
25 is cheap. I live in the Midwest and 25 gets you nothing here. Cost 60 for Madden. And if you think HBD is nothing more than a text game then I think you're playing it wrong. 1 movie a month is more than HBD. Meal at Mickey D is running at 6, probably more elsewhere.

And as much I like OOTP, it's not as detailed and time consuming (thus the entertainment value) as HBD.
I don't see how Madden is comparable. Madden is a much more polished product which offer unlimited play for that $60.

The advantage of OOTP over HBD is that is customizable and has a better graphical interface. Of course, a big advantage is that you can play as many leagues as you want for no additional cost. Disadvantages? When you play in online league typically multiple games are simmed at once so this decreases the anticipation relative to HBD. The player ratings are not as detailed either. I'll put in another plug for Football Manager Live, it is the best online sports management game I've seen by a wide margin, and I don't even like soccer that much.
8/11/2010 12:21 AM
nymetman
Posts: 20 (0)
All Star
15 29
Prospect
Posted by punkzip on 8/10/2010 8:16:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 8/10/2010 7:39:00 PM (view original):
And, without reading all of punkzip's post, the same thing applies to any cheapening of the cost.  I'd like cheaper teams because who doesn't want to pay less for everything?  But I also want the other owners in my worlds to have enough time/money invested into their teams so that they'll stay interested even if they're losing.
If I have a losing team that is not going to make the playoffs, I am likely to more interested in that team - for example, trading for the future, if I have already "prepaid" for 3 seasons as I can hope to have a better team for the next 2 seasons.  On the other hand, if I have only paid for the current season, I might decide that i should just cut my losses and not renew for the next season. We are really debating a matter here which can't be settled until it actually has been tried. Would you agree that many managers currently abandon losing teams after one season? What would you tell a manager who says that he just does not want to pay $25 to manage the team next season as it is going to take longer than that to get better? 
It could open up a major issue to be locked in to a team for 3-5 seasons if the World collapses.  They'd then have to get move involved in deciding when to consider a World "dead" to allow owners to transfer remaining prepaid seasons to other teams.

Excellent post though.  I'd have to agree that as a marketing scheme it could work very well.  They could induce extra business and by attempting to limit turnover could also strenghten competitiveness.  And I disagree that lower price automatically means that people will feel "less invested" in their team.  If I spent $20 for a team instead of $25 just for commiting to it for 3 seasons the dollar and change I save each month is meaningless compared to the extra week or month that I can avoid reaching for my credit card to indulge in a hobby.
8/11/2010 12:31 AM
Jtpsops
Posts: 15788 (0)
Hall of Famer
759 1 2 2 145
Prospect
don't you already get some kind of credit if you stay in the same world for 5 years, or something like that?
8/11/2010 1:14 AM
joshkvt
Posts: 6200 (0)
Hall of Famer
664 99
All Star
Most of the investment in a team is time, not money, so whether it's $25 or $18 or $32 probably doesn't make that much difference. Most of us probably make the cost of the team in an hour or three of work, but spend many multiples of that amount of time running our teams. If I'm willing to put the time in to properly manage my team, I'm not about to abandon it because it's not $5 cheaper.
8/11/2010 3:48 AM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
If owners are forced to stick with teams for 3-5 seasons, what happens when they lose interest?   Maybe real life gets in the way.  Maybe they don't like where the world is headed.   If they've already paid, and can't get a refund, do you think the absentee owner is good for a world?
8/11/2010 7:02 AM
123 Next ▸
Why not multi-season or lifetime prices for teams? Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.