Online: 38
00:15 GMT         Day 3 of 90, Season 69    

When a transfer goes sour
by Finz, at 29/4-15 - 10:34 GMT


  Written by Finn Löwik of jj
  
  When you are a young professional you want the best and when you have the chance to get the best you do not hesitate to grab that opportunity. This is a golden rule for any professional career.
  People are pleased with the chances you get and congratulate you with your move. It is not so in the world of sports.
  
  Recently we have had some heated discussions about what is reasonable and what is not. Ethics in the world of sports, the most contradicting term but, as I am naive and believe in a situation where everybody can be good to each other, I have come to terms and support the idea.
  When a transfer is made it will be done in public and if you do it in the back alleys behind a shroud of darkness you are likely to be exposed.
  
  The rule however is that a transfer should hold a fair price. A fair price is a price that is decent for both the seller and the buyer. When there is no agreement there is no deal, one party could not decide if the fair price offered for his services was fair enough.
  So far, so good.
  
  But what if you

want to strengthen your squad and have a nice rider in sight. You contact the team owning the rider and start negotiations. Of course you do not want to start giving your highest offer. You are not silly. You give him your first offer and the other team with counter it. In the end you agree on selling and buying the rider for the fair price. Not too much for the buyer and not too little for the seller. There is an agreement. The problem in the world of sport is, there are not two parties involved in a transaction. The complete community is involved.
  
  And thus the fair price is not a fair price between two parties completing a business agreement but a popularity quest. When you are popular you can get a more fair price than if you are not. More teams will likely to feel left out and complain about the deal you have made. Your impopularity will mean most of the competition will deny you your deal and you are left out with nothing, if you are lucky and, with less if you are impopular to the bone.
  
  This will happen when a rider is sold, too low in the eyes of the competition. You have strengthen your squad with a great rider and still have money left to make another

great acquisition.
  
  But what if there is a manager that wants to strengthen his squad and contacts another manager to buy one of his riders and the manager offers a transaction that exceeds your wildest dreams. The other manager is willingly parting of his rider for a price that is welcomed and maybe even pushed higher depending on the greed of the manager in situ. This also results in a price that is fair, because two parties agree on a price. The difference however with above mentioned is that we have a price that is too high. Nobody will argue that, nobody will outbid that and everybody will think, I can get better for less.
  
  And here we are having an issue. A beneficial deal is always beneficial when other people than the parties involved, buyer and seller, feel they are left out. And never beneficial when a deal could hold future benefits. You always want to sell high and buy low. And this means you will always argue on a, in your eyes, beneficial deal that is too low but, never a deal that is too high.
  
  Ethics in sports, even those are questionable.
  
  
  
  



Comments


The Broad Backs at 10:45 29/4-2015
  Great article, but popularity of managers does not play a role whatsoever.


V02maXXers at 10:53 29/4-2015
  High profile managers are more under scrutiny.


NECFTW at 11:05 29/4-2015
  Spot on! I applaud you.
  
  Rules can't be rules without set boundaries.


1 2 Cycle at 11:06 29/4-2015
  "When a transfer is made it will be done in public and if you do it in the back alleys behind a shroud of darkness you are likely to be exposed."
  
  That was the problem not being a high profile manager.


Kremer at 11:48 29/4-2015
  It's simple. Any other manager than slico would not be punished.


NightmareChaos at 11:56 29/4-2015
  I think you would too :D


Kremer at 12:34 29/4-2015
  ok just we two


NECFTW at 12:41 29/4-2015
  *cough,ahum.


Kingstowm at 12:41 29/4-2015
  "I am naive and believe in a situation where everybody can be good to each other.
  
  Of course you do not want to start giving your highest offer."
  
  You're not naieve and you don't believe in a situation where everybody is good to eachother, otherwise you would give your highest offer.
  
  Cherrypicking and double standards to prove a point that's not there. I call that unethical.


NightmareChaos at 12:55 29/4-2015
  But your point is invalid because you can not even write your team name correct


Schiavi di Don at 13:41 29/4-2015
  Finn, Finz, am I the only one thinking they might be.. ;)


Nikoline at 14:59 29/4-2015
  Buying cheap from a team taking a break/quitting without going public with the deal = You have something to hide.


Opium Fueled at 15:13 29/4-2015
  Free private deals!


nonnies at 17:44 29/4-2015
  Paraphrasing : "All deals are beneficial , but some deals are more beneficial than others"


Toronto Dragons at 18:43 29/4-2015
  Personally I think that the transfer mechanism should be changed completely. You should simply put a rider up for auction, in the app, and then teams bid. At a certain date/time the auction closes and the rider and funds transfer. The end.


millskids army at 23:34 29/4-2015
  I agree with Toronto dragons, it is that simple to get it right.


Dreigiau Pro Cycling at 23:47 29/4-2015
  I like Toronto Dragon's idea as well. That is how transfers are done on all other sports management sites, and it could help weed out unethical behavior as well if the transfer system was more structured.


Rigana at 04:45 30/4-2015
  I also agree with Toronto Dragons. How many teams even look at the private deal threads?


English Sprinting Team at 08:38 30/4-2015
  Yes, but when you lose the not so private deals, we'll lose a part of the game that's been around from when I started playing, maybe even before that? I don't think the system has to change anymore, it's not like there's a benefitial transfer case every single day!


lexx at 09:02 30/4-2015
  "It is that simple to get it right"
  
  Not really. To change it completely there's a lot of programming needed.


familytour at 17:20 30/4-2015
  I want to ask something.What are then private deal THREAD.And how could you make a private dial?You ask the manager,that's all?
   PS :Good idea,Toronto Dragons.


Rigana at 02:59 1/5-2015
  ESP I understand why people enjoy the private deal negotiations as opposed to having a mechanised system. The not private deals are still a grey area especially when certain unscrupulous older teams are involved.


1 2 Cycle at 10:04 1/5-2015
  Whit a mechanized system you can still make "private" deals.
  
  As a seller you should be able to tweak the auction settings (starting price, min bid increase, deadline) etc.
  
  In that case you can make the same settings as you would in a private deal (24 hours, min 10% overbid and the agreed transfer sum for the buyer to bid on).


Super Velo at 16:26 1/5-2015
  I understand this fair price stuff. I don't understand the questioning of "release value". If I want to sell my rider for release value then who is to say other wise? The price can't be less than release value so the issue of the price being too low should not be a concern, you can not go below the RL value. So where are the rules being broken?


BrokenChain at 18:06 1/5-2015
  #IamFinnLowik