NDL Forum

Uuaww wrote:

Boston_Rob wrote:Does team focus have anything to do with cash flows or anything?

How is Tampa "rebuilding"

we used to control this but we no longer do. The owner directly controls it now. I've been neutral since 17 started.

I remember we used to be able to switch it in 13 and 15. It used to effect how much money we would have to spend on drafting and IFA, since we can change that on our own now is the status irrelevant?

Uuaww wrote:

Boston_Rob wrote:Does team focus have anything to do with cash flows or anything?

How is Tampa "rebuilding"

we used to control this but we no longer do. The owner directly controls it now. I've been gender neutral since age 17.

LetsGoPeay wrote:

Uuaww wrote:

Boston_Rob wrote:Does team focus have anything to do with cash flows or anything?

How is Tampa "rebuilding"

we used to control this but we no longer do. The owner directly controls it now. I've been gender neutral since age 17.

Spoiler!

hahaha

This is the big takeaway...

In his years as the owner of the Yankees, Hank never added or took money from the team. They were always profitable, till the point of his selling of the team, they had over $100 million in cash. With a rating of 10 in the owner spending attribute, that means that Hank would not see the need to withdraw money from the team, but instead do everything he could to make sure the club stayed in the green in terms of profit.

When the new owner came along...

With the new owner have just a value of 2 for Owner Spending he decided to take over $44 million from the available cash of the team.

Montreal's Owner: 9...+$243million from owner
Charlotte Owner: 4...-$5mil+
Miami Owner: 7....-$1.5mil

Still no consistent measure of how, when and specifically what amounts will be taken even with knowing this.

With that being said, Rob did meet his goals, his owner doesn't want the team to completely fail and has a high spending # and dumped a crap load of cash to fix it.

Charlotte met no goals, lower # for owner, and he took money.

Miami,met 1 goal, has a boat load of cash, and had a successful season and even with his owner # being high determined, eh I can take a little cash in my pocket as we have a ton for FA and Extensions.

Point being, no consistent way of knowing and also we do dont choose our owners so if Rob continues to make terrible financial decisions and trades, his owner will attempt to continue to bail him out. (sorry Rob just a good example).

Do we feel thats fair just because of the random owner Montreal was dealt? I dont.

How do we find out our owner's rating? Any chance someone could just post a list of the ratings for every owner in our league? I'd even be interested in comparing the ratings of my old, dead owner and the new, live one.

You cant as it is an embedded option if you will for each team so it cant be changed.

Indy is 4

It's a random part of the game we deal with. Jerry Jones does different things than Paul allen. Different sport, but same deal. I say leave it as it is.

cougnix wrote:It's a random part of the game we deal with. Jerry Jones does different things than Paul allen. Different sport, but same deal. I say leave it as it is.

I wouldn't define $246mil for some and at or near $0 money from the owner for others despite better financial performance as just "random" though.

cougnix wrote:It's a random part of the game we deal with. Jerry Jones does different things than Paul allen. Different sport, but same deal. I say leave it as it is.

You think its ok one team gets $243million even when in massive debt and others that are fiscally managing their finances get money taken away or zero just because of a random setting of an owner assigned to them?

I am not sure I agree.

I think this issue is much bigger than the one everyone flipped out over with Montreal's finances, if I had to compare.

shel311 wrote:I think this issue is much bigger than the one everyone flipped out over with Montreal's finances, if I had to compare.

From -187 million to -28 million.....yes, I would agree

It's just digital money!!

dusters06 wrote:

shel311 wrote:I think this issue is much bigger than the one everyone flipped out over with Montreal's finances, if I had to compare.

From -187 million to -28 million.....yes, I would agree

-273 million(adding in luxury taxes) to -28 million.

Hell, if we leave this as it is, I don't think we can honestly argue that Rob is doing anything we need to change because his owner is footing the bill.

cougnix wrote:It's just digital money!!

Where's my cut!!!

damn i want more money.

I am not the only one who benefited from this.

Richmond 60 mil -- (78mil) to (23mil)
Boston 60 mil -- (28mil) to 35mil
Omaha 25 mil -- (43mil) to (3mil)
Tampa 12 mil -- (3mil) to 24 mil


All these teams operated at a loss, which appears to be the common factor. I just amplified this because of my high payroll last season.

Boston_Rob wrote:I am not the only one who benefited from this.

Richmond 60 mil -- (78mil) to (23mil)
Boston 60 mil -- (28mil) to 35mil
Omaha 25 mil -- (43mil) to (3mil)
Tampa 12 mil -- (3mil) to 24 mil


All these teams operated at a loss, which appears to be the common factor. I just amplified this because of my high payroll last season.

Where do you find these amounts from the owner for each team?

its ridiculous IMO

over 250 mill?

shel311 wrote:

Boston_Rob wrote:I am not the only one who benefited from this.

Richmond 60 mil -- (78mil) to (23mil)
Boston 60 mil -- (28mil) to 35mil
Omaha 25 mil -- (43mil) to (3mil)
Tampa 12 mil -- (3mil) to 24 mil


All these teams operated at a loss, which appears to be the common factor. I just amplified this because of my high payroll last season.

Where do you find these amounts from the owner for each team?

on the financial page on the website

Boston_Rob wrote:I am not the only one who benefited from this.

Richmond 60 mil -- (78mil) to (23mil)
Boston 60 mil -- (28mil) to 35mil
Omaha 25 mil -- (43mil) to (3mil)
Tampa 12 mil -- (3mil) to 24 mil


All these teams operated at a loss, which appears to be the common factor. I just amplified this because of my high payroll last season.

My total revenue was greater than total expenses, so don't think that had much to do with my amount