Good evening everyone,

I've been observing a drop in activity on the transfer market for some time now, and although I don't have a great deal of experience of the game, this trend seems problematic to me.

In Virtuafoot Manager, as in any football management game, the transfer market plays a central role. It allows managers to improve their squad, adjust their sporting strategy and boost the game's economy. However, there is a major problem: excessive speculation, where certain players are bought and then quickly resold with the sole aim of making a profit, rather than developing the team.

This trend detracts from the gaming experience by favouring a purely financial approach to the detriment of real sports management. To remedy this, it would be appropriate to introduce a minimum holding period after the purchase of a player, prohibiting his resale before a certain time (several days in real time).

1. Limiting speculation to preserve a balanced transfer market

The main problem with the current market lies in the possibility of buying a player and selling him immediately, or even a few days later, sometimes at a greatly inflated price. This encourages :

• Artificial price inflation: the same players change clubs several times in a short space of time, increasing their value without any statistical justification.
• An imbalance between managers: the most experienced exploit these opportunities to accumulate profits, while new players struggle to find players at reasonable prices.
• A decline in sporting investment: some clubs no longer buy players to develop them, but only to sell them on.

Introducing a minimum holding period would force managers to think about their purchases and invest in their players' development, rather than seeing them as mere financial assets.

2. Encouraging more realistic and strategic management of the workforce

In real football, clubs do not recruit players to sell them immediately after a few weeks. They invest in their development, their integration into the team and their role in the team.

By imposing a minimum period before resale, Aymeric would encourage :

• Managers to plan their recruitment based on their sporting project rather than simply on profit opportunities.
• A more considered rotation of players, where each purchase is part of a medium or long-term vision.
• A more dynamic but also more stable market, where players move around less frequently and prices remain more consistent.

Some might object that this limits managers' freedom, but in reality it reinforces the strategic dimension: buying a player should be a commitment, not just a speculative gamble.

3. Finding a way to revitalise the transfer market

While the introduction of a minimum holding period limits speculation, it is also crucial to stimulate activity in the market, to prevent it from becoming too stagnant. A number of complementary solutions could be considered:

• Make auctions more attractive: add auction bonuses to encourage managers to actively monitor transactions.
• Highlight available players: improve the visibility of players on sale via a more intuitive interface or a recommendation system based on clubs' needs.
• Encourage direct transfers between clubs: tax transaction fees for abusive purchases and resales to encourage strategic exchanges.
• Integrate a "loyalty bonus" mechanism: reward managers who keep a player over a long period with bonuses (e.g. faster progression, financial bonus).

I'm aware that this proposal could give rise to debate, and that's precisely why I'm putting it forward: I want to open the discussion with more experienced managers to see how this idea could be adapted or improved. The aim is not to block transfers, but to find solutions to revitalise the market and put the emphasis back on more strategic management of the workforce. What are your thoughts on this?

Good evening. Indeed, this is interesting. I'm in favour of a system where when you buy a player, the "place on transfer list" and "auction" tabs are only accessible to 56 players after the player has been bought.

Good evening and thanks for your feedback! 😊

The idea of blocking access to resale options for a certain period of time after the purchase of a player is indeed an interesting solution to limit speculation and encourage more thoughtful management of the workforce.

However, 56 days may seem a little long, especially for managers who would like to quickly adjust their squad after a poorly calibrated purchase. Perhaps a shorter but still significant period (e.g. between 20 and 30 days) would be a good compromise between curbing excessive resale and keeping an active market.

Ah the limitation... if you had a bit of perspective on the game you'd understand that it doesn't add anything. In fact, the opposite is true. Prices go up when the mdj stops playing with progression variables.
Buying and selling is already largely restricted, so there's no point.
The only reason for the state of the market is the changes made over the last year, which have had an impact on several generations of players, generating a fair amount of uncertainty.

In short, patience and there are far more important things to worry about today 😆

Thanks for your feedback and your experience, it's really interesting!

You've highlighted a key point. However, buying at low prices on auctions or transfer lists, followed by a more expensive resale, is still a very common mechanism, despite the limitations already in place. This system often benefits the most experienced managers, who know how to spot bargains and maximise their profits, while others struggle to find players at reasonable prices.

The real debate, then, is whether this system is natural and beneficial to the market, or whether it is detrimental to its equilibrium On the one hand, you could say that this is normal economic logic, where the most experienced players exploit opportunities. On the other hand, if this phenomenon becomes too dominant, it can slow down the flow of exchanges and prevent certain managers from accessing players at coherent prices.

So, rather than imposing strict restrictions, perhaps we need to find alternatives to prevent certain practices from unbalancing the market, while retaining some freedom. Better supervision of bids, making average player prices more visible, or adjusting certain parameters to limit abusive discrepancies could be one way forward.

It's always the same principle: I don't manage the transfer market well, so instead of analysing it better like some people do, I'm going to limit them so they can't rip me off any more.
That's your reflex all too often. How can you change the game to suit you? Aymeric has always made limitations, he doesn't need an idea for that. And once again, buying and reselling is a mess, so move on to a more interesting subject lol

I confess I don't really understand your reaction. 🤔 My aim is not to impose anything, but simply to offer food for thought and open up a debate. I don't claim to have the perfect solution, and I'm totally open to criticism and counter-arguments.

I've started this discussion because I love the game, and like any good manager, I'm trying to understand what works and what could be improved. Yes, maybe buy-sell is already weakened, and maybe limiting it further isn't the answer. But if that's the case, what could really kick-start the market? It's not by dismissing ideas out of hand that we make progress, but by working together to find ways forward that could benefit everyone.

I'm not saying: "I'm not managing the market well, so I want everyone to be restricted", but rather: "I've noticed a drop in activity, I'm wondering why, and I'm trying to see what could be tested to improve the situation". After that, if the idea of regulation is of no interest, I'm prepared to discuss it, but in that case, what do you think are the real causes of the problem and the best solutions?

In short, I'm putting forward ideas, not obligations, and if they're not relevant, then let's help each other find better solutions rather than shutting down the debate 😉

I understand what you mean, but that's why faire play was introduced.

The subject and the proposals are very interesting and raise some important points. Teddy's reaction is right, the transfer market and prices are currently low following the major change in training, totally favouring the current generation of 26/28-30 year olds, the target of the biggest wealthy clubs before this page of the golden generation is turned.

Nevertheless, this answer and this mention are totally off-topic compared to where Exoda probably wanted to take the discussion: the aim of buy-sell is to buy cheaply, sell straight away and make a small margin (including the penalty fees linked to rapid resale, affinity, etc.), often at the expense of new players (not particularly motivating for them) or players returning to the game and without any real knowledge of the market (having experienced this 1.5 years ago). Moreover, this practice is not only used by experienced players, but also by 'newcomers'. The last example I saw was a Vfo auction with players bought less than 15 days before at 8.9 and 13.2M, to be resold at 20M PDV, but above all a history of buying and selling at low prices that is quite astonishing. Quite frankly, I personally blacklist any manager/club using this practice for a future purchase or sale, as I do not endorse it. Certain proposals, such as the introduction of a minimum contract period (except for 'redundancy' by sending to the free agents to avoid a player being blocked at a club for X number of days) are worth studying, especially if they help to reduce the negative buy-sell aimed at newcomers to the game. Unless I'm mistaken, this is the subject he probably wanted to talk about, which has strayed from the original topic.

At the very least, I see a big problem with the introduction of a minimum contract for young players in the CDF, who start out with a 0-day contract and could end up with their training club (unless this constraint is lifted if the player belongs to the training club).

You say:
With experience, you learn to spot good deals and bad deals quickly. That's a true reflection of reality, where unscrupulous agents and clumsy sports directors do exist.

In theory, I agree 100%, but in practice on this game, the supposed spotting isn't always effective, simply because of the many changes in settings that are introduced without warning and which mean that a supposedly good deal can turn out overnight to be a bad deal and vice versa.

If you're a daredevil, a good deal is to buy a generation of players of the same age at a time when the game settings are unfavourable to the profile of your players, and therefore cheap, and who suddenly become a good option.
On the other hand, it can turn out to be a ruinous affair.
And that's not a question of experience, or even intuition.

أعتقد أنه يجب وضع رسم بياني كما في التطور توضح السعر الأدنى والأقصى للاعب واحتمالية زيادة السعر أو نقصانه وغير مسموح بالبيع أعلى أو أقل من ذلك إلا في حالة السوق وبالتأكيد سيتم زيادة السعر أو تقليله بناءًا على قواعد معينة وبالتالي سيفكر البائع أو المشتري قبل عملية البيع والشراء وأيضاً سيجعل النادي يبيع لاعب خوفاً من الخسائر أو يحتفظ به ليزيد من مكسبه وهذا لتنشيط المزاد
I think that a chart should be placed as in the development that shows the minimum and maximum price for the player and the possibility of the price increasing or decreasing and it is not allowed to sell above or below that except in the case of the market and certainly the price will be increased or decreased based on certain rules and thus the seller or buyer will think before the buying and selling process and also it will make the club sell the player for fear of losses or keep him to increase his profit and this is to activate the auction

So personally, I don't think the market should be restricted any further than it is today:
-high agent fees for players who have been at the club for 56 days or less
-table showing the maximum value of a player

When you look at the 'specialists' in buying and selling, you get the impression that they're making a fortune. But I'm not convinced that the time spent is all that beneficial for them (not least because of those infamous agent fees). So a large part of the seller's profit goes on taxes. If he really wants to make a profit (with a lower final price for the buyer), the seller should already keep this player for 56 days.

And for good deals, there's still the option, available to everyone, of going through the auctions every day. It's up to you to spend that time... Or not :)

I'm one of the game's biggest buyers and sellers. On paper I agree with you, there could be a limit (even if it's just one more, it's starting to happen) but if you go there, you could say the same thing about young players who are bought by the biggest clubs to be loaned out directly (because they don't have the time to train them) and so that breaks up the average clubs who want to train the rich ones. You could add a lot of restrictions on the game but I think there are enough restrictions.

Nowadays, buying and selling is often a risky gamble because there are taxes, etc. Unless you get a good deal, otherwise there's a risk of losing money. Do clubs like me hinder sales? No, they don't. Because I'm not going to lie to you, a player who sells for 5m on the auctions has to sell for at least 5.7m to make any money, if you want a bit of profit you have to sell for around 7m with the risk that if you don't sell him in 14 days, you're going to pay 300-400k in tax. So it's risky, but above all a player bought for 5m and visible to all the clubs in the game, isn't that what he's worth in the end? If no one bids, it's because everyone thinks it won't cost more. So buying 5m is still a gamble. That's why the buyer-sellers are just looking to buy cheaply and hope that a player is in urgent need of a player and buys him on the transfer list. That's all there is to it. And everything is negotiated on VF

So no, buyers-sellers are not the evil of transfers today. They can be annoying because they buy a lot, but they don't break the market. The market is linked to Aymeric's direction.
1 year ago, there was an average of 3-4 pages at auction. There are many more sales today than 1 year ago, nobody is responsible for that, apart from Aymeric

I think that restricting one of the few ways for new players to progress on their own outside of the agreement, and also a hobby for others, wouldn't be very beneficial
The tax + list fees are already there to force you to think... then even for the buyer if he's planning to buy a recently transferred player, the game warns you in order to suggest negotiation..

I am against

hello
je suis contre car 1bride a deja ete mise a la sortie des cdf et c'est ce qui a flingue le marché des transferts deja du moins en partie
1 joueur qui est garde au cdf jusqu'ax son âge sortira avec ng egale a potentiel et c'est deja 1 bride en soi pour la suite
restricting resale purchases with 1 deadline has also been done on players in the store with a 100% capital gains tax
BRIDGING players on top of that would only cause the rest of the auction market to collapse for what little is left of it, where 70% OF transfers are generated by the game and inactive clubs
on the other hand we should do the reverse to relaunch the market

We would like to remind any beginners reading this that for at least the last 2 years, no player has come out of a cdf with a score equal to his potential.

I feel they should add more ways for clubs to make money. The club shop and ticket should be made more sophisticated so as to allow massive profits and the possibility of massive losses also. The rewards for winning the league among others should also be improved and made variable and should depend on the TV revenue generated by clubs who played in that league for that season. This way the clubs have to focus on having a good squad so that they can make more money. Right now there’s still a lot of work to be done and I pray God will help us .

Current revenues are sufficient for a club that manages well and doesn't do just anything.

The income is more than enough, but you still need to know how to manage a club.

But where did you see that I was questioning buy-sell? I was responding to those who want sources of income other than those that currently exist: the current game, with its current parameters, allows a guy who plays regularly and doesn't mess around to generate enough money to progress in the game.

After that, if you manage like a hare, stacking up players who are close to retirement and training young players like a potato, it's complicated.

It has more to do with their investment in the game. You can't make progress by spending 5 minutes a day managing your club. It wasn't even possible when I started out.

As it happens, I work with small clubs that are making progress and that don't use the blind. So I have quite precise ideas of what is possible and what isn't today. Compared to when I started, I think it's actually harder and takes longer to build a team that's on a par with the best teams in the game.

On the other hand, if tomorrow I started the game with a level 1 account, I'm sure that in 8 months' time, without going through the store, I'd have a team with an average of more than 80 ng and an average age of 24, while having built up my infrastructure to the maximum that my level would allow. But it would take time, that's for sure.

250 PAGES OF TRANSFERS, I've stopped there's no point in going any further anyway, everyone has eyes to see it
242 players sold for more than 10m
i didn't see any players sold for more than 100m, the most was 85 I think
1 average between 10 and 20m a piece
a few players over 30m but very few
the players you buy at the store will never be amortised as an example because not only will you be paying irl money and at least 20m vf
c'est 1 autre fait

To think it took me at least 2 (or even 3) years to build my level 10 CDF!

Ola Red,

I've never actually helped out with a deal!
Just buying/training/reselling...
After all, it wasn't the same era, I admit..

Training... amha... becomes the same for all players leaving the CDF (at 17, 18 or 22 years old)...
Everything is smoothed out... many players will be identical... but the styles created by A45 change everything because you can modify the training sessions according to the style you choose.

But if you stick to the basics... all the players will be "identical"... but that's just my opinion... until the next change ^^

He wanted it that way and I think finding the right tactics will be complicated!

Finally, I've understood the difficulty of this game. I'm sure you won't like it, but I'll be honest because that's who I am. VF represents today's society: on the one hand, we have members who are said to be supportive, understanding and open to debate, and on the other, the reticent, i.e. members who consider themselves to be at the top of the hierarchy and think that their word is more important than that of other players. People who prefer to focus on their personal interests, in this case their money, and not reconsider their position in order to promote possible improvement. Once again, the topic I opened was based on suggestions, not obligations. What's more, I was banking on good faith and respect, but in return I'm entitled to receive a value judgement on my person and my work and nobody says anything.

Personally, I haven't read the whole thing... too many paragraphs for my brain!

But I've never liked buying and selling a lot (like reselling at +2 days)... I can't stand it... I've opened my mouth a bit about it before, but it's part of the game, so I won't say anything more (and God knows I want to, especially when I see a VFo sale on a player I bought 5 days before... it makes me itch... anyway).

But what bothers me the most is when buyers who want a player (and who don't have a lot of money) are s.domed by someone else who just wants to sell him to make 2M... it makes me go off my rocker... but I open a beer, go out for a smoke and it gets better ^^

It's a shame to pollute a well-written post with some nice suggestions. (I don't agree with everything, but there's a real point of view here)
The idea is not to know if buying or selling still works today (for info it works I make several hundred million each season, it's just a question of work / knowledge / luck and not level especially with a market with prices so low) or to know if certain players are good or bad managers (we're not in high school, otherwise create a post on the subject, and avoid accusations of cheating (forbidden on the forum for info) otherwise you have to go see the admins).

We're talking about making the game more dynamic (because some players would like to think about ideas as a community) and improving in-game sales, with or without limitations on transfers.

I'm really fascinated by the emptiness of these arguments, answers and counter-answers, generated by artificial intelligence. I'm not saying it gives a style, but then the content is something else.

In my experience, buying and selling is not a problem. As I am a small club with no agreement, I have managed to structure my club using this method without becoming a thunderbolt. I think that there are enough restrictive rules (agent's tax/time limit of 56 days or more than 100 days for players in the store) with regard to this practice. Players are visible to everyone at auctions, so it's a mockery to attack those who use this practice by saying that they're damaging the game experience. It's a complex management game with its own codes, but also one that bends to the will of the magic wand of the game's director. When you're new to the game and you want to structure your team by playing for 10 minutes a day, it's bound to be more complicated than someone who plays for 2 hours.
For me, what needs to change is the big clubs who are loaded at 32/32 but have 12 youngsters on loan, yes they distort the market for youngsters with infinite working capital. It would reshuffle the cards a bit on the transfer market for players who are in sales when they reach maturity.

Hello,
In this topic I find the idea of a minimum holding period for a player really interesting. I'll leave it to you to decide on the minimum length of ownership, as I'm not an expert.
At the moment we have players who can change clubs 4 times in 2 days, which is clearly not realistic. Another problem is that some clubs are killing the auction market. If you look at the current situation, there's one club that recruits almost all 17-year-olds with high potential and puts them on the transfer list. That's allowed, no problem, but from my point of view it's not realistic and it penalises the playing experience of the other members.

We all agree that the idea is not for VF to stick perfectly to reality, but for it to come as close as possible to it and avoid certain derives.

Not a bad answer ZeusGPT lol

Don't get me wrong, the idea is absolutely not to ban transfers or to be too restrictive, it's to limit abuse. Why do you think it would be a problem if the rule was: you can't sell a player who hasn't been with the club for at least 72 hours? 72 hours is an example, of course

This is a provision that existed previously