Mentor Posted February 9, 2014 Report Share Posted February 9, 2014 This idea i am going to discuss now i brought up well over a year ago and was very widely supported, but here i go at it again. Mergers are a major part of the game, as are super fights, fighter exchanges and so on. I would say not more than ever. I think there should be 2 features added to the game, #1 is the organization buyout feature. We get orgs on the market all the time (i mean on sale). Existing orgs are often interested in buying one of those orgs, but cant (because they already own an org). What we need is the buyout option. Basically how this will work is existing org owners should also be allowed to bid for an org. If they win the bid, then the existing fighters should get a message saying "your org X has been bought by org Y based in city New York, owned by manager ABC, do you agree to transfer your contract and fight in org Y?" They can reject the offer and be released or accept the offer and move to the new org. This will save masses of time. It will also save org owners the misery of having fighters released and go through a bidding war to resign them in new orgs. It has happened to every major org at one point or other. It has happened to me with GAMMA as i know it has happened to most top level orgs as well. You could argue that this way we will have less org owners. Technically that is not true as it is not exactly possible for you to buy out all the orgs anyway and we still have diminishing returns on the events. But if we want to totally get rid of that, we could add a max of just 1 merger per month, anything more will cost VIP time (similar to how the FA work). Direct transfers will happen in the same exact way as well. #2 Loan + Exchange feature Similar to the above, is for super fights. Most top level managers know how it works, they have a contract and usually honor that contract when they move over to another org for a fight. However you do get the occasional case where a fighter which was suppose to move over to another org for a super fight....................ends up somewhere else, simply because he got a massive offer from another org. I think the time has come for a loan feature. Basically it works similar to the above, the current org owner sends a "proposal" to a fighter to move to another org, that fighter needs to just accept or reject the offer to move over. The offer is always for just one fight (this is debatable, i guess you could do it for as many fights as you want, based upon their contract) and that gets deducted from his contract once he has fought. You wont need to release, renegotiate and release again and renegotiate. Everything is done fast and efficient. This will make super fights a dynamic process. 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 9, 2014 Report Share Posted February 9, 2014 Great ideas! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vlad Posted February 9, 2014 Report Share Posted February 9, 2014 Would love to see this added. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mario.Jay Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 Great idea, special first one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eveas Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deuce7 Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 I would love to see this. Of course there are still going to be people that give the usual complaint "But I didn't sign with that org so I don't want to transfer my fighter.........blah blah blah" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floppzzy Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 Sounds interesting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 This idea i am going to discuss now i brought up well over a year ago and was very widely supported, but here i go at it again. If they win the bid, then the existing fighters should get a message saying "your org X has been bought by org Y based in city New York, owned by manager ABC, do you agree to transfer your contract and fight in org Y?" They can reject the offer and be released or accept the offer and move to the new org. I would love to see this. Of course there are still going to be people that give the usual complaint "But I didn't sign with that org so I don't want to transfer my fighter.........blah blah blah" That does not happen because of "see above" Awesome idea. +15 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warlord Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooby Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 Love both ideas! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nandorossi Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 This is great! I would love to see the loan feature go into effect as it would offer a way for lower based orgs to raises higher. It is hard for the new little guys to get great fights on there events because of how new they are, but with this option of a loan could have a combined event with another company befitting both orgs and there owners. Org A is in New York and Org B is Montreal. Both are very new and are having trouble signing people because of there low hype. The two orgs get together and do something similar but on a much smaller scale to what EVO and Assension did. Now both orgs get two really nice hyped events as well as some extra cash that they made. They will now be able to sign a couple guys in the tp 1000 or so for a weight class. Which will lead to bigger fights and more abilities. New org owners wont be stuck as a bottom feeder for a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
listerman Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 #2 - Sounds cool. #1 - Not too sure about this. (this is my opinion, not a war request). I don't think this should be implemented. Yes, it's hard for org owners when buying/merge an org to sign all fighters and to go through all that shit. I get it. Why would we make it so easy? Owning an org is hard work and will always be. I see this as a lazy way to play the game. I won't elaborate more, I don't feel like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deuce7 Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 #2 - Sounds cool. #1 - Not too sure about this. (this is my opinion, not a war request). I don't think this should be implemented. Yes, it's hard for org owners when buying/merge an org to sign all fighters and to go through all that shit. I get it. Why would we make it so easy? Owning an org is hard work and will always be. I see this as a lazy way to play the game. I won't elaborate more, I don't feel like it. True, but at least if an agreement is reached the person "selling" their org, in most cases, would be highly compensated for the amount of time they put into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steel Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 1. The org value is directly linked to the quality of the roster and basically bugger all else. So a successful bid, and bare in mind your bid is based upon the value you give the roster, could turn out to be at a value far more than the actual alum of the roster you finally receive after managers decide to use any clause to reject a contract transfer. basic business protocol you have a supplier and a customer, they enter into contract, normally if the customer changes ownership this results in the contract being 'novated' the owner of the customer send the supplier a novation agreement. If the supplier company changes ownership, quite often, in the case where legal teams draw up contracts for high value relationships, the customer has invoke clauses to exit the agreement. I like the option 1 but the bid and true value issue would be the problem. Therefore as the orgs are the customer and the fighters get paid by the supplier, if an org makes a successful bid just have it that all the contracts get novated. There is nothing wrong in doing this. 2. This looks good too, NGF would help smaller orgs if this were in place, Ascension and EVO have helped Immortals in the past and this would make it more realistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavyJones Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 I like the merger idea, its happening anyways so why not make it easier on everyone. As long as the fighter has the option to transfer over or not I don't see a problem. The superfight/exchange idea is a good one as well. Back when I ran an org I lost a couple fighters due to superfight loan outs after they got scooped up by another org because of an offer they couldn't refuse. Very annoying. If the feature worked to move them between weight divisions within the org for superfights without disrupting their contract, that would be very helpful too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justus Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 Managers having the ability to cop out/opt out of joining the new org that just purchased them is the main reason this feature will never happen. When dealing with the mergers, the owners arn't buying the org, they're buying the fighters. So running the risk of shelling out 100k to a million to purchase an org with the possibility of not a single fighter coming over just doesn't make sense. At least not to me. I don't see why a fighter can't just finish out their contract in their new org and move on if they don't like it. Allowing managers to decline the transfer encourages managers to not even try out an org they very well could love. Not tryna start a war, it's already been discussed endlessly over the years. Just jotting down my thoughts on the subject... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steel Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 Allowing managers the option to rip up their contract if they don't want to move effectively kills the bid for all the reason already stated. It would be good to have the option but for this very reason I cant see it happening. This was discussed before, and probably for this very reason nothing happened. I wouldn't enter a bid for an org, when effectively you don't know what you are buying, its not Storage Wars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavyJones Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 There were some mergers where there was no chance in hell I would want to move my fighter over so yeah either way someones gonna get screwed over I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentor Posted February 11, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 There were some mergers where there was no chance in hell I would want to move my fighter over so yeah either way someones gonna get screwed over I guess. Ultimately that will happen anyway. Some people wont agree to move and i think they wont join irrelevant. So giving them an option out is the best. The new owner should get a message about this the same way he gets the "contract declined" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 Ultimately that will happen anyway. Some people wont agree to move and i think they wont join irrelevant. So giving them an option out is the best. The new owner should get a message about this the same way he gets the "contract declined" this needs to happen. Right now, let's say...a friend of mine has a fighter in NY contracted to an org in Hilo, suddenly the org is taken over and they move the base to tokyo and start planning the events there. The org owner does not give a shit about arranging transportation for this guy or even communicating with me, I mean, my friend. So now what, he's screwed? It seems so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentor Posted February 11, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 Yeah, that is what i mean. Some people may want to work exclusive in once city, others have a gym and want to keep near that gym. Others may not want to travel or the current contract which was low is not worth traveling, you could simply not like the new owner, the reasons are endless. It still gives the current fighters an "option" to get out of the merger deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steel Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 Ok, so you bid , you win, half the roster pulls out, and suddenly you have wasted a lot of money. Its a totally unrealistic business concept. Beyond crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justus Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 There would have to be some sort of protection in place for the Org Owner who is making the purchase. Maybe the New Owner would get back a percentage of their money based on the number of fighters who come over. So if I buy an org of 100 fighters for 100k (Just an example) and only 40 come over, I get 60k back. Fighters could have 1 week to decide before they're forced to move over to the new org. After 1 week the final tally of fighters moving over would be decided and then the initial bid money will be transferred to the old org owner. The protection policy would need a lot more input/work but something like that would have to be in place in order for Mergers to work properly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mentor Posted February 11, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 Ok, so you bid , you win, half the roster pulls out, and suddenly you have wasted a lot of money. Its a totally unrealistic business concept. Beyond crazy. Half will pull out anyway. This removes the hassle of needing to transfer them over + needing to offer sign on fees + fight on the FA market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steel Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 Your original post implied the manager clicks yes or no, I.e they get released or contract is novated , with the advantage being the hassle to have to re-sign and offer signing on bonuses, a quicker process. If half pull out, it's just half lost, because by definition you already have the mechanism in place for the smooth process. There is no upside, you have still bid for an org based on a roster which could be halved or worse. The issue is the value of the org. Lets say you EVO bid for NGF, say 5 m, then all the champs won't sign with EVO, and go to Asension? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts