Manfred Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 You're meant to sell out the Manfred - that's the point of the system. If you're really good, you're meant to sell out but figure out what is the best way to sell out. Giving away 500 units gives you some sort of benefit (sponsorship hype etc), but is it better than selling them? That's meant to be the decision now. Anyway, if everyone involved in clothing doesn't want the cap, we can remove it. But obviously we have to remove the clothing trophies etc too because they become kind of worthless if you can get a 500 week just by putting $4 t-shirts on sale all month. We would also need to cap the amount of products a fighter can buy, because people are using stores to money launder millions of dollars from fighters to managers. We could also start counting the amount of clothing you give away each month, and not count that in the orders cap. That wouldn't be too hard. With the current changes you are now limited to ordering 2500 / month. (which in effect is limiting the amount you can now sell) However, if you sell 500 units in one week, you get a hype boost. More details on the changes HERE Which do you prefer. The ability to order more, or the hype boost? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crzy1051 Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 I think the ordering cap should be raised at least Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 Not totally sure how I feel about all of it. Without having a full week with it in place, I personally can't judge if it is good or bad. At the same time as a relatively new owner, there might be times when I want to order a bunch of new designs if I get a big string of creativity or if some people really enjoy some of the items and wish to buy in bulk, then we would obviously need to put in more orders. I think it will all play itself out, but I am willing to give it a week or 2 to see how it goes... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMATycoon Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 Manfred, why did you leave out the last bit of my post? If you want to post a poll thread, please make it objective, don't sway it towards what you want. I find vote threads frustrating because I think a discussion is more appropriate. If people can't be bothered to discuss/post about the matter, they probably haven't bothered reading the thread in any detail. Also, as we know with just about any change with the game, the instant reaction of a lot of people is to leave it how it is. As it stands now, only 2 companies would reach the cap. I know I said "if people involved in clothing don't want it..." but that but that was a throwaway sentence. The changes affect everyone and as such, everyone's opinion is equal, whether they have a clothing store or not. Of course a clothing store owner would prefer no cap but I doubt nutrition company owners would appreciate being capped when clothing isn't... It opens up another can of worms. Again, the changes are meant to simply make everything more interesting and make owners and users alike have to think about what they're doing a bit more, rather than (in the case of clothing), make a design, order some stock and try and sell it. The new system adds extra facets to how to maximise profit. Finally, if we didn't have this in place, then there would need to be specific measures in place to prevent money laundering from fighters to clothing companies. This change had the secondary benefit of preventing excessive money laundering but if we remove the cap again, this will need to be dealt with directly. The change would likely be only allowing fighters to purchase up to 10 items of clothing at any one time. If you wanted to buy more you would have to buy it via the manager's balance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manfred Posted November 3, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 Manfred, why did you leave out the last bit of my post? If you want to post a poll thread, make it objective, don't sway it towards what you want. I find vote threads frustrating because I think a discussion is more appropriate. If people can't be bothered to discuss/post about the matter, they probably haven't bothered reading the thread in any detail. Also, as we know with just about any change with the game, the instant reaction of a lot of people is to leave it how it is. As it stands now, only 2 companies would reach the cap. Finally, I know I said "if people involved in clothing don't want it..." but that but that was a throwaway sentence. The changes affect everyone and as such, everyone's opinion is equal, whether they have a clothing store or not. Of course a clothing store owner would prefer no cap but I doubt nutrition company owners would appreciate being capped when clothing isn't... It opens up another can of worms. Again, the changes are meant to simply make everything more interesting and make owners and users alike have to think about what they're doing a bit more, rather than (in the case of clothing), make a design, order some stock and try and sell it. The new system adds extra facets to how to maximise profit. I tried to just present it plain. I left out some of your points, but I also left out mine You have said that clothing is the easiest to run. It's even in the wiki: Clothing companies are low risk, nice, easy companies to run. The only thing you need is a bit of creativity and the ability to create a nice looking t-shirt or shorts design They why do we get getting the same restrictions as supp companies. Apparently the supps needed fixing, but I don't see much of those complaints geared toward clothing, so why would we have the same rules. And why would "selling out" be a goal? What business would try to do that? For this game? To get some hype? Hype worthless. I didn't care about hype when I started and I don't care about it now that I have the most. Most sponsor because they want to give back or help n00bs, not because of a non-beneficial meter or a location on high street. I won't go into all my other points, which you have seen in the other thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMATycoon Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 I keep editing my posts in the middle of you writing replies I agree that it's unfair to limit sponsorships and freebies, so I think it makes sense to not include those in the 2500. As for clothing companies being low risk - they're still low risk with a 2500 monthly order - probably moreso because people would be stupid early doors and order thousands of designs that they'll never sell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manfred Posted November 3, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 As for clothing companies being low risk - they're still low risk with a 2500 monthly order - probably moreso because people would be stupid early doors and order thousands of designs that they'll never sell. Then they lose and have to rebuy VIP, so it's a good thing for you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMATycoon Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 As far as I can ascertain, you were using that wiki quote as justification for leaving it in a simple state. I have no agenda with the idea of clothing being low risk - I'm happy for it to be low risk but I think anything that can be done to make it a bit more interesting/thought inducing, is a good thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manfred Posted November 3, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 The sole reason for that wiki quote was to point out that if Clothing and Supps are different in difficulty level, then why do the changes geared toward fixing supps seem to apply to clothing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 I maybe biased here because Manny and I have worked together before, but I really think he's right about these changes. The freebies counting against his count is really uncool. I worked out a deal with HBF long ago where I ordered 50 Hoodies and give them away as awards for FOTN bonuses etc.. Manny is awesome about taking the PM is send him with fighter ID's and sending the gear on quickly to the guys who deserve it. It's not fair for me as an org owner to now have to go deal with someone smaller if HBF gets forced into a situation where he has to choose who gets freebies, or choose which org to work with. Telling new fighters that my org is aligned with HBF is a big deal and has helped me sign fighters because they see HBF is one of the best hyped and has cool gear. To lose that for this rule isn't cool. Also I just think the idea of a cap on orders is really destructive to the purpose that you're trying to achieve. Manny rose up from a noob company to where he's at by designing cool gear, having a good business sense (tycoon?), and good customer service if that's what its called in a video game. If new guys do that same thing, they'll rise to the top of clothing. HBF is proof of that. There seems to be no reason to penalize the Bushido's and Boondocks out there if the solution proposed doesn't really effect change that HELPS the new guy, it just HURTS those that have succeeded through good efforts and those that have allied themselves with good companies. That's my two cents Mike, and I hope you'll consider changing this back to the old way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 Finally, if we didn't have this in place, then there would need to be specific measures in place to prevent money laundering from fighters to clothing companies. This change had the secondary benefit of preventing excessive money laundering but if we remove the cap again, this will need to be dealt with directly. The change would likely be only allowing fighters to purchase up to 10 items of clothing at any one time. If you wanted to buy more you would have to buy it via the manager's balance. Donate money to a fighter, manager gets 10%, fighter spends the rest on t-shirts, rinse repeat till manager has the desired amount of money. Remove the total cap and put a cap on how much a fighter can buy. Who needs 10 shirts at the same damn time? Manny has some of the best designs in the game. He also is one of the few people who really put a lot of time and effort into making clothes for this game. If you're able to sell 10 000 shirts a month its not because your shirts give a bigger morale boost, its because your a better designer and people want to buy your stuff. I dont think clothing companies should be capped on their total sales as its a matter of personal preferance and not the best quality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMATycoon Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 mac, I've said twice that we'll make it so that it doesn't count sponsorships and freebies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 mac, I've said twice that we'll make it so that it doesn't count sponsorships and freebies. thanks Mike, but I still think fundamentally a cap doesn't improve the game. Not for the struggling clothing companies or for consumers of clothes in the game. If it discourages the guys at top from growing, We're all gonna suffer with inferior product in the end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 I really don't mind the cap. But from my clothing lines perspective SWAT I am not looking to move 500+ units a week. This new system which ranks companies by how much clothes they sell is sort of biased. I market myself towards a smaller niche which doesn't mind paying more and getting something that not everyone is wearing. If anything you should be ranking the top 25 companies by hype and rewarding the ones who have worked the hype up that high. Rewarding people for pumping out 3000 15$ in my opinion is like giving Wal-mart an award saturating the world with cheesy TapOut shirts. I wouldn't mind seeing a ranking system, but I don't see how showing people who has sold the most will help my company. Maybe you could also ad an option which would allow a clothing company to become a "premium" line which sells clothes for 100$ + and doesn't stress the fact you have pumped out 500+ shirts, and how many weeks you have done that in a row. The other lines, could be your "Generic" or "K-Mart" lines, with shirts from 1$ - 20$... then slot another one in the middle from 21$ - 99$ and rank those lines accordingly. The ordering cap is an awesome idea though, I generally don't order more than 100 of each design a month and in no rush to sell out all my lines... As they sell out I generally will replace them with a new design or cycle them back in as it seems people prefer that certain line. Just my 2 cents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 mac, I've said twice that we'll make it so that it doesn't count sponsorships and freebies. Well, how is that going to stop people from selling stuff on the side to people? Bulk orders will just become an underground market.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 $100+ for a shirt/shorts/whatever seems pretty ridiculous imo. I would rather pride myself on putting out good design and making things affordable and selling a lot of product. If you are selling a lot of product, you must be doing something right... And I don't want to be rude, but I have seen a lot of shotty design when it comes to people's clothing stores at super inflated prices... just doesn't make sense to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 $100+ for a shirt/shorts/whatever seems pretty ridiculous imo. I would rather pride myself on putting out good design and making things affordable and selling a lot of product. If you are selling a lot of product, you must be doing something right... And I don't want to be rude, but I have seen a lot of shotty design when it comes to people's clothing stores at super inflated prices... just doesn't make sense to me. Not debating design quality here, have any input on the changes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 Not debating design quality here, have any input on the changes? Yeah, I have given input on the changes... Not totally sure how I feel about all of it. Without having a full week with it in place, I personally can't judge if it is good or bad. At the same time as a relatively new owner, there might be times when I want to order a bunch of new designs if I get a big string of creativity or if some people really enjoy some of the items and wish to buy in bulk, then we would obviously need to put in more orders. I think it will all play itself out, but I am willing to give it a week or 2 to see how it goes... And comments about it in the thread where this was all announced... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickwick Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 The only thing I want to point out is as Mike said there will only be TWO companies to be limited by this so far. And neither of those two are complaining. It isn't a way to penalize people from being big it is a way to help make a true market. I think mike should make it to where there are different type of clothing that give slightly different hype like silk cotton etc. so then clothing people will just drop it. I havent noticed any nutrition companies raising a big fuss about this. It's not like it really hurts you that much it just makes you slightly raise your prices so you're not part of the income influx among fighters. (sorry if I sound like a troll didn't mean to) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 The only thing I want to point out is as Mike said there will only be TWO companies to be limited by this so far. And neither of those two are complaining. It isn't a way to penalize people from being big it is a way to help make a true market. I think mike should make it to where there are different type of clothing that give slightly different hype like silk cotton etc. so then clothing people will just drop it. I havent noticed any nutrition companies raising a big fuss about this. It's not like it really hurts you that much it just makes you slightly raise your prices so you're not part of the income influx among fighters. (sorry if I sound like a troll didn't mean to) I like that idea, different materials that have longer life on the fighter and give more positive Morale perks... Would also cost more for the company to order the clothing in, and would justify the higher prices. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 in no way should clothing and supps be in the same boat. they are way too different to be treated the same Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 Manfred, why did you leave out the last bit of my post? If you want to post a poll thread, please make it objective, don't sway it towards what you want. I find vote threads frustrating because I think a discussion is more appropriate. If people can't be bothered to discuss/post about the matter, they probably haven't bothered reading the thread in any detail. Also, as we know with just about any change with the game, the instant reaction of a lot of people is to leave it how it is. As it stands now, only 2 companies would reach the cap. I know I said "if people involved in clothing don't want it..." but that but that was a throwaway sentence. The changes affect everyone and as such, everyone's opinion is equal, whether they have a clothing store or not. Of course a clothing store owner would prefer no cap but I doubt nutrition company owners would appreciate being capped when clothing isn't... It opens up another can of worms. Again, the changes are meant to simply make everything more interesting and make owners and users alike have to think about what they're doing a bit more, rather than (in the case of clothing), make a design, order some stock and try and sell it. The new system adds extra facets to how to maximise profit. Finally, if we didn't have this in place, then there would need to be specific measures in place to prevent money laundering from fighters to clothing companies. This change had the secondary benefit of preventing excessive money laundering but if we remove the cap again, this will need to be dealt with directly. The change would likely be only allowing fighters to purchase up to 10 items of clothing at any one time. If you wanted to buy more you would have to buy it via the manager's balance. why should it matter, clothing owners sell their stuff cause it looks nice, nutrition companies have different levels of quality that directly effect the fighters, where as clothing has the same effect no matter how good it looks. All I can see this doing is making Tycoon land a very dull place to look at. Why would someone want to take the time to make lots of nice stuff when everyone will just be buying the cheap crap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBR Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 Who needs 10 shirts at the same damn time? a lot of people -- when you buy custom work you get a better price the more you buy --- i order and sell custom stuff up to 25 or more at a time --- so for tops/bottoms thats 50 total -- plus clothing quality is moving faster so its needed more now which is a good thing -- this will hurt some companies now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j666 Posted November 3, 2009 Report Share Posted November 3, 2009 i own a supp company and i have no problem with clothing companies being on a different thing than supps. they're way too different. supps are all the same...money based. NSN's 158 is the same as everyone else's...but clothes are creativity based...bushido's designs are different than hbf's, period. not even the same, no worms in a can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 4, 2009 Report Share Posted November 4, 2009 I vote to take away the cap and awards.....leave the game how it was!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.