Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jari Rantanen's Shorts
On the 1st of July suddenly my wage budget is £300k a week 
But what irks me is that I'll be spending a minimum of £150k a week less than the board will allow me to (maybe one more player and a loan signing or two), £7.5m less than the budget over the year. IRL if I went into the boardroom and said, 'I'll keep wages £7.5m less than you allow me, but give me a few million more transfer funds for one or two extra players' (which I need), as the money is in the bank, I'm positive they'd agree. |
You can do this in FM when the budgets are announced there is a button on the bottom left to allow you to negotiation them (ie. lower wage budget higher transfer budget etc.) - this is obviously dependant on the situation and mood/personality of the board at the time (ie. if they're about to fire you don't expect much flexibility if any
).
Incidentally though the board will be likely to NEVER allow you that much more than say £5-8m to spend in the situation you're in and would rather have a high wage budget than spend more on transfers - why you ask ... simple economics.
The statistical chances of a newly promoted side surviving in the Premiership isn't particularly high, hence the board will want to ensure that they don't put the club in a precarious position in case they're relegated.
Thus giving you a high wage budget but limited transfer funds will encourage you to purchase cheap players from free transfer or abroad rather than buy in expensive players.
This means should you get relegated the club will have enough funds left to ensure they can run for a while outside of the Premiership either to push for another promotion or to offload players and lower the wage budget ... heck if you bring in freebies they might even make a profit out of it.
On the other hand if you'd had transfers fund then you'd have depleted the clubs cash reserve meaning that if you'd been relagated the club wouldn't be in as stable a financial position.
Hope this helps,
Marc