Do anyone know the price change formula used though the season?
Here is the formula I use, although there is a variable that it is not easy to work out.
(75% x old price) + (25% x Current Magic Number x 3 Game Rolling Average)
Example:
If Taylor Walker ($448,900) averages 95 over the first 3 rounds, with the MN 5150, then his price will change to:
=(75% x 448900) + (25% x 5150 x 95)
= 336675 + 122312
= 458987 rounded to $459,000
This will only give you an approximate value, because the Magic number changes every round. (That is the variable I was talking about).
It is changing because it is designed so that the value of the league stays constant. Adding up all the player prices at the start of 2013 we have a value of just over $222 million. The combined value of all players must stay constant. While most of the increases and decreases will cancel each other, the problem are the rookies: you can expect Wines, Viney, O'Meara and many more rookies to increase considerably during the season, but there is no corresponding decrease because rookies that do not perform don't get an increase. Someone else has to lose value, to keep the league at a constant $222 million, and that is achieved but changing (almost always reducing) the MN.
Selling Taylor a little short :-X
Seriously though, that's a fair ave increase for a very little price increase, should we be worried :-[
Quote from: tbagrocks on January 14, 2013, 06:45:19 PM
Selling Taylor a little short :-X
Seriously though, that's a fair ave increase for a very little price increase, should we be worried :-[
This is why I don't believe that planning to trade premiums out after a 3 weeks (i.e people hoping to upgrade a Redden for Swan after Round 3) all season with the new trade rules is going to be as profitable as people think, there is a lag on the price matching the average. :-\
Quote from: Presto on January 14, 2013, 06:37:02 PM
Here is the formula I use, although there is a variable that it is not easy to work out.
(75% x old price) + (25% x Current Magic Number x 3 Game Rolling Average)
Example:
If Taylor Walker ($448,900) averages 95 over the first 3 rounds, with the MN 5150, then his price will change to:
=(75% x 448900) + (25% x 5150 x 95)
= 336675 + 122312
= 458987 rounded to $459,000
This will only give you an approximate value, because the Magic number changes every round. (That is the variable I was talking about).
It is changing because it is designed so that the value of the league stays constant. Adding up all the player prices at the start of 2013 we have a value of just over $222 million. The combined value of all players must stay constant. While most of the increases and decreases will cancel each other, the problem are the rookies: you can expect Wines, Viney, O'Meara and many more rookies to increase considerably during the season, but there is no corresponding decrease because rookies that do not perform don't get an increase. Someone else has to lose value, to keep the league at a constant $222 million, and that is achieved but changing (almost always reducing) the MN.
Thanks mate :D
Quote from: timmyparso on January 14, 2013, 07:02:56 PM
Quote from: tbagrocks on January 14, 2013, 06:45:19 PM
Selling Taylor a little short :-X
Seriously though, that's a fair ave increase for a very little price increase, should we be worried :-[
This is why I don't believe that planning to trade premiums out after a 3 weeks (i.e people hoping to upgrade a Redden for Swan after Round 3) all season with the new trade rules is going to be as profitable as people think, there is a lag on the price matching the average. :-\
Yes and that would make Reds a keeper, anyway surely it means Swan will fall more than people think as long as he doesn't start with 130 averages, which he doesn't do until later
Quote from: tbagrocks on January 14, 2013, 07:11:18 PM
Quote from: timmyparso on January 14, 2013, 07:02:56 PM
Quote from: tbagrocks on January 14, 2013, 06:45:19 PM
Selling Taylor a little short :-X
Seriously though, that's a fair ave increase for a very little price increase, should we be worried :-[
This is why I don't believe that planning to trade premiums out after a 3 weeks (i.e people hoping to upgrade a Redden for Swan after Round 3) all season with the new trade rules is going to be as profitable as people think, there is a lag on the price matching the average. :-\
Yes and that would make Reds a keeper, anyway surely it means Swan will fall more than people think as long as he doesn't start with 130 averages, which he doesn't do until later
This also means Ball will not rise in price as fast as people expect unless he starts smashing out 150's
Quote from: timmyparso on January 14, 2013, 07:14:19 PM
Quote from: tbagrocks on January 14, 2013, 07:11:18 PM
Quote from: timmyparso on January 14, 2013, 07:02:56 PM
Quote from: tbagrocks on January 14, 2013, 06:45:19 PM
Selling Taylor a little short :-X
Seriously though, that's a fair ave increase for a very little price increase, should we be worried :-[
This is why I don't believe that planning to trade premiums out after a 3 weeks (i.e people hoping to upgrade a Redden for Swan after Round 3) all season with the new trade rules is going to be as profitable as people think, there is a lag on the price matching the average. :-\
Yes and that would make Reds a keeper, anyway surely it means Swan will fall more than people think as long as he doesn't start with 130 averages, which he doesn't do until later
This also means Ball will not rise in price as fast as people expect unless he starts smashing out 150's
The MN will work like it did last year as far as we no that has not changed ... Everyone thought Swan was going to drop last year and he went up .. this year is different yes because he averaged alot, i guess you have to weigh up wether the extra points + captains points is worth the 40-60k that he will drop. Last year midpricers like Hayes,Waters,Grimes etc went up in value considerably even with a new club entering the competition with rooks like Greene,Treloar,Adams,Giles etc going up ... Ball,Embley,Varcoe etc etc will go up in value without having to score 150's as you say
Quote from: FOOTBALL FACTORY on January 19, 2013, 11:18:43 PM
Quote from: timmyparso on January 14, 2013, 07:14:19 PM
This also means Ball will not rise in price as fast as people expect unless he starts smashing out 150's
The MN will work like it did last year as far as we no that has not changed ... Everyone thought Swan was going to drop last year and he went up .. this year is different yes because he averaged alot, i guess you have to weigh up wether the extra points + captains points is worth the 40-60k that he will drop. Last year midpricers like Hayes,Waters,Grimes etc went up in value considerably even with a new club entering the competition with rooks like Greene,Treloar,Adams,Giles etc going up ... Ball,Embley,Varcoe etc etc will go up in value without having to score 150's as you say
Its actually not quite the same as last year, FF. The main difference in 2013 will be that price changes will occur in SMALLER increments than previous years. This is because fewer rookies will be in the pool of players than the last two years (due to the introduction of GCS in 2011 and GWS in 2012).
Quote from: mezzoculo on January 20, 2013, 01:55:12 AM
Quote from: FOOTBALL FACTORY on January 19, 2013, 11:18:43 PM
Quote from: timmyparso on January 14, 2013, 07:14:19 PM
This also means Ball will not rise in price as fast as people expect unless he starts smashing out 150's
The MN will work like it did last year as far as we no that has not changed ... Everyone thought Swan was going to drop last year and he went up .. this year is different yes because he averaged alot, i guess you have to weigh up wether the extra points + captains points is worth the 40-60k that he will drop. Last year midpricers like Hayes,Waters,Grimes etc went up in value considerably even with a new club entering the competition with rooks like Greene,Treloar,Adams,Giles etc going up ... Ball,Embley,Varcoe etc etc will go up in value without having to score 150's as you say
Its actually not quite the same as last year, FF. The main difference in 2013 will be that price changes will occur in SMALLER increments than previous years. This is because fewer rookies will be in the pool of players than the last two years (due to the introduction of GCS in 2011 and GWS in 2012).
Ok .. i was sort of thinking with less rooks taking the money Premos would hold their money better and the rooks that do play and score well will rise in value fairly quickly because there is a bit more money to go around without so many rooks rising in value.
Quote from: Presto on January 14, 2013, 06:37:02 PM
Here is the formula I use, although there is a variable that it is not easy to work out.
(75% x old price) + (25% x Current Magic Number x 3 Game Rolling Average)
Example:
If Taylor Walker ($448,900) averages 95 over the first 3 rounds, with the MN 5150, then his price will change to:
=(75% x 448900) + (25% x 5150 x 95)
= 336675 + 122312
= 458987 rounded to $459,000
This will only give you an approximate value, because the Magic number changes every round. (That is the variable I was talking about).
It is changing because it is designed so that the value of the league stays constant. Adding up all the player prices at the start of 2013 we have a value of just over $222 million. The combined value of all players must stay constant. While most of the increases and decreases will cancel each other, the problem are the rookies: you can expect Wines, Viney, O'Meara and many more rookies to increase considerably during the season, but there is no corresponding decrease because rookies that do not perform don't get an increase. Someone else has to lose value, to keep the league at a constant $222 million, and that is achieved but changing (almost always reducing) the MN.
Good guideline to work on pretty sure the magic number isn't effected by the total sum of the league. The formula isn't revealed as it would defeat the purpose of purchasing the AC. The formula given here is reasonable accurate and i'd use it as a great guide i been using it for years. Yes there is some undefined variable or constant but I'm 99.9% certain it does not effect the mn.
Quote from: FOOTBALL FACTORY on January 20, 2013, 02:24:14 AM
Ok .. i was sort of thinking with less rooks taking the money Premos would hold their money better and the rooks that do play and score well will rise in value fairly quickly because there is a bit more money to go around without so many rooks rising in value.
It's too late at night to actually write a coherent response, so I'll just point out Griff's effort over at DTTalk:
http://dreamteamtalk.com/2012/12/18/the-magic-number-revisited/
Quote from: owenbond007 on January 20, 2013, 02:39:31 AM
Good guideline to work on pretty sure the magic number isn't effected by the total sum of the league. The formula isn't revealed as it would defeat the purpose of purchasing the AC. The formula given here is reasonable accurate and i'd use it as a great guide i been using it for years. Yes there is some undefined variable or constant but I'm 99.9% certain it does not effect the mn.
The Magic Number changes weekly. It is responsible for ensuring that each player increases or decreases in price at the same rate. This in turn maintains a constant total player cost across the entire season.
Quote from: mezzoculo on January 20, 2013, 02:44:53 AM
Quote from: FOOTBALL FACTORY on January 20, 2013, 02:24:14 AM
Ok .. i was sort of thinking with less rooks taking the money Premos would hold their money better and the rooks that do play and score well will rise in value fairly quickly because there is a bit more money to go around without so many rooks rising in value.
It's too late at night to actually write a coherent response, so I'll just point out Griff's effort over at DTTalk:
http://dreamteamtalk.com/2012/12/18/the-magic-number-revisited/
Thanks for posting that link. I thought it was really informative.
Quote from: FOOTBALL FACTORY on January 19, 2013, 11:18:43 PM
Quote from: timmyparso on January 14, 2013, 07:14:19 PM
Quote from: tbagrocks on January 14, 2013, 07:11:18 PM
Quote from: timmyparso on January 14, 2013, 07:02:56 PM
Quote from: tbagrocks on January 14, 2013, 06:45:19 PM
Selling Taylor a little short :-X
Seriously though, that's a fair ave increase for a very little price increase, should we be worried :-[
This is why I don't believe that planning to trade premiums out after a 3 weeks (i.e people hoping to upgrade a Redden for Swan after Round 3) all season with the new trade rules is going to be as profitable as people think, there is a lag on the price matching the average. :-\
Yes and that would make Reds a keeper, anyway surely it means Swan will fall more than people think as long as he doesn't start with 130 averages, which he doesn't do until later
This also means Ball will not rise in price as fast as people expect unless he starts smashing out 150's
The MN will work like it did last year as far as we no that has not changed ... Everyone thought Swan was going to drop last year and he went up .. this year is different yes because he averaged alot, i guess you have to weigh up wether the extra points + captains points is worth the 40-60k that he will drop. Last year midpricers like Hayes,Waters,Grimes etc went up in value considerably even with a new club entering the competition with rooks like Greene,Treloar,Adams,Giles etc going up ... Ball,Embley,Varcoe etc etc will go up in value without having to score 150's as you say
Quote from: mezzoculo on January 20, 2013, 02:44:53 AM
Quote from: FOOTBALL FACTORY on January 20, 2013, 02:24:14 AM
Ok .. i was sort of thinking with less rooks taking the money Premos would hold their money better and the rooks that do play and score well will rise in value fairly quickly because there is a bit more money to go around without so many rooks rising in value.
It's too late at night to actually write a coherent response, so I'll just point out Griff's effort over at DTTalk:
http://dreamteamtalk.com/2012/12/18/the-magic-number-revisited/
LOL thats why i asked the question then went to bed ;D
So im sort of right saying that if you start without Swan you have to weigh up if the points you lose are worth the money you save. And rooks/midpricers will still gain good money aslong as they score well.
Quote from: FOOTBALL FACTORY on January 20, 2013, 02:24:14 AM
So im sort of right saying that if you start without Swan you have to weigh up if the points you lose are worth the money you save. And rooks/midpricers will still gain good money aslong as they score well.
You're not wrong. It's just that premiums who underperform will not drop in price as dramatically as they have in the previous two years (ie eintroduction of GCS and GWS). Using Swan as an example, if he 'only' punches out 120s it will take him longer to drop (say) $50k than 2011 and 2012 and your 'stepladder' midpricers (like Ebert in 2012) will take longer to increase $50k.
Quote from: mezzoculo on January 20, 2013, 03:34:02 PM
Quote from: FOOTBALL FACTORY on January 20, 2013, 02:24:14 AM
So im sort of right saying that if you start without Swan you have to weigh up if the points you lose are worth the money you save. And rooks/midpricers will still gain good money aslong as they score well.
You're not wrong. It's just that premiums who underperform will not drop in price as dramatically as they have in the previous two years (ie eintroduction of GCS and GWS). Using Swan as an example, if he 'only' punches out 120s it will take him longer to drop (say) $50k than 2011 and 2012 and your 'stepladder' midpricers (like Ebert in 2012) will take longer to increase $50k.
Yeah.. considering im gonna start with Swanny this makes me happy.. im not too fussed about the midpricers aslong as they get there. Its still money in the bank and you get some good scores out of them until you upgrade them.