MB points transparency needed.



  • @EJ said in MB points transparency needed.:

    I jumped on here because I was bored.

    Its hard to leave...

    @Black-wolf i can see how his tweet could be seen pro Grealish... But it was after a long campaign about MB in general just be left alone by CS...a bit like much of our discussion on this thread... It wasn't specifically about the Grealish story.. Just wider concept that all media should stand.



  • @Lukeroro said in MB points transparency needed.:

    0_1586114382566_Screenshot_20200405-201906_Football INDEX.jpg

    Coronavirus in the headline. Not yet removed. The picking and choosing of stories is becoming indefensible.

    ...beginning to seriously believe football index are fixing the media. Take a look below, is this really the true reflection of media articles today?? 🤔0_1586126540990_DD7D1D28-ABC8-4CEC-9910-A52347F27A10.jpeg



  • 0_1586130465699_187109D6-0E45-45AE-AAA5-04B6EB8BC8F4.jpeg

    Of course Neymar had MB bonus at ‘00.00am’ precisely...

    Neymar easily won yesterday’s Media day and football index has f*cked everyone over. Disgusted at FI. No other words to say.

    They owe Neymar holders an explanation and the correct Media bonus to be paid out.

    How convenient for them to wait for the article to pass midnight...



  • 0_1586130942102_E42DEA56-C359-4ABF-8C66-BF9BCB250996.png

    See the time of the article posted above...it CLEARLY says ‘23.55’.

    This is THEFT or ‘Fixing’ by Football index, no two ways around it.

    Disgusting.



  • Sorry to go on, but someone needs to point this out.. I will not accept an explanation from Football index that ‘it mentioned the corona virus in the title’ - see Rooney’s media article headlines above in my previous post...



  • Just before anyone loses their heads completely shall we wait for FI towers to address this in the morning?

    In my experience they’ve always held their hands up when they’ve made a mistake, we definitely need some clarity but I don’t think they’re a dirty company and intentionally fixing things.



  • @BeanDrown said in MB points transparency needed.:

    Just before anyone loses their heads completely shall we wait for FI towers to address this in the morning?

    In my experience they’ve always held their hands up when they’ve made a mistake, we definitely need some clarity but I don’t think they’re a dirty company and intentionally fixing things.

    Sorry? Have you seen the evidence posted above? They have been caught red handed on this occasion. I caught them before when it came to changing the ‘delta’ for moving a player a single 1p, and now I’ve caught them again. This is not acceptable and very shady practice.



  • @Sol said in MB points transparency needed.:

    @BeanDrown said in MB points transparency needed.:

    Just before anyone loses their heads completely shall we wait for FI towers to address this in the morning?

    In my experience they’ve always held their hands up when they’ve made a mistake, we definitely need some clarity but I don’t think they’re a dirty company and intentionally fixing things.

    Sorry? Have you seen the evidence posted above? They have been caught red handed on this occasion. I caught them before when it came to changing the ‘delta’ for moving a player a single 1p, and now I’ve caught them again. This is not acceptable and very shady practice.

    0_1586132691063_Screenshot_20200406-010009_Football INDEX.jpg

    The attached image shows that the 'news feed' appears to have been added at 0000 hours, but the actual article was written at 2355 hours.

    There is clearly dubiety here, and a potential error on the part of FI.

    Contact customer support, ask the question in a responsible manner and await a response before you go throwing accusations of cheating and fraudulent activity. 👍

    I am not saying that you are wrong, but the way you are going about it is not helpful.



  • @Sol could the difference in time be down to the first being when the article was uploaded and the second being the time it was added to RSS feed. We have already seen that an article and RSS feed article can have differences like the way names have been spelled. Maybe the times published and uploaded can vary too



  • Just because you can screenshot when the story was 'written', doesn't mean it was added or picked up by the RSS then. Suggesting FI are rigging MB by artificially delaying a story by a couple of minutes, simply doesn't stand up to any scrutiny for many reasons. I'd bet my port no one at FI was even monitoring it at 23:55 for one.

    We can all dig out FI for inconsistency all we like, but we also need to be careful about hysterically calling them out unnecessarily and simply incorrectly. This makes them be even more defensive and uncommunicative, and be even less minded listen to legitimate criticism and solutions.

    Similarly @EJ is someone who has put enormous faith into the product, and has ALWAYS seemed to conduct himself in the right and proper way, unlike many, many other accounts I can think of, large and small. It's just wrong to suggest he would care one way or the other about the Divs from a single day (or even a couple); he just wants to make the platform as good as it can be - as I hope we all do, because that is ultimately a win for everyone (apart from Tim Cahill and Peter Crouch perhaps...).

    EJ may have different ideas to myself of how to 'fix MB', but to suggest FI kept the Grealish stories to placate him is, frankly, ridiculous. I'm pretty sure he said he doesn't even own Grealish, and if he said it I'd also bet that is the case.

    We may all be tilted when things go wrong, but it would be to all our benefits to keep a sense of perspective. FI are human, and no doubt feeling the strain of the wider world just as we are too. But they've been getting the big things right in a period when it could have easily gone tits up.

    MB has many flaws, we know that, and FI know that. The Grealish call wasn't a great one. We could sit here all day and pick holes in the system. It's frustrating that it hasn't been addressed sooner. We may have differing views how it should operate. But it's still paying out everyday and keeping the platform going at the moment, when so many other things have ground to a halt.

    Nothing is going to change overnight (or even at 23:55). So let's do ourselves and FI a favour and keep positive and respectful of everyone.



  • @Sol not being funny but why are you still on the index with the constant hammering you give them, I don't think fi are that desperate that they need to worry about paying out for neymar and extra penny or two. It's coming across as just a bit bitter, it's a flawed system but people know that and it will take a slight delay to pick stories up. The constant moaning from people on here will only scare of newbies which benefits nobody



  • @MUFC £40k investment and the inability to market sell for a minimum of 3 months answer your question?

    0_1586158515493_C7D02969-7D70-4DF8-BD35-C5E91C5DFD1D.jpeg



  • @Black-wolf said in MB points transparency needed.:

    @Lukeroro they arent removing Coronavirus ones now unless its directly rating to a players health I believe

    So why are they removing those stories?! It's farcical.



  • They added the Neymar story on today



  • 0_1586164379828_Screenshot_20200406_101250.jpg

    Tricky one for FI today... Walker and Grealish in same mb article...



  • @Sol it's a tricky situation for the whole world, the index have handled it pretty well tbf, always gonna be glitches but I don't think they would risk their gambling licence by rigging such a small amount of money to suit them, neymar story would only get tagged on to today anyway if that was the case improving his chances today



  • @Westy said in MB points transparency needed.:

    0_1586164379828_Screenshot_20200406_101250.jpg

    Tricky one for FI today... Walker and Grealish in same mb article...

    I laughed when i saw that after CS telling me the two weren’t comparable



  • @Black-wolf said in MB points transparency needed.:

    @Westy said in MB points transparency needed.:

    0_1586164379828_Screenshot_20200406_101250.jpg

    Tricky one for FI today... Walker and Grealish in same mb article...

    I laughed when i saw that after CS telling me the two weren’t comparable

    0_1586167495891_70D368D1-4A89-4BEA-BDC4-CA2F5A2E987C.jpeg

    To quote Eddie...let’s see football index ‘balls this one up!’ 😂



  • Funnily enough they have removed it for walker but left it for Grealish. How can one story be eligible for one player but not the other. Sorry to keep going on but i find it astounding how bad FI’s management of MB is atm. Is the lack of football and the lockdown causing bored employees to over think things 🤣🤣



  • @Black-wolf said in MB points transparency needed.:

    ‘Funnily enough they have removed it for walker but left it for Grealish. How can one story be eligible for one player but not the other.’

    Answer: it’s rigged. Simple. Rooney and lingard will take 1st and 2nd spot, thus saving FI literally 100’s of thousands in payouts on Neymar and Pogba...


Log in to reply