Just read....





  • FIT is a legend. When he speaks, ppl listen. Talking 100% unadulterated sense as usual.



  • Good and interesting blog.



  • Good read. What I can start to see is why FI introduced keepers - and my way of thinking has come about since LP1 started making moves....

    Had FI not introduced keepers, and LP1 starts freeing up everyone's money from the tops - where would that money go? It may leave the market, otherwise it would go into ME where FI makes no real money.

    The timing of LP1 with keepers means that as LP1 releases peoples funds, that money is almost certainly going back into newly minted goalkeeper shares - which goes directly back into FI coffers. This means the LP1 purchases are pretty much zero risk, as there is no net loss on the account sheet if customers are going straight back in for newly minted shares.

    Would people be buying from market with their LP1 released funds if keepers hadn't been released? Doubtful. Most likely a smart business move that work in conjunction with each other



  • @Baydog said in Just read....:

    Good read. What I can start to see is why FI introduced keepers - and my way of thinking has come about since LP1 started making moves....

    Had FI not introduced keepers, and LP1 starts freeing up everyone's money from the tops - where would that money go? It may leave the market, otherwise it would go into ME where FI makes no real money.

    The timing of LP1 with keepers means that as LP1 releases peoples funds, that money is almost certainly going back into newly minted goalkeeper shares - which goes directly back into FI coffers. This means the LP1 purchases are pretty much zero risk, as there is no net loss on the account sheet if customers are going straight back in for newly minted shares.

    Would people be buying from market with their LP1 released funds if keepers hadn't been released? Doubtful. Most likely a smart business move that work in conjunction with each other

    Can we have a bet on how long it takes for someone to say they got lucky and it was never a smart business move (not me, I'm just stating it so they don't say anything and hopefully suffer less stress and upset by stating they got lucky).



  • @Baydog
    My thoughts exactly .... the keeper intro at this time had me puzzled. I’m starting to think FI pulled a masterstroke here. All this new money and stale money in holds is being redistributed across all this newly minted asset class.
    I can see this trend ongoing for a while until keepers reach their true market values .
    I see a lot more cap appreciation here and new users and old users alike will make hay on this strategy.
    Benifits to FI as outlined with minimal money leaving the platform and more in their coffers for future yield increases . Can see rest of market getting much more trading once the keeper craze slows down .
    To say I was initially sceptical and worried when the div announcement was made would be an understatement but now I’m seeing the soundness of this risky play and fair play to FI if this comes off it will have been a brilliant ballsy play .



  • @Millerman

    The keeper thing baffled me more than most decisions that they have made previously... But I guess a week of reflection and seeing other things happening in the wider picture - eventually things do start to make some sense...

    I suspect the FI associated MM's will act during the keeper frenzy and in similar situations as required (clearing queues to facilitate market buying frenzies). Then there will be other MM's who are added, and they will be the ones acting more in the IS sense. They will be there to trade and make money like the rest of us, but with set parameters in exchange for certain incentives



  • To me there is a fundamental flaw in the blog, which is the 30% figure. And the issue is he keeps going back to that figure to back up most arguments, but I think that figure is flawed. Most players did not see anywhere near a 30% increase to their value, that 30% number is almost entirely taken by keepers. It's hard to put an exact number on it I agree, but my calculations is that most players saw a 10-15% increase. When you replace the 30% with say 10%, most of the arguments unravel fairly quickly



  • @Dr-Jan-Itor dont think keepers got a 30% rise as the only value the had prior was a 1p clean sheet so at the very least they got a 300% rise but yes id say his 30% dividend rise was a generous estimate i had it around 20% personally.

    Overall though it amaas a very good read that makes a lot of good points



  • @Dr-Jan-Itor

    The review certainly puts the value in the lower and middle end for the meanwhile.. The yields in this area will read more impressively. To begin with I was very angry, as I did not see how the review would help liquidity at the bottom end.

    But, I think as the blog alludes to, the stingy increase in the traditional payouts will probably make traders look at the middle and bottom end - so that should in theory sort out some of the liquidity issues there currently...

    Again, come the new season and new value emerges, more people may look to get out of some of the hype holds with little or no potential yields, to move onto cheaper PB holds who with one win on a silver or gold day can return 10-20% - so this LS01 thing is probably going to be providing the queue clearing service to support cycles like that too...

    There is most likely an agenda from FI to stifle the top end a little, but I think it's probably to benefit the wider market and getting the bottom moving organically by making their yields stand out.. The top end players will emerge again in CL/EL and when the new season is underway, so I do not expect sustained drops at all in the players that deserve to be there on div returns



  • @Baydog said in Just read....:

    @Dr-Jan-Itor

    The review certainly puts the value in the lower and middle end for the meanwhile.. The yields in this area will read more impressively. To begin with I was very angry, as I did not see how the review would help liquidity at the bottom end.

    But, I think as the blog alludes to, the stingy increase in the traditional payouts will probably make traders look at the middle and bottom end - so that should in theory sort out some of the liquidity issues there currently...

    Again, come the new season and new value emerges, more people may look to get out of some of the hype holds with little or no potential yields, to move onto cheaper PB holds who with one win on a silver or gold day can return 10-20% - so this LS01 thing is probably going to be providing the queue clearing service to support cycles like that too...

    There is most likely an agenda from FI to stifle the top end a little, but I think it's probably to benefit the wider market and getting the bottom moving organically by making their yields stand out.. The top end players will sink or swim on returns once the new season is underway, so I do not expect sustained drops at all in the players that deserve to be there on div returns

    Yeah I'm sort of in agreement, but there are certainly areas in the article which don't have much to back them. Like the idea there are plenty of players that can get to 20-30% yield. It is true, there are, but a good chunk of them are over 30. There are only 29 players under the age of 30 that would have got more than a 20% yield under this div structure. Not a huge amount when you consider all the available players. 39 players above the age of 30, but the divs are offset by cap depreciation and of course increase risk due to no IS. Though there is strong argument that over 30 dividend earners are the big winners, and I'm not saying it is a bad thing they got a win. In fact I am happy they got a win.

    The 29 players is actually around the same number of players under 30 that would have returned 20% under last div increase (using their 1st November price). So I don't really buy into the argument that this benefits the bottom end. Well, it does, but not because the bottom end holds much more value, only the top end has been crushed. To me, there were so many other ways to build value in the lower end then to crush the top end, and we shouldn't celebrate this. A modest increase to IPDs would have been far better, adding value to players rather than taking it away. Or permanently changing the threshold for gold matches, increasing the chance of that lower end player winning a big payout.

    I guess I also put offside by a seemingly regular defence (not you Baydog and Black Wold whose opinions I really respect) of the small increase by labelling those who are disappointed as having unrealistic expectations (100% is often cited). I don't think that is fair. I personally did't think or hope that. But for many reasons I am disappointed and worried that the market is gonna tank near the end of the year.

    That said, I do agree that the article makes alot of good points, just some of them I dont quite agree with.



  • @Dr-Jan-Itor

    That's an eye-opening statistic about 29 players under the age of 30 returning more than a 20% yield. @Martyn-B and @dan the untaggable man are going to have very rewarding strategies under the new structure I believe. They do not carry the same prejudices that myself and many others do about age.. I think that the current matrix probably does favour senior players (set piece responsibility) for a reason, and it is also realistic that senior players at their peak are good dividend winners... But only 29 players under 30 returning 20% - wow!

    I think that just shows what sentiment means to this market. It can drive players who basically return a pittance to unsustainable prices - but to be fair there is a good case for future value in any equation with no IS - more than ever you have to factor in the likelihood of being able to sell those shares on in 3 years are etc...

    There is a lot of adapting to do in mindsets on buying and selling. I cringe when I see some of the buys going through the ticker at the moment. People do need to think more about how they trade from this point onwards. The removal of IS has resulted in a re-appraisal of values. There is more risk on every hold, as you can't flog 'em back to FI.

    I was only expecting a 25% increase - so the technical increase is about in line with that. But as you say, it is not a real 30% rise at all (just like the last rise wasn't 57%, it was 300% to the gold day star man and modest rises elsewhere)... I certainly was not expecting keepers, but I can now accept why they have done it. I think it will stand the company in very good stead in a difficult time.

    What I will say about expectations though - I do expect them to go big within the next year or so. I do think that there will be another dividend rise or significant promotion before the end of the year, and I do expect all areas of the market to rise in line with a return of positive sentiment in due course...



  • @Baydog

    I love my Golden Oldies and I reckon I should have 4 or 5 players in most TOTM.

    This is my current top 5 dividend returners:

    0_1594840565813_Screenshot_20200715-200708.png

    4 of the 5 are over 30 and are ignored by a vast majority of the market. The older players tend to win PB more often (in my opinion, not done the research), are often on penalties, set pieces, club captains and Messi and Ronaldo are rarely substituted.

    Also bring in MB as they have history. Selling is obviously a future concern but they are never far from a PB win (and now a TOTM) to regenerate interest.

    Still dividends in the old dogs of war yet...

    Edit: Ronaldo currently underperforming as I recently topped up another 500.



  • William has been amazing hold this season



  • @Tom77 said in Just read....:

    William has been amazing hold this season

    Willian has been decent as well :P


Log in to reply