Raise dividends or add more eligible games?

  • Seen lots of people saying that the dividends structure needs altering after the share split... just thinking, if they are gonna leave the dividends as they are could we at least expect them to make all cup competitions and all international games eligible for Pb? Would mean a lot less media days but i personally think they need to focus more on PB than MB anyway so would kill 2 birds with 1 stone.

  • I personally think more league's will be eligible for PB criteria.


    They would be my guesses.

  • I had an idea the other day around this topic. What if they introduced kind of a secondary PB and G&A structure for lesser leagues?

    So the current structure stays exactly as it is with the same 5 leagues and competitions but then they have kind of like B leagues. Let's say the Portuguese, Dutch, Turkish, Russian and Scottish premier league's for example.

    For these B leagues G&A could be paid out at 1p per goal, 0.5p per assist and 1p per clean sheet. PB could also be paid at half the rate of the A leagues.

    An A league and B League player can't compete against eachother for divs on the same day (unless they are in UCL or Europa League), you would have 2 pages for the PB scores, the A players scores and B players scores competing for seperate dividends.

    It would mean that say Frenkie de Jong can now earn you divs at Ajax but can only earn half as much as say Salah because de Jong is in a B league that only pays out at half rate.

    I think it would certainly cause more money to come into the index as there are more dividends up for grabs and a 32 year old playing for Benfica is no longer basically worthless so prices of players in those B leagues would rise a little. It would also help investors see who is scoring good PB scores in other leagues before they potentially transfer.

    Just a random idea I had haha

  • Europa and champions league are in alredy. the mickey mouse cups don't need to be added really.

  • Scotland u must hold Defoe!😂

  • @Bigfella Sounds great to me. I'd love to see the qualifying games increased. No reason why the cup games couldn't be included and MB reduced to compensate.

  • @CLACKETT said in Raise dividends or add more eligible games?:

    Scotland u must hold Defoe!😂

    Nearly 5.5m people live in Scotland, I know they can use FI for England PL & European leagues but it would entice a lot more punters right on our own doorstep with no marketing required, if they could qualify for PB on their own league.

    Imagine all those Celtic & Rangers fans. 🤔

    Seems a no brainer.

    Disclaimer: I do NOT hold Defoe. 😎 (Yet!)

  • @Static You read my mind. I would like this post 10 times if I could. I would diversify the spending and have a wider range of appeal to investors!

  • The only way adding more leagues would work successfully is if it was accompanied by more PB dividend categories or places. Otherwise it would make PB even tougher to win and have adverse impact on the market.

    Similarly any reduction in MB would have an adverse impact on the top 10 players, which are a key part of a lot of people’s portfolio. That in turn could trigger a loss of confidence in the market, large scale withdrawals and widespread panic.

    Just look at the damage and panic that the original introduction of G&A caused and that was a relatively minor change.

  • Personally I cannot see this happening for some time and would not want to see it. If new leagues were introduced you would see significant falls in value across the board on your current portfolio's as the majority of traders would sell existing players to raise funds to invest in all the new players becoming eligible for PB. It would also make PB more difficult to win so reducing dividend returns in reality.

  • @Ericali

    This would kill FI its like rocking horse shit trying to pick a winner as it is.

  • @Metropolis_山の中の市 and crash the market?

    MB has underpinned it all since day one and I don’t think FI should crash the highest price players. Look at the drops G and A caused and that was only a minor change. Times the panic by ten for less media dividends.

  • @Metropolis_山の中の市 said in Raise dividends or add more eligible games?:

    @Bigfella Sounds great to me. I'd love to see the qualifying games increased. No reason why the cup games couldn't be included and MB reduced to compensate.

    Reduce MB and there's no reason to trade in the summer.

    I think a two-time dividend system just would work. Say the Scottish, Portuguese and Dutch leagues were eligible for PB separately, Scott Sinclair would be more expensive than Neymar! It would fuck with the market unbelievably.

    Maybe triple PB day's pay out for top 3 in each position of the current 5 leagues?

  • @ocs123 I think alot of people fail to realise most the buying and selling is from money already in the market, with new money trickling in all the time. So anything that changes the balance of the market wouldn't see new money rush into the market, but current players sold and that money reinvested in the new direction.

  • Why isn't there a PB for Goalkeepers?

    Goalkeepers seem totally pointless in FI

  • @El-Marko89 There in DF PB and they have clean sheet IPD. This has been debated to death.

    Think the reason FI won't give them there own PB just for GK is the pool of players will be to small and certain goalkeepers would clean up (think ones that play out from the back in strong teams). Also on single match days it would be which of these 2 - 4 GKs will get the divindends.

  • @Misto Fair enough. Thanks

  • @Misto

    This is definitely true. When G&A dividends were first trialled in October lots of people were angry. Despite it being extra dividends, it shifted money away from defenders causing some people to lose quite a bit of money (in the short term at least), didn't lead to the big influx of cash that FI must have expected and actually caused a fair few people to leave entirely.

    So I think FI learned a big lesson then about how they go about altering dividends, and also about how they go about announcing changes. I can't imagine any imminent, big changes to dividends. Opening up other PB leagues, even if with a secondary PB structure, would be a pretty big one, as it would add a lot of extra dividends into the market. Investments in normal PB leagues would go down in price quite a bit initially, which would cause a lot of trader anger for a while, in my opinion. Also, it would add complexity to the dividends structure, which FI have explicitly said they are very wary of doing.

    Dividend changes I think are more likely:

    • Slight adjustments along with the share split. If they went for a four-way split, would they really have MB dividends of 1.25p? It just sounds odd, as much as anything. (That said, they've basically already said they plan to offer the ability to buy fractions of shares in the future, so maybe they are comfortable with offering weird fractions for dividends. I just think it leaves FI looking a bit strange.)
    • Introduction of wider media sources for MB. As FI is launched in countries that have their own big leagues - Italy, France, Germany and Spain - they will need to make it relevant to them too. This will change which players are the relevant media players. I know I wouldn't be as keen on FI if it was only in German, traded using Euro, and exclusively used German media sources, so I expect the same would be true for a German trader looking at FI as it currently is. So at the very least they could translate the website and add in different media sources. I think this change could be done slowly, but I think it's necessary at some point for FI to expand as much as it could.
    • Eventually raising dividends staying in the current structure (for the sake of simplicity and not annoying people). Prices will have to increase quite a bit more before then, I think, for FI to remain confident they will still turn a profit. If they don't do this at some point FI will be limiting their potential scale, which I don't think they'd want to do, until they become so big that increasing dividends doesn't attract sufficient additional trading.

    The key thing to remember is that every time FI changes dividends, even if adding extra ones, they are changing the rules of existing bets, where, in the short term at least, the relative value of those bets is as important as the real value. There is a basic fairness problem with this, unless it is done very, very sensitively. Of course I want extra dividends! But I don't want FI to scare people away from the product whilst doing it.

  • @Willie-Mink Very well put. I argee with everything you have talked about there. The only thing I would guess at being different is the inceased MB sources. They will/do need to add extra sources, but it's how they go about implementing it.

    I think if they just add in extra sources from other leagues, it would weigh very favourably to the internationally recognised players. Neymar, Messi and Ronaldo can win MB with just British sources with EPL players winning if they do something newsworthy. If they add in other countries, I think the combined stories about them 3 will out weight any localy relavent new to any league.

    The best idea I can think of would be to make the MB payouts local to each country, using there relavent local news soucres, but have the players traded on the FI worldwide.

    EG: Mauro Icardi scores a hat trick in the derby. He'll win MB in Italy and all Italian FI users would be paid out for the win. Meanwhile in the UK Pogba gets a new hair cut and wins MB for the UK based FI players.

  • @Misto Interesting suggestion. I don't see how MB can be altered without seriously messing the market up since three years of trading have occurred around it. This is a possible solution for other countries. Would certainly add an interesting dynamic.

Log in to reply