@Dan-The-Man You're right I am saying that. The only thing that drives or creates value on FI are dividends or the perceived prospect of future dividends. There is literally nothing else that provides foundational, underlying value behind these fictional "shares" we are buying in players.
Best posts made by Wotabeast
RE: The Eric Dier paradox, or why average players are booming on the index
RE: PB is a fix
@Black-wolf Yet Kimmich has still scored 200+ more times than any other player on the index this season, even without the clean sheet bonuses.
The only reason he hasn't been winning the divs is luck - he's had absolutely rotten luck with the matchday scores on the days he has posted big scores. He has more scores over 200 than anyone else and has the 4th highest PB average of all players to play 10+ games this season, so it's not like he's not scoring enough points to be winning dividends, or not posting high enough peaks to be challenging at the top. He actually doesn't need the clean sheet bonus to be a contender.
The fact that he's been so unlucky so far this season makes him a highly attractive prospect right now in my opinion as the law of averages says he will win eventually, and his overall wins this season are likely to settle up more or less where they should be. That could mean he will be in for a good few PB wins in the second half of the season. The fact he's been scoring highly and not winning shouldn't be a reason to stay away - if anything I think it's a good reason to buy as it means he's undervalued.
Top 200/MB-gate update
It's now been a month and a half since FI opened up MB to the whole of the market (I believe it was October 1st that the change kicked in?). We all know that previously FI stated winners would only come from outside the top 200 7% of the time, based on their research.
There was uproar in the early days following the announcement when it seemed like that 7% figure was a gross underestimate, but many traders were sensibly recommending we wait and see how it pans out.
It's now been 49 days since the change was made, and a quick bit of analysis on IndexGain shows that the MB winner has come from outside the top 200 on 23 days since then, or 47% of the time*.
Now i am aware that the nature of the new cycle shifts across a season, and we are likely to see more prominence for the top 200 as the latter stages of the cups, CL, EL and Euros approach, but is now a reasonable time to challenge the 7% figure, and assert that the actual figure across a year will be FAR higher?
If it were to fall out at 7% across a year, that would mean 25 days of wins for players outside the top 200 - and we are at 23 wins after just 49 days. Even if the nature of the news cycle changes significantly across the year, surely we are looking at a figure, at an estimate, of at least 20% of wins across a year from players outside the top 200?
My question is, is it reasonable to assert at this stage that with this MB change, FI has made a quite considerable change to the terms of our bets? They tried to reassure us that it would hardly make any impact, but the evidence so far shows the opposite.
I was also previously of the belief that the 50% increase in MB payouts would cover any losses related to the fewer days that top 200 players would win - they might win less often but they would win bigger when they won. But previous analysis of several top MB players indicated that they could only afford to lose 30% of their MB wins without losing on the actual amount paid out. So on the current trajectory they are going to return less, as 47% of MB wins have come from squad players since October 1st.
*(caveat - this is based on looking at current player prices, and applying a cutoff of £1.40 for the top 200 - both of these things shift over time but i don't believe it would have actually made a difference to the figures).
RE: Turns out you can lose money...
@janner73 @Pagey74 I agree with @janner73 on this - i think the index has been compressing to the point where we're about to see a surge at the top end - whether organic or mechanically induced by FI with a dividend increase, a bonus or whatever.
I predicted the same around the start of June, when i saw that the top 10 had been in stagnation since after the SS and the rest of the top 100 had rapidly caught up with them. I was right at that point - money started surging back in to the top end around mid-June.
Looking at it now, the top 10 has grown by just 3.5% since the end of March, after the SS, while the top 100 has grown by 36% and the Footie has grown by 46%. Even looking back to start of the year before the pre-SS surge in the top players, the top 10 has grown by 35% (including that massive SS surge), compared to 62% for the top 100 and 145% for the Footie. So the rest of the market has grown considerably faster and more dramatically than the top 10.
That is a lot of money being put into a lot of players with zero inherent value, with traders gambling on quick rises perhaps. At some point the regular promise of dividends and relative stability of the top players seems to appear more attractive again.
I also believe FI will be keen to see the top 10 in green - they love it when the top is flying - they're posting rocket emojis all over Twitter - it's obviously great PR for the product. Also, logically, the prices in the top 10 set the benchmark for the rest of the index - they need to keep going up in the long-term rather than down, because otherwise if the current trend continues you're going to have a point where Greenwood is the highest value player on FI, leaving a trail of world class players in his dust - and the optics of that are just not great - we want to see the world's best players at the top of the index, leading the way and driving the prices of everyone up, as it makes it look like something that actually correlates with real-world common sense.
RE: Pogba, Hold or sell
@fantasyindex Actually Pogba was the 8th highest PB returner last season, with 22p in PB divs and 5 wins, more than Hazard, Van Dijk, Ronaldo and Sergio Ramos. His PB average was 110 and his PB base was a very decent 79.
So to say he is only an MB player is completely untrue.
More importantly, with MB & PB combined he returned a full 33% more in divs than anyone else on FI, with Messi in second place.
RE: A red lining market?
@janner73 Yep, I agree. And for people saying that the top players don't represent value - I disagree when you have the likes of Pogba and Neymar offering 20% plus yields in dividends annually while you just sit there, which can be reinvested back into the market.
The quick flip IPD culture looks attractive but for every player who smashes a 50% rise in a week there is another player who goes nowhere or drops drastically. Traders playing this game exclusively might win big, but they are also likely to lose big at times as well. I don't think we should be under any illusions that everyone playing the short-term game is profiting massively from it.
RE: A red lining market?
@Hotspur There will come a tipping point where the top 20-50 can't continue to drop relative to the rest of the market - and i believe this will happen even without a dividend increase. I predicted it back in June, when i had seen the top 10 dropping consistently since the share split, while the rest of the market caught up. You could see there would come a point where the top players looked like good value again, and we will get there again - especially perhaps when the CL/EL football kicks in.
I agree though, a dividend increase would stabilise the market and give it a clear direction of travel.
I was thinking the other day, why couldn't FI just scale dividends comparative to the size/value of the market? Every 3 or 6 months i think they should have a formula which scales the dividends in relation to the growth in the market. In theory that would be fair for traders and it would focus the market around dividends, which is the thing that gives it underlying value. However, it would harm the potential growth in profitability that i'm sure FI is striving for, so no doubt they wouldn't be keen on the idea.
RE: A red lining market?
@Stevo Fair enough mate, and i'm glad that you're doing well, but unless dividends roughly keep up with market growth, then everything that FI is built on would eventually collapse, because it would just become a pyramid with no underlying value. A dividend increase is in the interests of the entire market and all traders, not just those who are seeing their portfolios struggle at the moment, or those playing the long-term game.
RE: SELL YOUR NEYMAR
@Yellow @Dan-The-Man I agree with Yellow - Soccer Stocks wasn't just playing the role of messenger, he was strongly advising traders on what to do with their shares in an effort to influence their decision making. A messenger would have reported the news neutrally and let traders make their own minds up!
RE: The rise & fall of Paul Pogba
@Dan-The-Man I wouldn't say you need 1,000 shares for divs to be "worth anything". I have 666 Pogba's (nothing sinister, i just had 222 before the SS) and have been paid out £954 in dividends on him this year so far. Even if i had half of those shares, the £477 wouldn't be worthless by a long shot.
Even a player like Griezmann, who i have a much smaller holding in (300 shares) has seen me paid £96 of free money at a yield of around 17%. That's far from worthless - i think it's pretty amazing actually.
Latest posts made by Wotabeast
RE: Confusing situation with Bayern.
@chaps1988 Lewa's price is lower than Gnabry and Sane's because Lewa is 32, Gnabry is 25 and Sane is 24. In theory Gnabry has 7 more dividend winning years than Lewa and Sane has 8.
That makes Gnabry and Sane massively more valuable than Lewandowski and arguably both are now hugely undervalued given the new dividend payouts. Gnabry scored 300+ last night for 70 minutes of action. If he does that 5 times a season, as you suggest, he will easily return his current price in dividends and more over the length of his career.
RE: Kylian Mbappe
So Mbappe's FI stock has been back on the rise again after a couple of excellent weeks in terms of goals and all-round performances.
I think the last few weeks have done a lot to dispel the feeling that he is a bad hold for PB, not suited to the matrix or simply not going to become a top level world class player.
Have any traders changed their mind on him?
@Victory It's pretty simple. England rely on Kane because he is head and shoulders above the likes of Tammy and Calvert-Lewin. He's a proven, experienced goalscorer with a phenomenal return in international football, whereas the other two are young, still somewhat raw and with no track record at senior international level.
Almost any international team would have Kane as their starting no.9. If he can prove his fitness and recovers match sharpness before the end of the season it is a no-brainer for Southgate to pick him and start him in every game for the Euros.
RE: Raheem Sterling Bouncability Factor!
@Black-wolf @Dronny-Gaz he's also way off his peak price now, and I don't see him as a player who will continue to be out of favour amongst traders for long, so there's an indication of where he could head back to.
Look at Rashford before his injury. There was a lot of negativity and his price was absolutely diving. He dropped well over £1 from over £5 to less than £4, before a bit of form cake his way and he flew up to beyond his previous peak, before the injury sadly curtailed his progress.
I see a similar pattern for Sterling. I don't think he can drop much further and hopefully a big performance in the coming weeks will kick start his rise. I think there were promising signs in the CL last night.
RE: Raheem Sterling Bouncability Factor!
Surely he's due a rise back towards the £6.50 mark at least. Likely to be England's main man at the Euros and he's still such a good age in FI terms.
Sentiment seems to have been against him lately though, regardless of the injury. There was some concern about the MB review affecting his chances of "winning" racism-related media divs, and traders seem sceptical of him as a PB hold.
I will say that, although his PB scores tend to rely on goalscoring, his base scores are still decent for a forward, and he has 5 PB scores over 200 this season. That puts him in the top 10 of forwards for 200+ scores and only Gabriel Jesus out of those 10 is younger than Sterling.
Add to that his MB potential with England and now with the Man City ban, a potential load of transfer speculation, I think his price surely has to bounce back soon.
RE: Kylian Mbappe
@ScouseSte Fair enough - I believe the signs are there that Mbappe will become one of the best PB forwards on the platform in the coming years, as it's rare to see a forward score consistently so highly at such a young age. Considering his age and dividend potential over the next 10 years, I don't see him as being overpriced. This is all a game of opinions and trying to predict future performance - I think the signs are there that his future performance will be excellent, and that's not even considering MB and transfer spec potential if he ever moved to the Prem.
I will admit I hold and I'm currently approx 55% up on him in cap app over the past year. Not the most exciting hold or the most dramatic increase but I hold a significant amount of my deposits in top end players to minimise risk, so I'm quite happy with the slow and steady cap app on him and other similar holds. Everyone must select their own approach to trading!
RE: Kylian Mbappe
Final point - Mbappe was 11th forward last season on the index in terms of number of PB scores of 150+ (8 games). The next nearest in his age bracket was Ismaila Sarr, way down the list with 5 scores of 150+.
This season he is also 11th forward in terms of 150+ scores, with 9. Nobody above him is younger than 26. Nobody younger than him is in the top 40.
RE: Kylian Mbappe
Also it's just worth mentioning Mbappe was the 4th highest PB average forward on the platform last season (10+ PB games), and the youngest in the top 50 forwards for PB average. Dembele, Bailey, Jovic and Richarlison were the closest in that top 50 in age (1 year older) and all averaged less than 75 (Mbappe's ave was 110).
This season he's far and away the best average scoring forward aged 21 or under, and he's 4th overall in PB average for the 21 and under category.
I think it's madness to judge him by the same standards as the likes of Messi, Ronaldo or Neymar at this point. Against his peers, he is in fact, peerless.
RE: Kylian Mbappe
Much better to look at last season when Neymar was out of the team for a prolonged period and see what happened to Mbappe then. Between Jan 24 and the end of the season, in games Neymar missed, Mbappe's PB average was very similar to his seasons average overall (108 Vs 110 across the season), while he scored 19 of his 37 goals for the season in this period (in 17 games, with the other 18 coming in the 20 games prior to Jan 24). He also claimed 5 of his 9 assists in these 17 games, with the other 4 coming in the remaining 20 games he played.
In summary, his goals and assists contribution increased slightly without Neymar being in the team (1.1 goals per game Vs 0.9, 0.29 assists per game Vs 0.2). His PB average wasn't affected, although he scored 100+ slightly more frequently (in 65% of games Vs 60%). It is also worth considering that playing in the same team as Neymar, with the creativity he has, may lead to increased PB average scores for a player like Mbappe.
In summary I would say that Mbappe more or less continued to do his thing in the absence of Neymar. His numbers improved slightly but this sample size still isn't big enough to make concrete conclusions. What is clear though is that a player who was 20 at the time was shouldering a huge responsibility for one of the world's most high profile teams and he certainly wasn't shrinking into the background.
Hope that information helps traders to make their own minds up - even though it's not necessarily conclusive, I feel better having looked into it rather than taking one game as evidence as to whether or not he can "step up".
RE: Daily Fail insider trading
The Express and Star have been the main drivers of MB for Bruno Fernandes over recent weeks. Already 7 articles about him on the MB feed today and 5 of them were from the Daily Express.
Does make you wonder if someone from their digital team is heavily invested. Often the articles come in flurries first thing in the morning. Today it was 4 Express articles between 5.30 and 7.30 - just in time to give him a nice MB foundation so traders can see him top of the pile while they're perusing FI over their cornflakes.