Dark Cloud's Financial Market Model Version 1.0 - Page 3

darkcloud4579 · 12-26-2007, 12:34 AM

Here is the Excel file (you can use OpenOffice, too.) for folks to plow away with. I have it in other formats, if that's what you want.

If you have questions, do PM me or post it here. That way, I don't waste precious keystrokes explaining it for no real rhyme or reason.

I've got my own theories about what things look like, but I don't know what good it would do it break it all out right now. Maybe on another day when I've got some desire.

Scroll down and use the newest version instead of this one.

darkcloud4579 · 12-26-2007, 12:40 AM

ESPN Stadium Tour
MLB Valuations
MLB Attendance
Canadian MSA Data
US MSA Data
Ticket Prices (2006)
How the Luxury Tax works (*The one I devised isn't the same...and it wasn't intended to be. It's based on market size deficiencies and is intended to do that on purpose.)
Median income, by place, USA
Who fans root for, a US map
US Census Population Projections 2004-2030

That should get you going...and the DMA spreadsheet listed above is also super useful and I used that, too.

Doughnuts? · 12-26-2007, 10:46 AM

nevermind/

darkcloud4579 · 12-27-2007, 12:44 AM

I was just goofing around with this and I noticed something interesting. If you try to put a team in a really small market, the model will not significantly deviate the local media revenue. Why? It's apparently tied to attendance, as well as fan interest. So it doesn't put all of the pressure solely on being in a big market. I did that on purpose. Since it's just calculated every ten years, I didn't know if it made a whole lot of sense to have teams having their local media determine everything, especially since there are teams like Boston that aren't really in big markets on paper, but have a big sphere in influence due to the region and secondarily to their success and I wanted to factor for that.

So if you attempt to put a team in Keokuk, Iowa...just to see what the model would do, very little will happen. What you'll need to do instead is, make sure that teams in small markets place in smaller capacity stadiums. Then after a year of attendance, then you can see what the model would do with them. Because teams in smaller markets that can't draw as well, have more pressure on them to have more success to get more fans to come out, etc.

Anyway...just noticed it and figured I ought to share.

darkcloud4579 · 12-27-2007, 04:57 PM

I was just messing around with the league I use this for and I moved a team from a small market to a larger one and I wasn't happy with the local media market size calculations anymore. I don't think it's steep enough and it was far too reliant on fan interest and not enough on the actual size of the market. So I adjusted it some.

I'm also going to break up the multi-team markets. Right now, they all get credit for being in that market as if they were one team. I did that initially because I felt like the multiple teams actually increased baseball interest in those markets and that the team's presence ought to reflect that. But in retrospect, it just skews the data too much and it makes it ridiculously unfair in the model. So I'm going to work with that, too.

The point of this secondarily was to make sure that small market teams would really be penalized for being small market. Not to the point where they couldn't compete, per se, but to where it when you play the game you feel a distinct disadvantage compared to your big market peers and have actual hard decisions to make since you can't do what they can do over a ten-year period.

I might tweak it more in response to that. I won't release the file unless someone asks me for it, because I've never been able to ascertain that anyone has actually used it and if they have, what their thoughts are related to it.

darkcloud4579 · 12-27-2007, 08:57 PM

Because the cash maximum thing is handled so poorly by the game, I've decided in the next season of my league to eliminate the number I have in the game designated as a cash number and instead, to just give each team a flat number that's equated the amount of national media revenue they get as their cash and just being done with it. It's too much of a hassle to try to police and the game just doesn't do it right and the alternative is ridiculous sums being thrown around because the game isn't equipped to know what the heck is going on.

One nice side effect of eliminating cash from the equation is that the local media revenue as % of team income portion of the sheet is far more reflective of real life things (that is, teams make the bulk of their cash from local media revenue) and it also allows me to alter the revenue sharing formula.

So it turns out okay in the end.

dl5175 · 12-28-2007, 03:56 PM

I used to numbers from the last file but I play my league in real time so I will not know the results for a while. What it did do was give some of my broke computer teams cash to bid on FA that they previosly did not. So are you saying that the cash number that you gave you are going to add it to media revenue? What should we use for a flat cash number and how will it affect the computers willingness to go over budget?

darkcloud4579 · 12-28-2007, 04:29 PM

Yeah, I noticed the same thing. That it gave broke teams money and I specifically did not want that to happen. But that's a flaw in the stupid game mechanics, because even when you turn off revenue sharing, it still tries to share out cash. Which is irritating. But I digress.

I changed the entire formula in the sheet I'm using now. What I did basically, was tweak the formula so that local media revenue was calculated differently. For cash, I simply replaced the national media field and issue each team the same amount of cash to start. Then with the tweaked local media formula, it makes things better because then you have your stark contrasts and teams won't be able to share revenue unless you specifically want that.

I guess what I'll do is, release the new file and you all can just use that one or the old one if folks prefer that formula to the new one.

It's attached here. The changes are listed below:

Quote:

-Eliminated the National Media category and replaced it with a new cash calculation mechanism. It's a flat rate calculation that you should apply to all teams.
-Reformulated the local media revenue category. It is now more reliant on the team's DMA and market size than before, to ensure that big market teams have a more natural advantage.
-Recalculated media revenue and budget categories based on previous changes.
-Expanded sheet for 32 team league.
-Reformulated luxury tax and revenue sharing formulas. Teams are now assesses the luxury tax at the rate in which they are over the set rate. For instance, if a team is $50 million over the tax, they will pay $50 million in luxury tax according to the formula.

This is the same one I was using for my current league, so it'll be a bit different than the other one and isn't ready for a straight MLB league right now, because I set the numbers for 2020 and not for present in this particular one. It's why I'm leaving the other one up.

And one other anomaly on this particular sheet is that Boston's market size is set to include the entire regional population of New England, rather than just the Boston MSA. This is a weird thing, but because of the new local media revenue setup, I wanted to reflect that team's emergence as a dominant market franchise via their regional market share and that was the only way I could tweak it to reflect that. Feel free to change that or anything else however you want obviously.

SetonHallPirate · 12-28-2007, 05:31 PM

I've actually just started my own league, and I'm trying to see what V5 is doing...a few tweaks I made, however:

1: Went back to 2006 data for the attendance and performance stuff (league starts in 2007, remember) and used the OOTP payrolls.
2: Deep-sixed the luxury tax.
3: Replaced the Revenue-Sharing formula, so that half of all locally-earned media revenue is shared.

I'm going to divide the markets, but not until after the 2007 season...I'm already in June of 2007 in this league, and don't want to screw everything up in midseason with the six teams in Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York.

darkcloud4579 · 12-28-2007, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SetonHallPirate

I've actually just started my own league, and I'm trying to see what V5 is doing...a few tweaks I made, however:

1: Went back to 2006 data for the attendance and performance stuff (league starts in 2007, remember) and used the OOTP payrolls.
2: Deep-sixed the luxury tax.
3: Replaced the Revenue-Sharing formula, so that half of all locally-earned media revenue is shared.

I'm going to divide the markets, but not until after the 2007 season...I'm already in June of 2007 in this league, and don't want to screw everything up in midseason with the six teams in Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York.

Sounds awesome. Keep me posted on how that works out for you. It's cool to hear what people are doing with it. I like the idea you've implemented in lieu of luxury tax.

dl5175 · 12-29-2007, 01:30 PM

I will try the new one when it is MLB ready.

darkcloud4579 · 12-30-2007, 08:15 PM

I dunno when I'll do that. The new one is just the one I'm using currently and I'll keep tweaking it. I might release it eventually, but not unless there is a compelling change that you all ought to get your hands on.

dl5175 · 12-30-2007, 09:02 PM

So if Imake the national media change with V5, what should I do with the cash numbers that are there? The reason I ask is to account for the owners who have alot of outside cash to use.

darkcloud4579 · 12-30-2007, 09:22 PM

I'm whipping up a new version for MLB and making a few tweaks. It'll be out in a bit.

darkcloud4579 · 12-30-2007, 09:47 PM

Here's the spreadsheet that mirrors 5.0 in the sense that it was intended for an MLB league, but with tweaks.

In addition the calculation improvements from 5.5, I made a few other changes:

Quote:

- Added a new "Owner" category. The owner category attempts to assess the largess of a team's owner. It's added to the cash category, which takes that amount, plus the team's share of national media revenue into account

-Divided the multi-team markets in NY, LA and Chicago. I just did it straight across the way for population, but not media markets.

.

What this means is, 5.7 is more further along than 5.5 in regards to its calculations, it's just not setup for a 32-team league (no big deal) and the changes to Boston aren't here either, because it keeps the relatively purity of how v.5 was setup.

I've deleted 5.0 for that reason, but left up 5.5 for the time being until I bring it up to speed in a new release somewhere down the road.

With the new changes, ballclubs should be able to keep cash in tow as opposed to before, when it was either too arbitrary or too similar. It's still not perfect, but it's better than it's been in previous iterations I think.

Have fun.

dl5175 · 12-30-2007, 10:10 PM

Will the high budget numbers send salaries up?

darkcloud4579 · 12-30-2007, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dl5175

Will the high budget numbers send salaries up?

No. The only thing that seems to increase (or diminish) salaries is whatever you set the averages to be inside the game setup options.

dl5175 · 12-30-2007, 10:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darkcloud4579

No. The only thing that seems to increase (or diminish) salaries is whatever you set the averages to be inside the game setup options.

Thanks

dl5175 · 12-31-2007, 12:24 AM

Will the teams try to spend alot more than what they would with the budget numbers?

darkcloud4579 · 12-31-2007, 12:31 AM

I don't really have any evidence to back that up, yet. I think that setting the game to have the owner set the budget might help prevent teams from going crazy over budget, but I can't really definitively say that it's one way or another...I might have more data over the coming weeks as I actually use it more, but I haven't tried it in more than one way. In my leagues, teams still underspend and others overspend. Is spending over overall? Yeah, but it's because I raised the salaries and so, I knew they'd get there.

I think if you lower league salaries across the average, that payrolls will lower, regardless of the budgets.

But maybe someone else who has used the module, can relay their experience.

12-26-2007, 12:34 AM	#41
darkcloud4579 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 8,305 Blog Entries: 32	Here is the Excel file (you can use OpenOffice, too.) for folks to plow away with. I have it in other formats, if that's what you want. If you have questions, do PM me or post it here. That way, I don't waste precious keystrokes explaining it for no real rhyme or reason. I've got my own theories about what things look like, but I don't know what good it would do it break it all out right now. Maybe on another day when I've got some desire. Scroll down and use the newest version instead of this one. Last edited by darkcloud4579; 12-30-2007 at 09:48 PM.

12-26-2007, 12:40 AM	#42
darkcloud4579 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 8,305 Blog Entries: 32	ESPN Stadium Tour MLB Valuations MLB Attendance Canadian MSA Data US MSA Data Ticket Prices (2006) How the Luxury Tax works (The one I devised isn't the same...and it wasn't intended to be. It's based on market size deficiencies and is intended to do that on purpose.) Median income, by place, USA Who fans root for, a US map US Census Population Projections 2004-2030 That should get you going...and the DMA spreadsheet listed above is also super useful and I used that, too. Last edited by darkcloud4579; 12-27-2007 at 12:25 AM.*

12-26-2007, 10:46 AM	#43
Doughnuts? All Star Reserve Join Date: Sep 2005 Posts: 704	nevermind/ Last edited by Doughnuts?; 12-26-2007 at 01:37 PM.

12-27-2007, 04:57 PM	#45
darkcloud4579 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 8,305 Blog Entries: 32	I was just messing around with the league I use this for and I moved a team from a small market to a larger one and I wasn't happy with the local media market size calculations anymore. I don't think it's steep enough and it was far too reliant on fan interest and not enough on the actual size of the market. So I adjusted it some. I'm also going to break up the multi-team markets. Right now, they all get credit for being in that market as if they were one team. I did that initially because I felt like the multiple teams actually increased baseball interest in those markets and that the team's presence ought to reflect that. But in retrospect, it just skews the data too much and it makes it ridiculously unfair in the model. So I'm going to work with that, too. The point of this secondarily was to make sure that small market teams would really be penalized for being small market. Not to the point where they couldn't compete, per se, but to where it when you play the game you feel a distinct disadvantage compared to your big market peers and have actual hard decisions to make since you can't do what they can do over a ten-year period. I might tweak it more in response to that. I won't release the file unless someone asks me for it, because I've never been able to ascertain that anyone has actually used it and if they have, what their thoughts are related to it. Last edited by darkcloud4579; 12-27-2007 at 05:08 PM.

12-27-2007, 08:57 PM	#46
darkcloud4579 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 8,305 Blog Entries: 32	Because the cash maximum thing is handled so poorly by the game, I've decided in the next season of my league to eliminate the number I have in the game designated as a cash number and instead, to just give each team a flat number that's equated the amount of national media revenue they get as their cash and just being done with it. It's too much of a hassle to try to police and the game just doesn't do it right and the alternative is ridiculous sums being thrown around because the game isn't equipped to know what the heck is going on. One nice side effect of eliminating cash from the equation is that the local media revenue as % of team income portion of the sheet is far more reflective of real life things (that is, teams make the bulk of their cash from local media revenue) and it also allows me to alter the revenue sharing formula. So it turns out okay in the end. Last edited by darkcloud4579; 12-27-2007 at 09:01 PM.

12-27-2007, 12:44 AM	#44
darkcloud4579 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 8,305 Blog Entries: 32	I was just goofing around with this and I noticed something interesting. If you try to put a team in a really small market, the model will not significantly deviate the local media revenue. Why? It's apparently tied to attendance, as well as fan interest. So it doesn't put all of the pressure solely on being in a big market. I did that on purpose. Since it's just calculated every ten years, I didn't know if it made a whole lot of sense to have teams having their local media determine everything, especially since there are teams like Boston that aren't really in big markets on paper, but have a big sphere in influence due to the region and secondarily to their success and I wanted to factor for that. So if you attempt to put a team in Keokuk, Iowa...just to see what the model would do, very little will happen. What you'll need to do instead is, make sure that teams in small markets place in smaller capacity stadiums. Then after a year of attendance, then you can see what the model would do with them. Because teams in smaller markets that can't draw as well, have more pressure on them to have more success to get more fans to come out, etc. Anyway...just noticed it and figured I ought to share.

12-28-2007, 03:56 PM	#47
dl5175 Major Leagues Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 347	I used to numbers from the last file but I play my league in real time so I will not know the results for a while. What it did do was give some of my broke computer teams cash to bid on FA that they previosly did not. So are you saying that the cash number that you gave you are going to add it to media revenue? What should we use for a flat cash number and how will it affect the computers willingness to go over budget?

12-28-2007, 05:31 PM	#49
SetonHallPirate Minors (Triple A) Join Date: May 2002 Location: Boynton Beach, Florida Posts: 205	I've actually just started my own league, and I'm trying to see what V5 is doing...a few tweaks I made, however: 1: Went back to 2006 data for the attendance and performance stuff (league starts in 2007, remember) and used the OOTP payrolls. 2: Deep-sixed the luxury tax. 3: Replaced the Revenue-Sharing formula, so that half of all locally-earned media revenue is shared. I'm going to divide the markets, but not until after the 2007 season...I'm already in June of 2007 in this league, and don't want to screw everything up in midseason with the six teams in Chicago, Los Angeles, and New York.

12-29-2007, 01:30 PM	#51
dl5175 Major Leagues Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 347	I will try the new one when it is MLB ready.

12-30-2007, 08:15 PM	#52
darkcloud4579 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 8,305 Blog Entries: 32	I dunno when I'll do that. The new one is just the one I'm using currently and I'll keep tweaking it. I might release it eventually, but not unless there is a compelling change that you all ought to get your hands on. __________________ Godfather of Fast-Sim OOTP My Mods: GMExcel 24 Major League Women's Baseball (OOTP24) quickstart Indian Premier League \| 300+ years of baseball quickstart \| Expatriate League quickstart \| Off-Field Injuries Update \| Women's Name File for OOTP \| My (outdated) market calculator & financial spreadsheets

12-30-2007, 09:02 PM	#53
dl5175 Major Leagues Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 347	So if Imake the national media change with V5, what should I do with the cash numbers that are there? The reason I ask is to account for the owners who have alot of outside cash to use. Last edited by dl5175; 12-30-2007 at 09:08 PM.

12-30-2007, 09:22 PM	#54
darkcloud4579 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 8,305 Blog Entries: 32	I'm whipping up a new version for MLB and making a few tweaks. It'll be out in a bit. __________________ Godfather of Fast-Sim OOTP My Mods: GMExcel 24 Major League Women's Baseball (OOTP24) quickstart Indian Premier League \| 300+ years of baseball quickstart \| Expatriate League quickstart \| Off-Field Injuries Update \| Women's Name File for OOTP \| My (outdated) market calculator & financial spreadsheets

12-30-2007, 10:10 PM	#56
dl5175 Major Leagues Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 347	Will the high budget numbers send salaries up?

12-31-2007, 12:24 AM	#59
dl5175 Major Leagues Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 347	Will the teams try to spend alot more than what they would with the budget numbers?

12-31-2007, 12:31 AM	#60
darkcloud4579 Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jun 2003 Posts: 8,305 Blog Entries: 32	I don't really have any evidence to back that up, yet. I think that setting the game to have the owner set the budget might help prevent teams from going crazy over budget, but I can't really definitively say that it's one way or another...I might have more data over the coming weeks as I actually use it more, but I haven't tried it in more than one way. In my leagues, teams still underspend and others overspend. Is spending over overall? Yeah, but it's because I raised the salaries and so, I knew they'd get there. I think if you lower league salaries across the average, that payrolls will lower, regardless of the budgets. But maybe someone else who has used the module, can relay their experience.