2017/18 FPL Price Changes and Team Value Monitoring

[No Way Jose]

So what's people's TVs then?

I've been trying to slow my early transfers so I have more info about the players which means I'm missing some of the price rises.

I've got Squad Value of 104.2 with 0.2 in the bank.

I've changed tac too. Less early moves and less TV chasing as my TV is 104.7 if you include ITB but my points leave a bit to be desired. Hopefully it will pay off down the stretch

[BuckJones]

I see FPLStatistics has Couthino (I mean he who is dead to me) reset to a target of 0 and his status changed to "U". I tried to understand if this was explained in the notes on the site but am unsure. Could someone please explain how the price changes work for players that leave the country?

[BuckJones]

Those explanations make sense, thank you very much for the insight!

[No Way Jose]

After fluctuating between -130 and 95 for a week and a half and not dropping, salah is now steadily rising. What a stitch up.

[Joccki_10]

Salah has been transferred out by more than 500k managers the last two GWs, didn't drop in price even once. He has now been transferred in by 77k managers this new round and is on his way to a price rise. Ridiculous.

[Ruth_NZ]

Salah has been transferred out by more than 500k managers the last two GWs, didn't drop in price even once. He has now been transferred in by 77k managers this new round and is on his way to a price rise. Ridiculous.

If a player effectively can't fall but can easily rise then there is no market. That's what FPL have created. People can make all kinds of clever comments about this or that threshold or DGW rule or flag rule (all assumed) but what it amounts to is that transfers in and out don't count. It would be more honest if FPL simply stated that; then we'd all know. But tonight's Salah rise destroys any idea that we are dealing with a neutral market and is another sign of the dumbing-down of FPL.

[Finisher1]

I totally agree this Salah case is one eff fat joke.

I have demanded FPL to publish their price change formula. Just publish it, clear and loud. Things like this Salah case will keep crushing their credibility until they publish their price change formula.

[No Way Jose]

Salah has been transferred out by more than 500k managers the last two GWs, didn't drop in price even once. He has now been transferred in by 77k managers this new round and is on his way to a price rise. Ridiculous.

If a player effectively can't fall but can easily rise then there is no market. That's what FPL have created. People can make all kinds of clever comments about this or that threshold or DGW rule or flag rule (all assumed) but what it amounts to is that transfers in and out don't count. It would be more honest if FPL simply stated that; then we'd all know. But tonight's Salah rise destroys any idea that we are dealing with a neutral market and is another sign of the dumbing-down of FPL.

Yep. Thought I was clever taking him out and bringing him back in and hopeful it would only cost me .2 in TV. I'm up on points from the move but down .4 in TV and a bit of egg on my face

[konstro]

The early signs of tampering happened when Kane got injured in October. There were a lot of people selling him but his price only dropped 0.1 but when the news of him being back for Palace game was made public he went up like crazy. Totally disproportional. They had the free hit excuse at that time. Now they use wildcard to explain Salah situation. Disappointing. There are definitely few holy cows that need to be treated with caution when transferred out.

My TV now is around 104 including ITB, it would be around 105 if I kept Salah and Richarlison. It does feel more realistic now.

[Tacalabala]

Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't transfers made with WCs except?

[snakzz]

eff Salah case this season is just beyond words.
Its corrupted and leaves an bad taste in my mouth.

My sale price on Salah was 9.8 when he was 10.1

I was down one player playing so getting in Eriksen for Salah for 3 matches for the price of 2 trades an an MAXIUMUM value loss of 0.2 was my idea.
I have never in my wildest imagination consider him dropping Z E R O -_-

Tought I was smart, now I am just left in the cold feeling stupid

[No Way Jose]

eff Salah case this season is just beyond words.
Its corrupted and leaves an bad taste in my mouth.

My sale price on Salah was 9.8 when he was 10.1

I was down one player playing so getting in Eriksen for Salah for 3 matches for the price of 2 trades an an MAXIUMUM value loss of 0.2 was my idea.
I have never in my wildest imagination consider him dropping Z E R O -_-

Tought I was smart, now I am just left in the cold feeling stupid

I'm the same but lost .4 and brought in alli instead of eriksen! Someone is rorting the system!

[snakzz]

eff Salah case this season is just beyond words.
Its corrupted and leaves an bad taste in my mouth.

My sale price on Salah was 9.8 when he was 10.1

I was down one player playing so getting in Eriksen for Salah for 3 matches for the price of 2 trades an an MAXIUMUM value loss of 0.2 was my idea.
I have never in my wildest imagination consider him dropping Z E R O -_-

Tought I was smart, now I am just left in the cold feeling stupid

I'm the same but lost .4 and brought in alli instead of eriksen! Someone is rorting the system!

I was supposed to bring in Son, but dropping Salah gave me so much Money I got in Alli and Eriksen!!

[No Way Jose]

eff Salah case this season is just beyond words.
Its corrupted and leaves an bad taste in my mouth.

My sale price on Salah was 9.8 when he was 10.1

I was down one player playing so getting in Eriksen for Salah for 3 matches for the price of 2 trades an an MAXIUMUM value loss of 0.2 was my idea.
I have never in my wildest imagination consider him dropping Z E R O -_-

Tought I was smart, now I am just left in the cold feeling stupid

I'm the same but lost .4 and brought in alli instead of eriksen! Someone is rorting the system!

I was supposed to bring in Son, but dropping Salah gave me so much Money I got in Alli and Eriksen!!

Haha great minds mate! I thought the added security of minutes for the double GW would make alli a better buy. He hasn't done badly but if I had brought in son I would have made money, more points and possibly kept him through to the BGW28. You win some you lose some!

[Joccki_10]

I brought in Eriksen for him as well. Surely he was going to drop at least £0.1?! I planned on reversing that move right about now, but no. May as well get Mané and/or Firmino.

[Stemania]

The rise is perfectly in line with what should be expected; regardless of how many transfers out he got the yellow to clear will have reset the counter to zero, meaning he only needed the 37k or so effective transfers to rise. He's had around 150k NTI since the flag went as per CTC, so that shouldn't be part of any complaint really.

I'd like to hear the thoughts of nigel (at fpls) on the lack of drop, he didn't specifically mention Salah in his 'news' section like he did for one or two other players. There's plenty of 'normal' factors that could have contributed to it even from my naive understanding:

1) Salah was well on his way to a rise when his injury occurred, meaning he would first have to recieve something like 30k or so effective transfers out just to get back to zero.

2) He was (at least) orange flagged at one point so there could have been a multiplier in place for the number of NTOs required for a drop (but the previous CTC understanding was that there is no multiplier on orange, and the numbers on fpls suggest there is not for cheap players at least). There could be a multiplier rule for orange flagged players with a certain level of ownership, I for one don't know for sure (would guess not?).

3) According to fpls his flag fluttered between yellow and orange and yellow again in the lead up to the gameweek, in doing so there could have been a reset in there somewhere. Did he hit red at any point?

4) I've seen it conjectured that the threshhold of transfers required for all players is at least doubled in DGWs (which is the week Salah got all the NTOs). Presumably this would double everything above even if it already had a different multiplier. If this is true then at the very least (just by (1)) he'd have needed something like 150k effective transfers to drop. As for how many net transfer this would have required, it would depend on wildcards.

5) There were something like 250k wildcards played that week, all of which would have counted as transfers in the total numbers, but not as price changing transfers. So added to (4) it doesn't seem unreasonable that we'd be talking 250-300k NTO required as standard for a drop even without any other non-understood factors. In this context, 500k isn't actually that big, it could just be just an extra 1.5x-2x multiplier chucked in somewhere. All the 500k transfers out basically happened in a two day period, it was a very slow trickle after that.

6) It could be that transfers for Free Hits counted to the net totals, and there would have been an awful lot of players dumping Salah in that week. There were something like 150k Free hits played, with a higher proportion the further up the ranks (where Salah's ownership is higher).

7) We've seen a similar thing to this once or twice in recent seasons with very popular players, so it could just be a rule that isn't understood yet (by us non-price site people anyway). There might be a rule that there's a maximum number of transfers out per day that are allowed to count, or something like that, there might be a multiplier for orange flagged players over a certain ownership level, it could be that in certain situations the drop threshold reverts to 10% of ownership instead of just negative the NTI threshold (and that would virtually explain it all by itself), who knows? (maybe nigel knows).

Whether there's enough factors to explain it I don't know, but I wouldn't jump to any big a conclusion quite yet. There's always the possibilities of human error (someone moving the flag from orange to clear to yellow in the process of going from orange to yellow, for example) or active decisions made to protect popular players outside of the system, but until someone like nigel comments on the situation I don't see the need for speculation tbh. It is what is it, we're not supposed to know any of the price change rules.

[Finisher1]

I was expecting Stemania to come here and defend price changes

The fact is Salah got more than 500k NTO and didn't drop. That's absolutely ridiculous. You can always make excuses about WC, FH, flag or whatever, but the fact he got more than 500k NTO without a drop appears as a big fat joke to us. If they had published a price change formula then we'd have no right to complain, but as it stands, the price change formula is secret - that's why this kind of Salah case which is a total anomaly and against all the expectations made by price change experts, might and will make people furious! And FPL Towers have no other option than accept people's complaints - it's all their fault, because they keep price change formula secret!

Secret formula and the case against all the expectations made by price change experts - that's the combination which makes people furious.

Just publish the price change formula next season. Or if you don't, then you can just launch a new "players points are calculated based on their performances" policy. If the price change formula is secret, why is the points formula public then?

[snakzz]

I was expecting Stemania to come here and defend price changes

The fact is Salah got more than 500k NTO and didn't drop. That's absolutely ridiculous. You can always make excuses about WC, FH, flag or whatever, but the fact he got more than 500k NTO without a drop appears as a big fat joke to us. If they had published a price change formula then we'd have no right to complain, but as it stands, the price change formula is secret - that's why this kind of Salah case which is a total anomaly and against all the expectations made by price change experts, might and will make people furious! And FPL Towers have no other option than accept people's complaints - it's all their fault, because they keep price change formula secret!

Secret formula and the case against all the expectations made by price change experts - that's the combination which makes people furious.

Just publish the price change formula next season. Or if you don't, then you can just launch a new "players points are calculated based on their performances" policy. If the price change formula is secret, why is the points formula public then?

Haha, on this one I am with finisher1. Thats not often.

Its eff ridiciouls to go loose 500-600k owners and not drop however you look at it.

[Stemania]

I was expecting Stemania to come here and defend price changes

The fact is Salah got more than 500k NTO and didn't drop. That's absolutely ridiculous.

All we need is for DGW thresholds to be doubled and free hit transfers to count in the net tallies and I'd have expected it then to take around 400k net transfers out to drop once. That would be roughly 80% of his NTOs without a drop accounted for already, so 'ridiculous' is strong I think. But for sure even I was surprised he didn't drop.

[Tacalabala]

How do we know also that there might be a higher threshold if a player is above a certain Form value?

It's frustrating but you have to consider that HOHO shouldn't really be a tactic that the system is not able to mitigate in some way.

[flare2]

Salah has been transferred out by more than 500k managers the last two GWs, didn't drop in price even once. He has now been transferred in by 77k managers this new round and is on his way to a price rise. Ridiculous.

If a player effectively can't fall but can easily rise then there is no market. That's what FPL have created. People can make all kinds of clever comments about this or that threshold or DGW rule or flag rule (all assumed) but what it amounts to is that transfers in and out don't count. It would be more honest if FPL simply stated that; then we'd all know. But tonight's Salah rise destroys any idea that we are dealing with a neutral market and is another sign of the dumbing-down of FPL.

Have a look at Wilson (Bou) price and transfers to see the opposite of this but also increases the risk of bangwagons.

Went from being owned by 6,000 people @ 5.9m to 300,000 @ 6.1m. He then dropped to being owned by 100,000 and worth just 5.7m; most people would have lost money on him.

[Ruth_NZ]

The fact is Salah got more than 500k NTO and didn't drop. That's absolutely ridiculous.

All we need is for DGW thresholds to be doubled and free hit transfers to count in the net tallies and I'd have expected it then to take around 400k net transfers out to drop once. That would be roughly 80% of his NTOs without a drop accounted for already, so 'ridiculous' is strong I think. But for sure even I was surprised he didn't drop.

For some reason you continue to misread the point that is being made. It's not about mechanisms, no-one knows what the mechanisms are anyway. It's about the plain fact that Salah dropped nearly 600k owners at peak - almost 20% - and didn't get a single drop.

That is a broken system. Whether it's an anomaly, manual interference (same as with Kane), mid-season rule changes (which amount to the same thing), an error... really it doesn't matter. I have seen all kinds of things written to suggest that there may be this or that mechanism that explains it - FH chips, wildcards, flags, lord knows what. None of that is salient. Because whatever the mechanisms are they are delivering a ludicrously skewed result. Unless, that is, price changes are performance based and have nothing to do with transfers at all. But that doesn't stack up either, otherwise why did Arnautovic fall.

PS. I agree 100% with Finisher1. Didn't expect that to happen so soon.

[casualnutpi]

As far as I'm aware thresholds are doubled for DGW and BGW players only. Salah didn't have a blank so shouldn't have had twice the drop threshold. Plenty of other players fell as expected. His status was yellow/orange all the way, not red, so should have had a multiplier of around 1.5. I don't think the drop can be explained in any other way other than a possible rule change regarding high ownership players.

[Stemania]

I actually quite like the price change system, most of the rules seem pretty sensible to me.

Some oddities might occur every now and again if everything aligns (or a rule change happens or something), but significantly more players fall than rise in price than rise generally and the system is far better than it was 5 years or so ago when it was much more volatile.

If a player is red flagged and at (or below) his starting price he'd have required 20-25% of his owners to sell for a drop under current understanding, so we're used to seeing high percentages of ownership for thresholds (and they seem reasonably sensible in those circumstances), in which case I don't see a 15.6% drop in ownership for one player not resulting in a drop in price (which is what we saw with Salah) as a particularly system breaking or unwanted event. It just so happens Salah is so well owned that 15.6% corresponds to 520k owners. The raw number of sellers may look big, but as a percentage of ownership it really isn't that great a number.

[Sutter Kane]

It's clear the FPL got Salah's price wrong initially (not that they could have known really). Are they simply correcting his price by never allowing him to drop so he's effectively able to continue spiralling indefinitely? 600k transfers out could mean a serious chance of mega rises. Another short term injury and he'll be 11mn before we know it!

[Stemania]

150k of the 520k (not 600k I believe btw, as per CTC) have already been cancelled out to get the first rise (so around 30% of the NTOs); so probably/possibly he's only looking at 2-3 total rises (just 2 if he gets them all and goes up twice this gameweek) to get back to previous ownership levels.

[casualnutpi]

I actually quite like the price change system, most of the rules seem pretty sensible to me.

Some oddities might occur every now and again if everything aligns (or a rule change happens or something), but significantly more players fall than rise in price than rise generally and the system is far better than it was 5 years or so ago when it was much more volatile.

If a player is red flagged and at (or below) his starting price he'd have required 20-25% of his owners to sell for a drop under current understanding, so we're used to seeing high percentages of ownership for thresholds (and they seem reasonably sensible in those circumstances), in which case I don't see a 15.6% drop in ownership for one player not resulting in a drop in price (which is what we saw with Salah) as a particularly system breaking or unwanted event. It just so happens Salah is so well owned that 15.6% corresponds to 520k owners. The raw number of sellers may look big, but as a percentage of ownership it really isn't that great a number.

The difference is that Salah's price is above his starting price. In this case the drop threshold is normally the minimum of either a fixed value or a % of ownership. In his case the former is far smaller than the latter due to his high ownership.

In my opinion the lack of a drop cannot be explained by the current understanding and points towards a rule change. It could be, for example, FPL didn't use the normal minimum described above and just went with the higher value. If this is the case a drop wouldn't have happened.

[konstro]

A picture tells 1000 words as they say. Below is a graph of changes in Salah ownership and price since the beginning of November.

Salah ownership by price.GIF

Everyone can decide if there are manual interventions or not?

After seeing Salah numbers I had an epiphany. Anyone who had a chance to read my RMT knows that I`m a big Milivojevic fan. I was surprised that even though he had few good scores his price didn`t go up. Then I checked his ownership numbers and saw this....

Milivojevic ownership changes by price.GIF

His ownership went up more than 700% (from 15K to 110K) without price change. 4 times in last 2-3 weeks and not a single price change. Did every single person get him in on wildcard?

[Finisher1]

CTC says there were two price changes on Feb 6th at 5pm. What the eff is this?

[MoSe]

CTC says there were two price changes on Feb 6th at 5pm. What the eff is this?

maybe related to this viewtopic.php?p=3165223#p3165223