<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" version="2.0">
							<channel><title>New Posts For Thread: liquiditiy will keep rising as the knowledge that winners are excepted though charged is positive</title><link>https://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/28039753/liquiditiy-will-keep-rising-as-the-knowledge-that-winners-are-excepted-though-charged-is-positive</link><description>There cant be any dispute that the pc hike is of a great debate but there are positives from it as there are always positives from a negative somewhere and the now common knowledge that a large group of pro gamblers make a good living out of betfair</description><item><title>jtothev, that wont be the case, the premium charge has no effect at all on the prices, back or lay in any market other than any observed change in liquidity by changes in the now charge rate to top earners.</title><link>https://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/28039753/liquiditiy-will-keep-rising-as-the-knowledge-that-winners-are-excepted-though-charged-is-positive?post_id=503039661#503039661</link><description>jtothev, that wont be the case, the premium charge has no effect at all on the prices, back or lay in any market other than any observed change in liquidity by changes in the now charge rate to top earners.</description><pubDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2011 17:11:03 -0500</pubDate></item><item><title>*I should add a disclaimer in case that was seen as bad taste (but the truth) - I meant Rumsfeld would be laughing to be shown to be correct. I decided months ago though to give 25%+ of sale price to Japan charities when their value has recovered sli</title><link>https://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/28039753/liquiditiy-will-keep-rising-as-the-knowledge-that-winners-are-excepted-though-charged-is-positive?post_id=503033809#503033809</link><description>*I should add a disclaimer in case that was seen as bad taste (but the truth) - I meant Rumsfeld would be laughing to be shown to be correct. I decided months ago though to give 25%+ of sale price to Japan charities when their value has recovered sli</description><pubDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2011 16:16:03 -0500</pubDate></item><item><title>FAFH - I bought shares in Nintendo and Sharp (with quality research imo) just before the earthquake that crippled Japan.  Rumsfield would be laughing now lol!</title><link>https://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/28039753/liquiditiy-will-keep-rising-as-the-knowledge-that-winners-are-excepted-though-charged-is-positive?post_id=503032681#503032681</link><description>FAFH - I bought shares in Nintendo and Sharp (with quality research imo) just before the earthquake that crippled Japan.  Rumsfield would be laughing now lol!</description><pubDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2011 16:06:03 -0500</pubDate></item><item><title>And George W. presumably ?</title><link>https://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/28039753/liquiditiy-will-keep-rising-as-the-knowledge-that-winners-are-excepted-though-charged-is-positive?post_id=503032145#503032145</link><description>And George W. presumably ?</description><pubDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2011 16:01:31 -0500</pubDate></item><item><title>Rumsfeld would be betfair's kind of guy.</title><link>https://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/28039753/liquiditiy-will-keep-rising-as-the-knowledge-that-winners-are-excepted-though-charged-is-positive?post_id=503031625#503031625</link><description>Rumsfeld would be betfair's kind of guy.</description><pubDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2011 15:57:04 -0500</pubDate></item><item><title>Perhaps as Rumsfield sort of said it's the things we know we don't know, or we don't know we know, those are zee problemas.It certainly is a rat's nest of disinformation.</title><link>https://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/28039753/liquiditiy-will-keep-rising-as-the-knowledge-that-winners-are-excepted-though-charged-is-positive?post_id=503030365#503030365</link><description>Perhaps as Rumsfield sort of said it's the things we know we don't know, or we don't know we know, those are zee problemas.It certainly is a rat's nest of disinformation.</description><pubDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2011 15:47:00 -0500</pubDate></item><item><title>He also stated this, which I'm also pretty sure isn't compatible with the reasons for introducing and later increasing PC : CustomersTotal active customer numbers grew by 15% over the year, with the FIFA World Cup attracting a large number of new pla</title><link>https://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/28039753/liquiditiy-will-keep-rising-as-the-knowledge-that-winners-are-excepted-though-charged-is-positive?post_id=503029001#503029001</link><description>He also stated this, which I'm also pretty sure isn't compatible with the reasons for introducing and later increasing PC : CustomersTotal active customer numbers grew by 15% over the year, with the FIFA World Cup attracting a large number of new pla</description><pubDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2011 15:36:01 -0500</pubDate></item><item><title>Their reasoning for introducing PC @ 20 % and now increasing it to 40 - 60 % has been nothing but corporate BS from day 1. They say these winners drain the pool to fast and that they need more money from these winners in order to advertise more to ge</title><link>https://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/28039753/liquiditiy-will-keep-rising-as-the-knowledge-that-winners-are-excepted-though-charged-is-positive?post_id=503027893#503027893</link><description>Their reasoning for introducing PC @ 20 % and now increasing it to 40 - 60 % has been nothing but corporate BS from day 1. They say these winners drain the pool to fast and that they need more money from these winners in order to advertise more to ge</description><pubDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2011 15:27:39 -0500</pubDate></item><item><title>My point is if the charge was justifiable in 2008 then how did they get their calculations so wrong in charging 22.5%??</title><link>https://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/28039753/liquiditiy-will-keep-rising-as-the-knowledge-that-winners-are-excepted-though-charged-is-positive?post_id=503024445#503024445</link><description>My point is if the charge was justifiable in 2008 then how did they get their calculations so wrong in charging 22.5%??</description><pubDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2011 15:02:29 -0500</pubDate></item><item><title>that maybe so, but why not communicate that message to punters, the PC has always been clouded in smoke and mirror tactics from BF..Both introductions have been handled poorly by the firm and because of that there is animosity and suspicion from cust</title><link>https://community.betfair.com/general_betting/go/thread/view/94082/28039753/liquiditiy-will-keep-rising-as-the-knowledge-that-winners-are-excepted-though-charged-is-positive?post_id=503024229#503024229</link><description>that maybe so, but why not communicate that message to punters, the PC has always been clouded in smoke and mirror tactics from BF..Both introductions have been handled poorly by the firm and because of that there is animosity and suspicion from cust</description><pubDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2011 15:01:00 -0500</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
