Heathcote the latest

Heathcote = "Bet Angel Advert"

why cant it be that he is actualy that good at trading, am sure if u had a top end pc fast broadband and router and a 10k start bank over time it could be possible

Faster only makes it more profitable. If you can't do it with an average set up unlikely you'll do it with fast kit.

that cant be true surely,if u have an average set up u miss all the best prices available

neeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrroooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwww

Surely it is possible and I bet, here are bigger players/earners than him.
Footie gives you the oportunity to play with 50k and more( one tick gives you 250-500 profit, depends on odds). From that kind of money no need to be unreal to get 1200 per day.

I've only glanced at a few of his posts but I imagine he lost all credibility with that subscription service.

Betfair say his claims are true so either they are true or it's an advert for betfair.

I think his profits are genuine, I just don't buy into his "If someone stoopid like me can do it, anyone can using bet angel" angle.

The claims of him not being involved with bet angel were blown apart when he set up a subscription service with someone who does home trading courses for bet angel.

Posts being moderated in this thread?

Someone does have friends in high places.

Feck N. Eejit 05 Dec 20:31
Betfair say his claims are true so either they are true or it's an advert for betfair.

Betfair also says:

"There are very few people who are consistently profitable and none of those people are in the UK"

Both statements cannot be true :D

This is how easy it is to make a fake Betfair statement:-
http://www.juicestorm.com/betfairgen/

He has shifted away from the Bet Angel advertisement and made his own tipping service which i'm sure is a complete waste of £70 a month cause he will be hoovering up all the value.

Mark Davies was misquoted by the newspaper on that one investor. You cannot believe anything you read in a newspaper.

Feck, how do you know that? Do you know what he actually said?

you can't believe anything in a newspaper? anything?

Someone in betfair told me investor. As soon as I seen the quote I suspected he was talking about the fact that the biggest winners on betfair (mainly horses I think) come from outwith the UK. When you think about it, why would he say there were no winners in the UK when they're letting people ** others rotten to give the impression it's a place where fortunes can be made.

I was asking myself a similar question Feck. I would have thought that mentioning that people have made large profits would be good publicity...
It's obvious that the statement is untrue, unless "consistent" means winning every single bet :D

I wonder what he actually said though.

The 76p profit example does give the article a sense of deliberate downplaying of profit that some people make, as does the sentence about "computer geeks" when most of the people that make big money have automated at least some of what they do.

I really don't see what benefit betfair will gain from articles like this. If I had never heard of Betfair and read that article, I would have thought it would be a complete waste of time.

Id go along with that Investor.

I wouldnt be at all surprised to find out MD was mis-quoted (out of context etc) in that article but theres definitely a tone of deliberately trying to downplay things in it too.

As for Adam H, I have no reason to doubt the integrity of the claimed results although I cant imagine the subscription service was the best move in the context of "perceived integrity."

Betfair also says:

"There are very few people who are consistently profitable and none of those people are in the UK"


Where do Betfair say that ? As we all know that is complete**

If you read the thread you'll see that betfair didn't say it.

Or they now deny it.

Can anyone think of a logical reason why he would say it?

New tax?

*To reduce the possibility of...

Why would he then say he was misquoted?

Maybe he realized it was pointless once dozens of 'sharp minds' started flashing their P/L's. Or maybe he was indeed misquoted.

Betfair need to take a leaf from the Las Vegas scrapbook at some stage and realise that marketing the exploits of your winners can bring in lots more users.

But for some reason Betfair seem to think that their winners are somehow their competitors too.

See current thread on Horse Racing forum re BF and winners.

As to why MD would say something foolish, who hasn't? Denying it afterward, we all do this, our memory is subconsciously self-edited to shore up the ego, a phenomenon well-studied by psychologists.

The interview has the smack of a well-lubricated discussion, imo, esp the bit about imaginary wine-bottles. Did the journo record it? Or was he too p1ssed?

Can't see that thread ML.

It's called SHARP MINDS or MUGS.
I've bumped it.

To me the central point about that thread, and other similar ones over months, is the extent of disillusion and mistrust that has grown.
As BF increase charges and commissions, this is inevitable imo.
The existence of the Malta-based BF hedging team doesn't help.
It is deeply undesirable imo.

Thanks ML. I doubt they want rid of winners full stop as liquidity would plummet if the position taking winners left. Middlemen and **s are a different story but, given betfair are willing to risk their integrity for the latter, I wouldn't have thought they'd have much to worry about while financial sector morals rule.

If the fast pic boys left, liquidity would improve imo. but they will be the last to leave, and will only do so if someone intervenes to level the playing field.

We'll have to agree to disagree re middlemen, I think they are essential and you don't.
Recreational punters don't like to see a big gap betweeen the back and lay prices, and they're not wrong. They may head off to oddschecker if they see that.

Recreational punters don't like to see a big gap betweeen the back and lay prices, and they're not wrong

I agree. The aim should be to guide both backers and layers towards mutually acceptable odds but why do it in a way that deters large offers as happens now. The early horse markets are the perfect example. £2 leap frog because of an interface which some within betfair insist is required to protect recreational customers from sharks. Seemingly this protection does not extend to ir where the most vulnerable of recreational customers are being **ed rotten by people betfair think are harmful to their business. There is absolutely no logic to betfair's long term thinking.

Betfair don't appear to think long term

Betfair don't appear to think long term

They want to sell the business to Stock Exchange mugs.
The worry is that they may know something we don't.

There is absolutely no logic to betfair's long term thinking.

There is certainly an inconsistency. The subsidisation of exchange shops is bizarre.

Re large offers, I think the serious big player needs a drip-feeder bot.

It's not the serious big players we want ML. Requiring a drip feeding bot is just another deterrent to high rolling mugs who can get on with the bookmakers.

If a single bet can spoof the market, then there isn't enough liquidity.

Feck, I wasn't talking about the mugs, I was suggesting it was what guys like you and millhouse need to avoid spooking the market.

The exchange shops are only getting subsidised until March 2010 after that it stops.