The all new liquidity generating premium charge

Feck is an internet troll

Don't bother trying to talk sense or discuss anything with him because its pointless


I don't think he even bets

Top normal commission rate decreased to 4%

The all new liquidity generating Premium Charge = (GrossProfit - 5 * CommissionGenerated) / 2

Sounds even better this way round!

If I understand this right, it looks like I'd be better off as a moderate winner than a highly successful winner (total charges range from 20% to 44%).

I don't agree with removing the aspiration to be highly successful, I also don't agree that highly successful people should pay significantly more (% wise) than mediocre people.

A minimum of 22.5% of gross profit for all users, irrespective of success rate, is plenty high enough for a service that has not improved since the charge was introduced. Why would us consumers ask to pay more?

Where's this supposed to generate liquidity? With Betfair's competitors?

I think the main problem here is that Feck`s area of expertise is in horse racing, where most `trading ` in the form of momentum trading, bot activity etc takes place in a static market pre-race, and seeks to take advantage of inefficiencies in the market to take a small profit. I always assumed this is what BF are targeting with P.C.

However, i`d say that most of the `trading` that occurs, and incurs P.C, site-wide is on other mid-long term active markets such as tennis, cricket, football, NFL, golf etc. This is a totally skill-based form of trading, based around the constant re-calculation of changing odds to find value and adjusting position as the value in the market changes. By labelling all `traders` as parasites who provide no liquidity, he ignores the fact that most are just value players, exactly the same as him. His refusal to acknowledge this difference leads things to develop into a slanging match and hampers the validity of his arguments.

A second point: Betfair`s `utopian` scenario, which would be where all punters bet at `correct` odds and therefore all break even before commission: now the only winner is Betfair. The more competition for value you have between punters and traders alike the more efficient the market, and therefore the better for Betfair.

Let`s be clear: Feck doesn`t like traders because they compete for the value and make it harder for him to make money, not because they don`t provide liquidity, but because they do: more liquidity will always lessen value, not increase it. Feck doesn`t like that, but for Betfair it`s ideal. So why should they seek to weed anyone out?

i`d say that most of the `trading` that occurs, and incurs P.C, site-wide is on other mid-long term active markets such as tennis, cricket, football, NFL, golf etc

I'd agree with that but that's about it. I'm at loggerheads with traders because I want the queue hidden, they don't and I think they should pay commission at similar rates to gamblers, they don't. As far as your "skill based traders" are concerned am I the only one that finds it extraordinary that this country had a glut of 'experts' on obscure sports (mainly ones with many definitive ir score changing moments) lying dormant prior to the birth of exchange betting?

I don't think traders like me very much because my ideas would make it harder for them to make money. They'd rather have been left on their 5% of winnings pretending their 'genius' and their famous liquidity kept the site running so they paint me as some kind of nutter who cannot possibly be right because it would mean that the vast majority on this forum (traders) would all have to be wrong.

Mind you, you can see where they are coming from though. The financial sector get away with it decade after decade. Every so often they get exposed for the shower of talentless w@nks they truly are but they just brass kneck it and a few years later they're portraying themselves as the masters of the universe again.

Toenail, on the horse racing markets I'm the sh1te under the shoes of some of the big winners. I don't have a problem with the non insiders among them because they supply liquidity and pay commission on similar terms to myself. I don't have a problem with people being smarter than me (it's an accident of birth after all) but I do have a problem with people who think they should be charged less than me because they think they're smarter than me.

Last few posts are spot on, Feck detests the idea that he should put up with someone who has the cheek to try and improve on his prices and making profits from working off much smaller margins than he does

I have NEVER suggested anything that would stop anyone from bettering my prices or working to smaller margins than me.

^^^^^^ spot on.

I admit you are cleverly spinning to look like you are the punter`s friend protecting against the big, bad trading wolves, but your proposals only benefit you and the small number of profitable proposition punters.

Nail on the head Bosman.

The referee's gonna step in now to stop this one before Mr Eejit receives any more punishment.

what is this about feck sounds bad to me, will i end up paying more than the 22.8% i pay every week now?

Toenail, that you are now simple soggy's echo illustrates just how far you have fallen.

is this happening feck, i win say a grand and have to give around 400 back, is this going to happen

In.
(that's my comment for the thread Feck, so you can feel complete)

Gross PL £ 1,196.03

Commission Paid £ 95.21
Commission Generated £ 61.32 +
Transaction & Data Charges £ 0.00 +

Total Charges £ 61.32

Total Charges % 5.13
Max possible Premium Charge £ 177.89

Premium Charge [pre-allowance] £ 177.89
Available allowance £ -0.00
Premium Charge Applied £ 177.89
Remaining allowance £ 0.00



i would pay £445 pc on this example from last week?, surely this cannot happen, surely this is bordering on ridiculous

mst, your average winning gambler is probably paying way in excess of 42% of their profits in commission. Don't you think non liquidity providing traders should pay more so those winning gamblers can pay less?

Feck, you've been rumbled by just about everyone now, if this was a boxing match the towel would have been thrown in by your corner ages ago. Retire with what little semblance of credibility you have left (I admit it's bordering on the non existant to be fair)

"It is unfair on you mst but when all is said and done you do not contribute a great deal to liquidity"

PMSL, it just gets better. So you know what his bets are now do you?

:^0 :^0 :^0

The point I was making, Feck, is that you were only attracted to racing in the first place because it was a medium where you could win worthwhile sums. With the advent of the exchanges, other sports are offering opportunities to other shrewdies who are attracted by the liquidity. You can hardly criticise them for becoming pricing experts in an emerging liquid market.