|
By:
dogdice - i have no knowledge of your fashion sense, nor do i know if you are a stripper of any type, but my business is just that; mine.
do you have a point? was my question, or are you just a troll? |
|
By:
sagaro,
if you ask them to email you an excel sheet, they'll send you a file with every bet you've ever placed, and the total commission paid. |
|
By:
your motivation for a mooted huge change comes from a reaction to a small subset of betfair's markets. the answer may be to treat them differently. whether bf users should treat them differently or bf should treat them differently is a discussion worth having if it hasn't already been done to death, but the vast majority of betting on bf is not susceptible to vacuuming (at least not of the known result, could afford to pay 99% commission type you mention).
i don't see that this has any bearing on people who are able to read sports markets well whether they punt, trade in-play or run books in adavnce and regularly turn a profit. yet all you mention in your first post is winners........so what are you worried about: winners like yourself (apparently) or only those who vacuum in your pet markets? systematically cutting out the first group would lead to a huge loss in liquidity and could well give other exchanges the impetus they need to compete with betfair. systematically cutting out the second group doesn't bother me since my profit on specials markets in the past year is about 20p, i.e. it won't impact me. |
|
By:
tamsloup - I wish I could make it plainer, but obviously I can't.
what is Betfair worth ? what assets and what liabilities ? how much for the "goodwill," ie the customer base ? the software etc. can YOU price it up ? I thought not. |
|
By:
dogdice - i don't know the answer to your question, nor do i understand why you would pose it to me.
For the third time, do you have a point to make, or are you just a troll? |
|
By:
"dogdice - you don't seem to have any point to your posts. do you have one?"
do you get the "point" yet ? I'm more than happy to paint you a picture if you like. |
|
By:
please paint me a picture then, as you don't seem to be able to make any valid point using vocabulary.
|
|
By:
oh, forget it :(
|
|
By:
if you look back on what I've said and think about it you might (possibly) come to some conclusions of your own.
|
|
By:
So you are no betetr with art than words.
I will therefore assume that you are a troll with nothing better to do than come onto internet forums and try to cause upset. |
|
By:
charlatan,
you're right to say that my unease with Betfair stems from what they are doing with a tiny subsection of their markets. where I feel uncomfortable is that if they say they are prepared to charge commission on bets placed after a result has finished, and is known, how much does this extend to mainstream sports? would I be right in thinking that if the clock beaters beat the clock for 18 months, this was only stopped when the software was reprogrammed, rather than nipped in the bud to start with? what if something similar happened again? As happened with bots (Betfair releasing a press release saying they would never allow them),...... http://sport.guardian.co.uk/horseracing/story/0,10149,798996,00.html About a dozen Betfair clients are thought to have been using bots to scan the site for chances to bet overbroke, or otherwise gain a guaranteed edge on other users. They will now be warned to switch off their bots, or be banned from using Betfair's site. ..... it also seems logical that Betfair's commission scheme will in future be altered to maximise Betfair's profits from its customer base. I don't think genuine winners will ever be banned, but I do think they will end up paying more for the privilege of using the website in the future. It would have to be broken down by market, not by account (which makes it even more complicated) for the reasons I outlined earlier. It does make financial sense to ban people who are winning every bet on horses/dogs or specials over a consistent statistically significant period of time. Cutting out winners would result in a huge short term loss in liquidity, but making them pay slightly more (on some graded curve according to their profitability) would if it was targetted at the correct people, result in bumper profits for Betfair, and no loss of liquidity whatsoever. (I'm talking about charging 5% instead of 2% to people who in reality would pay 10% before they would stop using the exchange, etcetera). Why would they stop betting on Betfair? They might actually increase their liquidity they offer, to reach a certain minimal profit target for the time period concerned. |
|
By:
(deep sigh)
chasing the same zero-sum buck around the block (for commission) will finally even itself out to the ones with the biggest capital base. it may be Gala Coral, it may be Stanley Leisure, it may be Harrah's (of Las Vegas fame), it may be the Malaysians taking over the London casinos and it may be some combination of the above. if that's too simplistic I will be more than happy to let you know the share-holdings of any of the above, their market caps (v Betfair) and anything else you want to know to prove my "point" |
|
By:
This was your contribution to the thread before I added a message. Please show me within your 29 posts of drivel, you point. Thanks.
dogdice 22 Sep 16:16 write a book on it dj dogdice 22 Sep 16:21 that's a rather naive opinion, in my opinion. dogdice 22 Sep 16:24 I did try to get all the Ryder Cup bettors together in Trafalgar Square, but unfortunately they just couldn't be arsed. dogdice 22 Sep 16:24 we were going to give the commission to charity (less ex's of course) dogdice 22 Sep 16:25 ***** is quite an acceptable word here in England dogdice 22 Sep 16:31 DJ - please stop using the term "hoover" - the generic term is "vacuum" you know, the one that nature abhors. dogdice 22 Sep 16:33 and isn't BF a business of some sort ? it might confuse the japs but surely not yourself ? dogdice 22 Sep 16:35 CAT - wheels don't need oiling. your metaphors are getting out of hand. dogdice 22 Sep 16:36 and cash cows aren't real cows either. dogdice 22 Sep 16:37 liquidity is just a frame of mind. there's only so much cash flying around you know. dogdice 22 Sep 16:42 bridgey - they would just have to try harder. simple as that. it's a zero sum game, so they should quit while they're ahead. have you heard of Amaranth ? dogdice 22 Sep 16:43 the betfairy puts it in a nutshell. dogdice 22 Sep 16:45 and if T & C sticks his oar in I know the topic is doomed, like the green boggy marsh it was before it even started dogdice 22 Sep 16:48 the hedge fund Amaranth. and yes, T & C is a legend, but that's as far as that goes. dogdice 22 Sep 16:50 it's all about "churn" - well, at least the Colonel knows what he's talking about. dogdice 22 Sep 16:51 go on then, would you short Stanley Leisure now ? dogdice 22 Sep 16:55 Freddie Done has gone long on Stanley, but why ? Betfair is a t**enny operation and it's kind of loveable in it's way, but would YOU buy into it now ? dogdice 22 Sep 16:56 short memories dogdice 22 Sep 16:58 vacuumed up dj, VACUUMED ! dogdice 22 Sep 17:03 but it's all about weeing in a small pond isn't it ? dogdice 22 Sep 17:05 adding something to this debate is like trying to find a tax disc on a B road, fruitful and yet somehow pointless. dogdice 22 Sep 17:07 but in answer to the original question - Betfair is NOT a budget airline. it's just not the same model. dogdice 22 Sep 17:11 "Pricing on betfair should be set at a rate proportional to the inverse elasticity of demand of the user" dj - either you're on a mammoth fishing trip (I hope so), or otherwise you sound like a thwarted ecomomist with some half-baked ideas that really should be set aside for the time being. dogdice 22 Sep 17:12 it's the first one. nice one dj dogdice 22 Sep 18:11 I always liked the elasticity of demand, especially when it applies to non-essential products. people just don't know how much they don't need something. dogdice 22 Sep 18:20 oh, change the record DJ. why did you have to come back even more boring than you were in the first place ? dogdice 22 Sep 19:01 I don't think DJ is being serious here. dogdice 22 Sep 19:10 dj - stop reading those books. "at the margin" - what on earth ? you could write for the Sun at this level of micro-economics ! dogdice 22 Sep 19:14 "dominant in the market" what market is that if you please - the market of exchange bettors ? chasing the same few million quid around the block ? go on then, what is the market cap of Betfair ? |
|
By:
Betfair is not a zero-sum game in the way you present it there.
Scenario 1 Player A bank 100 v Player B bank 100 money shuttled backwards and forwards between two punters, Betfair creaming off 2.5% of the total wagered, if bets are placed at evens. End result Betfair Player A and B both lose all their money, Betfair makes 200 Scenario 2 Player A v Player B v Insider Every bet placed by either A or B is matched by the insider. End result Player A bank down from 100 to 0, Player B bank down from 100 to 0, Betfair make 10, insider makes 190 |
|
By:
"So you are no betetr with art than words"
hey, if you want to join the Shakespeare squad and have a crack at us art-fiends I seriously recommend that you look elsewhere. I know a lot about companies and I know a lot about art. I also know a lot about idiots btw. |
|
By:
dogdice - it would be great to keep this on-topic if possible. i appreciate you have your grievances, or ideas about other people, but you've made your point that you don't respect other poster(s) ideas on this thread, and that's fine.
|
|
By:
tamsloup - and where in that little screed have I betrayed anything other than what I think ?
|
|
By:
dj - I think if you read your original post you'll find something about "companies making profits" -
I guess I didn't understand your concept of a "company" or that of "profit" I didn't realise I was dealing with school-children here :( |
|
By:
NOW NOW LADIES KEEP IT FRIENDLY!!
|
|
By:
well, read the original post.
|
|
By:
evening hardy ;) (well done with your mu v ar match bet ;))
|
|
By:
Where u been dj??
|
|
By:
hardy> http://forum.betfair.com/jive3/betex/threads.jspa?tID=792015&start=50&tstart=0&schatname=DJ+Sunset
|
|
By:
you're right to say that my unease with Betfair stems from what they are doing with a tiny subsection of their markets. where I feel uncomfortable is that if they say they are prepared to charge commission on bets placed after a result has finished, and is known, how much does this extend to mainstream sports? would I be right in thinking that if the clock beaters beat the clock for 18 months, this was only stopped when the software was reprogrammed, rather than nipped in the bud to start with? what if something similar happened again?
don't know about the technical stuff although obviously somethin gsimilar cannot be ruled out. i do know that on some late night and/or low priority sporting events (baseball games, basketball, etc.) the timing of the suspension can vary between bang on when the game ends and a few hours later so people will often bet when they already know the result. personally i don't have a problem with this. it enables those waiting for the market to be settled to back the loser at 1000 or similar so that they can bet elsewhere. the bets which tend to get hoovered in such situations are those put up by people well aware that they may well be hoovered, but willing to take the risk because htey think that people take the 1.01 or lay the 1000 too quickly during the event or may back the wrong side by mistake. this isn't analogous to your specials markets though. those who hoover aren't insiders. |
|
By:
I don't expect either DJ or tamsloup to know the first thing about companies (BF ???) or profits or how this kind of thing works. I don't even know how old they are or if they think that "big accounts" are immobile and if the liquidity is there or not.
but DJ is earnest, and I have to respect him for that. tamsloup clearly doesn't have a clue. |
|
By:
About a dozen Betfair clients are thought to have been using bots to scan the site for chances to bet overbroke, or otherwise gain a guaranteed edge on other users. They will now be warned to switch off their bots, or be banned from using Betfair's site.
don't see what is wrong with the overbroke bit. i've done that manually when i'm bored a fair bit, but obviously it only contributes a very small proportion of my net profits. as for the otherwise bit, i suppose it depends on what is involved. beating the clock through trickery clearly isn't on. |
|
By:
laying 1.01 or backing at 1000 after an event has finished is fine (it has some value, bf can't settle everything immediately).
knowing full well that a 4/5 shot has won and is sat on the board staring you in the face, with the option to take it or not, is not something that I think much of. |
|
By:
"I can't think of any other company that has such an inefficient pricing system to its customers"
I mean, really. it's either a joke or it's a JOKE. either way, it's pretty good :) |
|
By:
it also seems logical that Betfair's commission scheme will in future be altered to maximise Betfair's profits from its customer base.
agreed. but i don't have anywhere near info to even guess at how. |
|
By:
it also seems logical that Betfair's commission scheme will in future be altered to maximise Betfair's profits from its customer base.
agreed, but i don't care to presume that i have clue how or when. what do you think about lumping on at 1.1 or 1.7 when someone scores a buzzer beating three pointer to win an nba game? if you don't, someone else will, etc. |
|
By:
does anyone seriously think that Harrah's or that Malaysian lot are worried about the losing buck ?
"at the margin" - remember DJ, it's a zero-sum game (less the take) and the "take" is there for anyone to have. who has the most money ? |
|
By:
i will apologise and say that I know absolutely nothing about NBA :(
|
|
By:
I don't think genuine winners will ever be banned, but I do think they will end up paying more for the privilege of using the website in the future.
what about those who win both genuinely and less than genuinely. banned from some markets and not others or totally banned? |
|
By:
it was a silly thing to say and I would think DJ is both sensible and rich enough to admit it.
|
|
By:
very simple: team A 2pts in front. 0.1 secs left. if team B scores 3 pts they have won. if they miss they lose. if they score 2 we go to extra time. in that case they go from odds against to 1.01 instantaneously, and the man from bf isn't always quick enough with the suspension.....
|
|
By:
dogdice you seem a very stressed out man would you like me to pop some relaxing tunes onto the wheels of steel??
|
|
By:
:^O dj sunstroke
|
|
By:
if you could DJ, that would be most helpful.
|
|
By:
charlatan,
I think if they've said its a managed market, they have a responsibility to try to take it down the moment the match finishes. This is different though to people having long periods of time to smash into 4/6 or 4/5 shots, knowing they have a 100% chance of winning their bet. |
|
By:
DJ - did you ever see that movie Repo Man, well that Harry D Stanton character is pretty much me...
|