|
By:
i believe it was because he besmirched the good name of TGI Fridays
a very fine eating establishment, i think we can all agree |
|
By:
He did post on a forum (not his one ;) ) that he had a meeting with a Betfair Moderator to ask why he was banned
|
|
By:
It is surely not unusual for a company's biggest customers to understand the service the co. provides better than it does itself.
At the moment the premium charge sits somewhere awkwardly between a tax on profits over a defined period and a fee for using a service. I see no reason in principle why it can't go all the way to being a tax i.e either you pay 20% or higher of net winnings at the end of every three months or so or you can't bet again. The tax wd get away w/ being retrospective in the same way as the pc does--in that it wdn't be levied if you were able to take yr business elsewhere. |
|
By:
I like DJ's suggestion to be able to defer the payments, allowing PC payers to bet more and thereby pay more charges. Still unsure why BF haven't implemented this, as it would make them more money...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q57LFBG3t68 I also started a thread outlining how everyone would benefit from paying PC when withdrawing money so that you can compound your winnings faster. http://site.forum.betfair.com/jive3/betex/ThreadsFrameset.jsp?forumID=32&threadID=1940500 For traders/gamblers working with a small bank, it would make no difference at all, other than that they might be encouraged to leave more money on betfair. For people like myself who do not withdraw profits (yet), it would mean being able to compound my profits at a higher rate. I'm now paying Betfair Thousands (£) a month in PC and commission. If the PC had been in place back in 2006, my bank would now be considerably smaller, and they would be making less from me as a result. When you withdraw, liquidity is removed from the exchange, not when you win. |
|
By:
Good find ,Tobermory
|
|
By:
Having read this prophetic thread I am only too pleased that DJ was banned if he came up with stupid ideas like the premium charge :(
|
|
By:
It was McChicken Sandwich on the last post of page 7 who "found" this thread, not Tobermory. It's place at the bottom of the page is a bit like a cliffhanger at the end of a chapter of a book :)
|
|
By:
How things have changed in the sprinting world since 2006. Asafa Powell was "the man" back then. He actually equalled the world record 3 times that year.
|
|
By:
Yeah, I thought that when I read it Clydebank. That referance showed how old this thread was.
|
|
By:
What this dying forum needs is the likes of DJ, medemi and adonis back. All we get these days is 1p to 1 mill challenges and "boo-hoo, bad betfair are charging me less than everybody else and now they've even taken away my 1K allowance mummy".
|
|
By:
I'd rather the forum became an endless list of challenges than anyone advocating these outrageous charges (which I don't yet pay)
|
|
By:
Would you rather pay more so that these "'outrageous charges" could be dropped cdog? So that the traders, hooverers, trappers, insiders and shell and pea mobs could go back to paying around a fifth of what the rest of us do?
|
|
By:
No I'd rather go back to 2006 and 2007 when everything was fine.
|
|
By:
feck still being a cnut - self indulgent tw@t
|
|
By:
What was fine about subsidising parasites?
|
|
By:
Ah Reubers, any updates on Your Wonderful Life? What tales do you have for us plebs this week? Just humped your maid or sacked your life manager?
|
|
By:
Or did you mean fine as in fined cdog?
|
|
By:
what is parasitical about an in running sports punter on a significant time period event that happens to be pretty good at it ? - out of interest feck
no fast pics, no micro trading, no waiting to jump in front of anothers price because they don't have their own view etc |
|
By:
Nothing brentford.
|
|
By:
well they get fleeced as well
|
|
By:
Fine in that everyone paid between 2% and 5% on every winning market and nothing on every losing market, no matter how well or badly they did overall. And nothing else.
Which is as it should be. |
|
By:
It's an unfair system cdog. If you start up a petition that we should all just pay 5% of our profits in commission then I'll sign it but not a "5% for parasites only" one.
|
|
By:
I still don't understand why commission should be based on profits overall.
If I buy cola from a warehouse, they don't ask me how much I sell it on for, they just charge me for the cola. |
|
By:
well they get fleeced as well
How many gamblers (with no time advantage or insider knowledge) pay less than 20% of their lifetime profits in normal commission brentford? Should we all have to subsidise the parasites to accomodate a handful of very successful punters? |
|
By:
I still don't understand why commission should be based on profits overall.
If I buy cola from a warehouse, they don't ask me how much I sell it on for, they just charge me for the cola. If you buy 10 bottles they charge you more than if you buy 1 bottle Lori. Under the old commission system, someone placing 100 wagers during a tennis/cricket match and making £1 profit was charged the same as someone placing a single bet and making £1 profit. |
|
By:
They simply need to charge per transaction then, rather than all this complicated nonsense.
That's how the american facing exchange works and nobody's complaining about that |
|
By:
Taxing against profits, to me, seems totally wrong.
But I don't have any alternative. |
|
By:
How many gamblers (with no time advantage or insider knowledge) pay less than 20% of their lifetime profits in normal commission brentford? Should we all have to subsidise the parasites to accomodate a handful of very successful punters?
a lot more than you seem to think Feck - thus my irritation at the inaccurate picture you try to paint. Yes there are no doubt quite a few parasitic elements that pay the charge, there are also plenty of decent punters that fall under it as well and it will inevitably include quite a few recreational ones as well with the recent changes. The idea that the charge is somehow an effort at redressing some balance is nonsense - it's simply a money spinner for BF and the less resentment there is of it the sooner a few more changes will be made to get a few more in the pocket regardless of methods of success. |
|
By:
They simply need to charge per transaction then, rather than all this complicated nonsense
Lori, a fair transaction system may exist but if you think the parasites are squealling now wait till you hear them if betfair introduced such a system. What they want is an unfair system that's massively weighted in their favour. i.e. they want us to subsidise them. |
|
By:
brentford, if that's the case then those punters are being penalised because of a charge aimed at parasites. If I was such a punter I think I'd be campaigning for betfair to get rid of the parasites rather than joining in with the parasites who want to get rid of betfair.
|
|
By:
Taxing against profits, to me, seems totally wrong.
But I don't have any alternative. I take it you mean overall profits betfairy, but you trhink profit per market is fine? |
|
By:
I afraid I don't believe for a second that the charges are aimed at 'parasitic' activity unfortunately.
Would be some fairly obvious accounts that could be closed if they were interested in that. |
|
By:
Ah Reubers, any updates on Your Wonderful Life? What tales do you have for us plebs this week? Just humped your maid or sacked your life manager?
Reuber's gone quiet. Job done. ;-) |
|
By:
fell asleep reading your fc ucking sh1te
|
|
By:
I meant overall profits.
|
|
By:
On top of your maid Reubers?
|
|
By:
Yes, but why do you think profit per market is fairer as opposed to profit per bet, day, week, month, year or lifetime.
|
|
By:
Above to betfairy
|
|
By:
Less is more.
|
|
By:
I see that now.
|