BETFAIR WHERE WOULD

Btw Management why are stockbrokers aand estate agents all  "noted parasites ", as you seem to be implying in your generalisation.

Not to mention propoker's "Korean Bots"

Actually no, the point is that they're not a rip off site, just an expensive one.

Of the three major exchanges they're the most expensive.

Pre-off they're more expensive than most bookies

There are very good compensatory upsides of course, or we wouldn't be here. Great liquidity, good in-running prices on some sports, no banning of winners.

Hard to say they're not expensive though imo.

It's an understandable reaction by 'normal' punters imo
Everyone's after their own interests - if bf put up the pc it's less likely to result in other increases
similarly i'd love to see transaction charges trebled and a flat rate of 7 %
i wouldn't expect 'normal' punters to agree with that

The Management

LOL - you keep referring to "normal punters", whatever they are. I don't think BF would be what it is today if it had to rely on "normal punters", infact it would never have got past year one had that been the case!


for those who are not "normal punters", did you come here out of the goodness of your heart to help betfair get started ? No you didn't, you came here to make money for yourselves. While your actions may have benefitted Betfair, please don't pass them off as an act of altruism.

So what if betfair increased the PC to say 50%, where will you go ? even if you decided to call it a day, there will be others ready to step into your shoes.

Management
Are you the slightest bit concerned at the level of charges I pay as a " normal" punter.
It is well above the PC threshold of 20% on net profits, I can tell you.
Of course you aren't.
So why should I be concerned if the PC brings you up closer to my level of "normal " charges ?
Talk about a one-eyed view of things?
Selfish, apathetic. Do these adjectives now mean non- agreement with your point of view.

The idea of the site was to provide the owners with profit.

If they no longer want that profit, there are plenty of other places ready to step into their shoes..... that line works both ways. Right now Betfair are on the right side of it. Your 50% PC would definitely push them the other side.

I think the "Recreational punters" have plenty of other cheaper options already. Paying 5% commission on top of a 1-2% overround probably isn't very bright as there are a zillion other places offering better prices.

A recreational punter would be barking mad to pay 5% commission instead of 1% if they weren't trading. Despite the low level of intelligence of the average gambler, I don't think it's that low!

The "Liquidity providers" probably do the best advertising for the site through word of mouth. (Unlike the site itself who insist on sending confusing messages to the target audience)

I agree to a point that betfair don't need the winners, but I disagree that the winners need betfair. It's convenient and it's the best option for in-running and in many regards it's the best site overall. It's certanly not essential though.

FAFH

So even if liquidity moved elsewhere, you'd stay here and pay 5% when 1% is freely available. Yeah, that's pretty nutty.

Lori
I mean that I am not currently bothered to shop around with all the high street bookies, runiing the risks of sometimes not getting on, getting banned etc etc.
BF offers an ease of use at reasonable prices that I, and many , many other " barking mad" punters seem to like.
I wonder why ?

Do you understand that the PC doesn't impact me because I am already paying charges greater than the 20 % on net income threshhold. Nothing paassive about that is there?
Do you accept the fact that BF cannot run the sight for free ?
Do you understand that the betting procedures of the punters need to produce a revenue stream sufficient for the BF model to work in the interests of all parties ?.
At a basic 5 % commission level, a min. of 20 % of net income is probably being paid by most normal punters in overall charges in normal circumstances.
This deduction is based on my  relatively " normal"  personal betting techniques.
So they have set the bar of min. charges at 20% of net income.
Sounds fair and equitable to me.
Of course it will be impossible to get a situation where all punters pay exactly the same percentage amount, because of the different styles of punting.
But you have to set the bar somewhere.
Btw if you KNOW that there are many users paying below 20% in overall charges, and KNOW how they do it, then why don't you go out and do it yourself.
Nobody, not even BF, is stopping you are they ?

I would imagine they have modelled such a type of charge scheme and for whatever reasons it doesn't work as well as what they have.
We don't really know all that much about what it really takes to run a sight such as BF.
After all, it is a novel approach to providing a betting platform.
There are no case histories out there to compare it with.

I haven't read the whole thread, but I'll add a few points.

Firstly, I'll explain my personal circumstances, as it appears that a lot of what is said on here is driven by self interest. I'm a premium charge payer, but I also run position taking bots that can largely avoid it by generating commission elsewhere. The dilemma for me recently is how many resources to put into generating profit, and how many to put into avoiding PC. Naturally, if I am successful in achieving one, I am more likely to switch to the other.

I understand the rationale for Betfair introducing PC but I would question whether its sustainable. I hear some people questioning the exchange model but the fact is Betfair had revenues of 200m+ from the exchange last financial year and I'm pretty sure that PC wasn't that significant a proportion of this sum. The fact is that Betfair have been trying to sustain year on year growth and as a result have been spending a disproportionate amount of income on marketing. I think it's fairly clear now that without an expansion of the marketplace this expenditure is not justified. The business IS sustainable without PC, growth perhaps is not.

A few other points:

a flat 5% across the board would not work because a lot of the big liquidity providers are operating on wafer thin margins

higher transaction charges would kill all the derivative markets stone dead. I think Betfair have got these too high already and liquidity is too thin in many side markets (and, oh no, the losers are therefore losing quicker by betting into bigger overrounds)

I've said it before but I'll say it again. Any winner gloating about not paying PC whilst others do is missing the point completely. Anyone shrewd enough to pay PC will inevitably try to reduce their bill by increasing volume and reducing margin. By definition, this will be at the expense of other winners.

I think the truth is, Betfair invented IR betting. Unfortunately, they made it too easy for shrewdies to win too often. Betfair couldn't 'uninvent' IR because it is every punter's dream - they punt, it goes against them - they change their mind, all at relatively decent price. Betfair chose instead to change the charging structure and the PC is the result. As I said though, I think it's unsustainable.

So we are alike after all ?

YES it seems very very UNFAIR.

Most persons but not all of course.

Bayes, I agree with a lot of what you say. However, the following has to be challenged:

"a flat 5% across the board would not work because a lot of the big liquidity providers are operating on wafer thin margins"

It's common knowledge that companies like Betting Promotions, who channel huges sums here (and make big profits as shown by their results) do so commission free - maybe if they and other like them had to pay in the same way others do betfair might actually be able to not only do away with the pc, but reduce commission for everyone as well? Just an idea...