Premium Charge- Help

Sorry my charges should of course be 2.05 points, being 26.4 % of my net income, still over te 20% PC threshold.
Sorry for the error.

"Of course that scenario could happen. It's not supposed to be easy this betting lark"

It shouldn't be easy.

But it should be fair.

Why should people like that be clobbered, please explain?

A fair point Turtleshead but the shareholders wouldn't like that.

i think jimmy has mutiple user names 

couple ok k u can get away with when u get bigger theyll look out for u

CAN SOEMONE PLEASE EXPLAIN WHY NO OTHER SITE HAS A PREMIUM  CHARGE AN WHY BETFAIR RAN FOR SO MANY YEARS IN PROFIT WITHOUT IT ?

I'm probably one of the very few on the forum who has not had multiple user names.

Rs1
Because as things eveolved, along came some very clever people who found a way to make big profits from the BF platform whilst paying minimal overall commission.
That's why.

Jimmy
Can I ask the meaning of the 69 suffix.?
Or shouldn't I ask ?

lol...I used to live in a number 69. The years have made me wish I had chosen something different.

jimmy, why do you think so many of the smaller markets have been destroyed with nothing or tiny sums getting traded?

I will tell you EXACTLY why.

These markets are where people who pay pc specialize. They can use their better knowledge or skill to hopefully make a few quid. Suddenly, at a stroke betfair say they want up to a quarter of any profits and no rebate if they lose on the market. What do you think happens?

Nobody bothers to price it up as it isn't worth their while. The market maker doesn't make his percentage, other players don't get to bet on something they may wish to, everyone loses out.

Think about it. How many people pay pc just by betting on Arsenal v Chelsea or Man United for Liverpool? I'd wager nobody.

How do betfair or their shareholders benefit from that scenario, please tell me?

THANK YOU A MONOPOLY . DOING AS THEY PLEASE

I GOT USED TO PAYIN SO MUCH IM WORRIED THEY WILL INCREASE IT IF NO ONE ELSE IS AROUND

show some pride lads quit this site you hate so much

feck me another loser

theres nothing else to use dik head

ITS A MONOPOLY you thik twa t

Some of the people who pay large amounts of pc are ones with inside knowledge, such as on tv shows, manager markets, stable information, team news etc. I don't mind one jot if they pay extra.

What annoys me is people can pay it just by using their skill, or through luck alone. That is wrong, utterly wrong. It can't be difficult to work out the difference and distinguish between the two, and come up with a fairer system, surely you can see that froggy?

Maybe Betfair thought it would look good to prospective shareholders.

heynoodles
28 Dec 10 00:32 Joined: 18 Jan 05 | Topic/replies: 15,626 | Blogger: heynoodles's blog
1. In running horseracing (the most exciting form of betting full stop, imo)
2. In running betting all sports
3. Pre-race trading
4. Greening up at short odds after backing much higher (especially if it then loses)
5. Better odds for outsiders
6. A democratic forum
7. The opportunity to reduce your losses when you know you've got it wrong
8. Being able to lay @1.01 etc in the hope of a big win for small stake
9. Paul Nicholls column
10. Winning accounts not closed


As you can see a truly great company.



HE MUST BE WORKING FOR BETFAIR

heynoodles
28 Dec 10 00:32 Joined: 18 Jan 05 | Topic/replies: 15,626 | Blogger: heynoodles's blog
1. In running horseracing (the most exciting form of betting full stop, imo)
2. In running betting all sports
3. Pre-race trading
4. Greening up at short odds after backing much higher (especially if it then loses)
5. Better odds for outsiders
6. A democratic forum
7. The opportunity to reduce your losses when you know you've got it wrong
8. Being able to lay @1.01 etc in the hope of a big win for small stake
9. Paul Nicholls column
10. Winning accounts not closed


As you can see a truly great company.



HE MUST BE WORKING FOR BETFAIR

noodles, why don't you sod off?

No-one is forcing you to contribute to this thread full of whingers, are they? Why don't you spend some of your time on making your fortunes from horse racing that you keep going on about?

There's other ways to make a living rs1?

THIS AINT MY LIVING DIK HED

turtle
As I've said repeatedly I do sympatise with the essence of your complaint.
That is, in catching the big fish BF has done considerable cllateral damage to a minority of the smaller fish.
Is there an obvious, workable solution satisfactory to all ?. Note scrapping it would presumably leave BF short of well needed income to maintain the site and give a satisfactory return to s/holders..

i give up good night all

i cant believe there are so many idiots on here thinking never to post again

Promises, promises.

The majority of pc payers imo are people with a time advantage. ie track players winning huge amounts and paying feck all commission in relation. Unfortunately, this may result in a higher pc in future or perhaps horseracing bettors having to pay levy. Again in  defence of BF they are the ones fighting hard to stop this happening (solicitors fees etc).

"The majority of pc payers imo are people with a time advantage. ie track players winning huge amounts and paying feck all commission in relation"

Any evidence for this? And if it was just as simple as that, why wouldn't loads more do it?

Oh come on noodles.
I might not think the PC is the monster it's made out to be by some, but to portray BF as the white knight in all this is stretching it a bit, isn't it ?

"Unfortunately, this may result in a higher pc in future or perhaps horseracing bettors having to pay levy. Again in  defence of BF they are the ones fighting hard to stop this happening (solicitors fees etc)"



Good god some people are naive and gullible, if they honestly think this

If I thought that PC charges wrre going up in solicitor fees, then that would put me well in the turtle camp.

Apart from slipping noodles and jimmy a tenner each for defending the PC, what are they doing with the money?

Improving the services of the company?
Or perhaps they are just gratuitously raising extra income to abuse their monopoly position?
I reckon, if I had to guess, you're in the 2nd camp.

Move over Rs1, I'm coming to bed.
Good night all.

As for the OP. Unfortunately after over 100 replies, it seems no one can help.
But froggy and his mates think it's fair you pay, so I hope you feel a little better now.

"Move over Rs1, I'm coming to bed"

Very brave of you to say that on the betfair forum























































Any room for a third

Well i've had fewer markets to bet on this year, compared with last.
So they've not improved my service.

I do see this. Lots of us have made good coin on Betfair. We all will jump sites for a better price when gambling recreationaly. Betfair wants our allegiance even if they are not competitive in things like pre-match wagering.

* solictors fees = levy consultation not pc.

Betfair gets the blame in horseracing circles for taking too much out of the sport, when in fact it is the winners on here that do that not Betfair themselves, imo.

FINE AS FROG HAIR     28 Dec 10 00:16 
Marksman
Suppose for easy example I could bet on even chnces at 5% commission with a success strike rate of 55%.
Thus in a 100 bets, I would win 55 points, pay commission on my winnings of 2.75 points, and so make a net profit of 52.25 points and thus have a net income of 7.75 points, being 52.25-45.
My total charges would be (2.75+ ( 3% * 45))/2 = 4.1 points = 51.6 % of net income of 7.75 points.
That is, well over the PC 20% threshhold, and yet I'm in profit.
Am I right ?

No. You appear to have misunderstood how the premium charge is calculated. The premium charge is the lesser of:

The difference between 20% of the previous week’s gross profits and the total charges generated during the week; and The difference between 20% of gross profits and the total charges generated during the lifetime of the account.

The terminology that you used in your example is inaccurate. For simplicity I will use similar terminology to that used by betfair in their 'charges' section.

Winnings: 55 points
Losses: 45 points
Gross Profit: 10 points
Commission Paid (assuming 5% commission rate): 0.05*55 = 2.75 points
Commission Generated: (2.75+(0.03*45))/2 = 2.05 points
Other Charges = 0 points
Net Profit (excluding any applicable premium charge): 7.25 points
Total Charges Generated/Gross Profit = 2.05/10 = 20.5%

Note that the net profit (which you described as net income) is irrelevant in calculating the premium charge.

As your total charges exceed 20% of your gross profit in the given week you would not be subject to any premium charge.

jt45
I did correct one error in a later post, but I did miss the gross profit mistake.
But the example still serves its purpose, which was to prove to Marksman that you can be a long term winner even if your actual and implied charges are above the 20% PC threshhold. In this artificial example they're at 20.5 %.

Ok, I agree that a significant proportion of long-term winners may never be subject to the premium charge.

pc calimeros still at it then?

"We are being charged less than everyone else instead of only a quarter of that. It is an injustice it is."

Back more losers appears to be the only piece of advice for the OP.

There are plenty on this thread who should be able to help you with this.

As I said before if staying here, research a break-even method and run it alongside the winning method, hopefully that will water down your profit vs turnover so you are within the allowed threshold, though you will have to do with Maths as it would be different for each person according to the way he bets!

do the Maths* I meant

Froggie, how does your example help me, if I only bet on one market in a particular week?

marksman, I use the daq, outright positions no trading just on uk/ire racing, can get on at betfair prices no problem normally, harder in the morning but this place is dead now early doors, gone are the days finding real value the night before at this place.  I do mostly lays and was alarmed when looking at the portal on here showing most of my allowance used up, guessing its from the 100% weeks when managing to be ultra selective, hardly making rapid profits but account in profit, pre race gamblers have an alternative, IR punters don't.  I did email Betfair asking if they could kindly explain when and what weeks the allowance was taken, all they sent is a copy what I could see on the portal o_O

from the way I see it, if your account is in profit you will have to pay pc on that 1 bet, very fair

I dont ever see myself betting inplay anyhow, your brain has to work ten times as fast surely so much safer to give every bet alot of thought and do it the traditional way if you can make that work, thats my take on it anyhow.

Then again I know there are a few tried and trusted methods, they tell me if a front runner leads early on its price automatically drops.
I do find this rather odd as surely if its a front runner its going to front run aint it, so hardly any surprise so to me the price should remain unchanged at least in the early stages, fair enough if it gets an easy lead off a slow pace I can see the attraction.
But will stick to what I know best!

A lot of misconceptions here.

Firstly, sports bet markets is an absurdly profitable business. The gross margin with capital investment appropriately discounted will be over 50%. No other business by a publicly traded company comes remotely close.

Secondly, BF like many initially succesful companies is spending (squandering IMO) its profits by expanding into markets where its likely to fail, poker etc.

Thirdly, monopolies in law only need to be defacto. There are government agencies that exist to control the behaviour of monopolies and someone from the UK should report BF and let the appropriate government agency decide. (I'm not a UK resident).

Fourthly, words like 'fair' and 'reasonable' don't mean anything, and are irrelevant to the discussion.

the monopoly question is interesting.

plainly BF isn't strictly a monopoly (there are other exchanges, and they're doing nothing to stop anyone starting new ones).

but I'd argue it's a de facto monopoly, and the question is, how did they get that way? I'd argue that they couldn't have got to their position of market dominance if they'd instituted the PC from day one, or told people they intended to.

in that sense, whilst they were obviously within their legal rights  to introduce it, I've always thought it was an act of bad faith. I also think even some of the PC's defenders would accept that it's been transformative in terms of the way BF is seen by a large part of its customer base.

Viva
Surely nobody, even you, thought that the BF site wasn't going to evolve in all sorts of different ways over time.
You don't really think that they could have introduced a whole new betting concept and got everything right from day one, including pricing structures.
Clearly a group of clever punters has found a way to rort the BF platform for immense gain, and BF is trying to combat this.
There has been some collateral damage to a minority of innocents, but that's life I'm sfraid to say.

Clearly a group of clever punters has found a way to rort the BF platform for immense gain, and BF is trying to combat this.

LOL

Exactly how are these claimed 'rorts' occuring?

Note that BF is an exchange provider and as such should have no interest in how its exchange is used, other than complying with the law.

BTW Froggie, you sound more and more like a paid BF shill.

they encouraged people to develop trading based strategies in their publicity, then once they'd established a monopoly position increased charges on people using those strategies by 500% with very little notice. at a time when they were already very profitable.

imo, that constitutes bad faith.

pxb
How are these rorts happening ?
I wish I knew.
Maybe rort is the wrong word, but clearly some group of pros has found a way to benefit materially from the BF site, whilst not contributing their fair share in commission.
That's nothing to do with BF having an interest in how the echange is used per se, except to the extent that they financed the set up of the site and want and need a satisfactory return from all its users.
Basic good business practice I would have thought, isn't it ?

This is just weaseling around the real issue, which is that BF are grabbing a share of winners profits.

If some people are using methods that are 'unfair' then appropriate controls and/or charges should be put on those activities. As BF does already with some activities, such as high refresh rates.

Anyway, I think both I and BF will follow the current case concerning 'unfair' conditions on sporting bets, due to go to the Australian Federal Court shortly.

FYI, sports bets are legal contracts in Australia.

Some people's accounts are not profitable for Betfair so they charge them an extra commission. It doesnt seem that outrageous a concept to me. The only users I would have sympathy for would be the eddie the eagle type, who paid a lot of pc and has since hit a losing run (from what I read).

If your currently paying pc your overwhelming issue shd be to keep winning, imo.

Utter bullcrap noodles.

I bet I've paid more commission than you have or the vast majority of non PC payers do.
I also seed many of the specials markets driving business betfairs way which would otherwise have gone to the HS.

I suspect that makes my account more profitable to betfair than the vast majority of non PC payers.

Wacking the PC on top is just taking the p1ss and people like yourself Jimmy and froggie defending it under the guise of fairness is just taking the p1ss further.

fll, obviously I dont know your betting style so I couldnt comment. But I have worked in an exchange shop for 3 years and seen how many in running players bet. Some of them have near 100% strike rates (except now they go to the course). So they may win hundreds of pounds a day while paying derisory amounts of commission.

eg win £1k and pay £50 in commission. Does that sound like a good deal for BF or a good deal for the winner?

Obviously if there is "collateral damage" from the PC - ie someone like yourself - then its unfortunate and maybe it will evolve over the years.

I know about a dozen people who pay PC now and none of them bet on horses ir or otherwise.

They're just people who are willing to put in the time and effort needed to make an honest profit.

I suspect the vast majority of other PC payers are the same.

The myth spread by you and others that we're all cheats and doing our best to avoid paying our fair share really gets my goat....as you may have realised ;)

The vast majority have a time edge (nap)[;)]

Absolutely cr@p.

The only time edge the vast majority of winners have is the time they're willing to put in to studying and researching the markets they bet on.

I'd just like some honesty.
Betfair are a PLC and as such are out to maximise their profits.
One of the ways they're doing that is by putting a surcharge on winners.

The vast majority paying the surcharge are not cheating the system or unprofitable to betfair and have no advantage over any other punter on here.

Dont think anyone's denying it was a business decision. Betfair were slow to emphasise that when they introduced it I agree.

2 years later... move on.

I'm not moving on anywhere. Not til Dancing on Ice starts anyway :)

I'll continue to post when you or others pedal the myth that the PC is all about fairness.

FINE AS FROG HAIR: Clearly a group of clever punters has found a way to rort the BF platform for immense gain

The only way that you can possibly know this for a fact, is if you to be working for Betfair.

Life is tough five leaves...you should know that. If you are so successful then you would find a way around paying the PC. It's not terribly difficult to do.

PS  I'd complain like nobody's business if I ever had to pay the PC but unless I change my betting patterns or BF change the rules it's never going to happen.

If it's easy to do could you please post how for a thicko.

Just bet lots and make sure you win...lol

heynoodles
Date Joined:     18 Jan 05
Add contact | Send message
30 Dec 10 10:48
The vast majority have a time edge (nap)

Noodles you are completely wrong.  Some do for sure but the majority will be honest players who are caught in the net.

The majority of those who don't have a time edge, aren't utilising the built in market maker cheat and who aren't trapping or using inside information will be honest as the days long (would be) city boys leaching information from the rest. It's certainly very very sad that they are expected to pay a lower percentage of their profits in commission than everyone else (including those they're leaching from) when they used to be allowed to leach practically free of charge.

IT IS AN INJUSTICE IT IS.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I've read that post 4 times an still can't understand it

Feck, does it make you feel better about yourself, to believe in all this nonsense about leaches?  (I pesonally don't like words like "leaches".  I would prefer it if people used phrases like "successful  sports investors", but I suppose you can use whatever offensive words that you like, if it makes you happy).

jimmy69     30 Dec 10 14:30 
Life is tough five leaves...you should know that. If you are so successful then you would find a way around paying the PC. It's not terribly difficult to do.
_______________
jimmy, i like to think i'm a pretty smart cookie when it comes to maths strategies  [;)] and i havent found a way to beat it yet without going round the houses and causing myself untold stress 

I think maybe we would sleep a little easier if BF were spending more of our hard earned on advertising ,more publicity regarding start up incentives or even maybe Christmas hampers for long term players who lose consistently . 

an better prmotions where its fecking impossible just to get a free 10quid bet!!!!

actually if i got a free 10 quid bet id still be screwing its a **** promotion  for the money needed to get there!!!!

Coach

Surely it's just down to getting your commission rate as low as possible and keeping it down?

Possibly Jimmy , but  i won't spend any more than 40 hours a week in total  , that 40 hours for me is better spent attempting to win  ,if i spent untold hours in addition trying to defy the charge i believe it would be a waste of time on my part.

In other words i'm not smart enough to find an easy way around it . My commission rate could be lower  ,but that wouldn't suit my style of gambling .

That's fair enough Coach. The main thing is finding a style that suits yourself and sticking to it.

Yep Jimmy, i prefer it to be a fun thing ,or as much fun as possible 

Life is too short to be miserable i guess

true coachbuster.

tbf, though, one thing that has improved is site stability. the regular saturday kick-off time crash seems to have taken a back seat of late.

I agree coachbuster. It's pointless trying to avoid it. Much better to  use your energy trying to squeeze out more profit from what you're already doing.
That's the advice I'd offer the OP.

I think finding a way to increase your turnovers vs profit would only be a short term measure, once you have researched a way to do it the bets would be pretty much automatic without much brain power so I dont see it would be terribly time-consuming to run these extra commission-generating break-even bets alongside your usual winning ones.
I'd rather do that and be able to keep the money I had earned thats for sure.

I won in 11 of 12 main markets I bet on last year.
The same was true the year before and the year before that I won in all of them.
It would therefore take an enormous effort to get up to this arbitrary 20% figure.
Surely it makes more sense to try and win more from the markets I already do well in or look for other similar markets in which I can achive a similar success.
That's what I've been doing anyway.

Interesting thread this.  BF feels a bit like EBay in reverse. EBay started out with a customer base of genuine buyers/sellers who bought/sold their old tat or whatever.  EBay made a profit. Whole thing had a community feel and everyone happy.

EBay then got greedy. Its policy now is to specifically do everything it can to attract the multinationals. It allows them all sorts of competetive advantages e.g. a negative customer satisfaction score that would have the "little man" barred. Big commission see. Or rather big in the sense of turnover.

Bit like casinos who wine and dine the big rollers.

BF I don't understand. They seem to be doing everything they can to pisss off their big players. Whatever they win they already pay a commission so what's the problem? As has been said above BF is an EXCHANGE so unless it spots actual criminal activity it should not care who wins or loses what.

Does it cost BF any more to support an account where the bet laid is for say £50k rather than £5?

And one similarity between the two is that you can spot the "payroll posters" a mile off on both [;)]

the purple site is going 2.5% commission today until the end of march

Looking at the T&C for that 2.5% offer...  "Offer is not available to purple API customers." 

Does that mean they are excluding our fast fingered friends from the offer?

There was no fooling you, George.[;)]

[;)]

...BF I don't understand. They seem to be doing everything they can to pisss off their big players.


I would call myself a relatively big player and I am certainly not pissed off...and neither am I on the payroll.

PS Heynoodles is

don't agree about the big players; the PC is actually designed so that it's much easier for big players to avoid/mitigate than smaller scale traders. which is probably why liquidity hasn't been affected the was many predicted it would.

if I had a bank of £100,000 and was on 2% commission for a couple of weeks, I reckon I could build up a cushion against it that would last for years.

I think there's a bit of a difference here between 'betfair forum big players' and the big players.

"the PC is actually designed so that it's much easier for big players to avoid/mitigate than smaller scale traders"

Exactly! Yet another reason why it is so unfair!

"which is probably why liquidity hasn't been affected the was many predicted it would"

It's certainly been affected on lots of the smaller markets, where small stakes pc players specialize. No incentive to put up prices when betfair grab up to a quarter of the take, is there? Obviously in the most popular markets where millions get traded, like football and tennis, there is going to be very little pc paid as these prices are usually very accurate!

plus, if you have enough money and are on 2%, you can arb across the spread in related markets to mitigate it in a way that's not possible on 5%.

my guess is that the really big players pay no PC and have headroom from here till doomsday.

The introduction of PC charges has minimal effect on most of the persistent profit makers.

The biggest losers to this charge indirectly are the current losers, they will now lose more or bet less.

The losers should be the ones most vocal against the PC charges.

Like other forms of taxation the fortunate pass these extra costs on to those less fortunate.

my guess is that the really big players pay no PC and have headroom from here till doomsday.

If that is the case then why have it at all? If it ends up hitting the lower level market setters then how do the smaller specialist markets survive if they disappear?

Unlike ebay BF do seem to have a growing and legtimate competitor in the purpleplace.

I can't claim to understand in detail how the 20% works all I know is that its there like a sword hanging by a thread as a threat to all who aspire to maybe concentrate on the market(s) they know best and rack up a few wins.

Where are the pinks when you need them

because its primary target is traders.

All of the really big players would love to only pay 22.5% of their profits in commission. "It is an injustice it is".

For little players in little markets hasn't cross matching been more devastating than PC?

dunno, fred. not for me, though.