PURPLE TO TAKE OVER

I think it will take more than that


but it is coming.

WELL SINCE THE TAX THERE AS BEEN A DECLINE IN LOTS OF MARKETS ,AND IT WILL ONLY GET WORSE AS MORE PAY THE TAX.

YES YES YES



P.S which one are you with now? I reckon we can guess

WELL YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO BET EVENS WHO I DO MOST WITH.WHERE AS 5 YEARS AGO BETFAIR WOULD GET IT

I understand that purple are introducing a virtual racing game called tumbleweed.  It is what it says on the tin.

My commission rate on poiple has gone down to 1% since they restructured the rates for API users.

POIPLE ? Are you from NEW YOIK ?

problem with the purp is that they may tempt the so called "liquidity providers" over there,however without the fish it's just shark eat shark. However it does seem the purp have been making some big strides, rather than get the exchange players on their site as the fish, they have taken an innovative approach which i personally think has some potential. i.e. putting sportsbook revenue from other industry players through the exchange. They have 90% of the on course money going through GBE through the RDT arm, several minor online sportsbooks, shop money in eire through chronicle and have recently signed up one of the big 3 in this country.so plenty of fish on the dak.

poiple jerry, POIPLE

they just offerd me 2.5 all March and 2% in running, decent of em, seen as though I've only spent 40 quid with them despite the fortunes spent on here.

betting-quant, why wd they want the sharks? If they can match bf on prices and liquidity (wh/ I don't believe) and are risk-averse, why not leave the money bet through them up there to be taken by the recreational punter?

They cd want to knock bf out as a competitor, but this cd only be the prelude to starting bf-like charges on resource-consuming winners and smaller players.

I do not see it happening.

Purple users: What's the site like in terms of stability?

I'm sick of how incredibly slow and crash prone Betfair is nowadays.

Askari the problem is that the recreational players mainly just back selections, thus an exchange needs the layers to function, although I hate to admit it an exchange does need its "liquidity providers".

got to agree, I wouldn't like to see the purp get to big, as I have no doubt they would just become like betfair.

Thanks betting-quant. Why wdn't purple or another exchange then just slice and dice up backers' bets w/ a cross-matcher?

I wd be v. interested to know what 1) proportion by number and 2) by volume of bets are simply recreational on the back side, and 3) the number of players simply laying or full-booking in the horse markets. My sense is that there are a smallish number of huge-volume, tiny-margin horse players who both back and lay i.e. they populate the market on either side.

But I genuinely can't guess (and obv. see that this is commercially confidential info).

is there a geeks toy for the daq?

askari, I would like to know the answers to those questions aswell !

have to agree that in a perfect world an exchange should be able to operate without the so-called "liquidity providers", with backers being matched against backers through cross matching. The main barriers i see that prevent this from happening the are the steps between prices and people only taking money that is available.

e.g the problem with steps in prices is that in say 10 horse race is priced upto the max, it usally 101%, on first appearance it's looks like you can cross match to create a 99% book on the other side. problem is that 1%, you dont know where it has come from, when you crunch through the cross matching algorithm, you find that 101% back book will cross match to a 91% lay book on the other side. This is usally no better than the lays what are alreay up on that side. so cross matching isn't creating many new trades.

the other problem with people just taqking whats available, is that the backers are taking liqidity e.g. when they place a bet. say that £5 is available 2.4, and somebody wants £10 @ 2.4. In an ideal world that person would stick up their bet, get the £5 matched immediatly and leave the other £5 waiting to be matched and thus providing new liquidity for that they have taken away. However unless EVERYBODY does this, in the abscence of "liquidity providers" then liqiudity would eventually drain away.

b-q: got to agree, I wouldn't like to see the purp get to big, as I have no doubt they would just become like betfair.

-------------------

not sure about that, actually. would two companies in genuine competition act the same as one operating as a de facto monopoly?

BF users are faced with a quandary, really. on the one hand we need competition to protect us from rising charges. on the other, we don't want the liquidity being diluted by a rival taking a significant slice of the action.

have noticed more markets going in play there ... slightly better liquidity ...

just needs a bit more  an will be a snowball effect

betting-quant, I take the point about it's being impossible to turn around e.g. a 13-2 back into a balanced set of offers for the backers of other runners. I also have an issue with bf not offering exact reciprocals but sticking to increments on their ladder, which to my mind is a quiet and unfair earner for them.

In one sense I don't accept that a preponderance of backers over layers shd leave to either significant ORs or professional liquidity providers. I wd like to see forms of frozen pool betting to small takeouts w/ the operator building in a margin for security; this wd prob. be enough to accommodate me and return my betting to pricing, which I find more enjoyable than the ins and outs of getting bets matched and taking on risk.

*shd lead to overrounds or necessitate bookies

Purple won't take over. Fundamental problem with purple or any betting exchange is the sharps take money out of the platform. Purple lets the sharps do this without an extra charge - it even lets them pay less commission than the mugs. At which point, purple needs to spend excessive sums marketing to bring back the money the sharps took out.

Betfair have solved this problem, albeit in an autocratic and high handed way.

TAX

also the purple site looks bloody awful. I cant spend more than 5 minutes on it.

agreed Mr H ,it's a bit like going out with a less than attractive woman in order to save a few quid 

But the less attractive girl, for the moment at least, won’t take your money and disappear for an afternoon then turn up later minus your money and an explanation

i know this much, betfair goes down more than my other half

Very true. I am still fuming with BF.

Site crashed earlier and i could only sit and watch my bank slowly drain away as i was unable to trade out.

This time the horse in question won but that isn't the point!

After Saturday's debarcle when i lost £400 through BF's big crash has left a very bitter taste.

So their false promises and craftly worded answers to Monday's big Q & A proved to be all a load of baloney(?)

I'm with Mr H re: Negotiating Purple site is a nightmare. Little liquidity on Purple to trade is also a concern.

Even with BF's site crashing i'd still side with them as the best of both evils.

LOSE LOSE SITUATION!  :-(

That's my little rant over....Going back to the safety of the Darts Forum  :-)

But the less attractive girl, for the moment at least, won’t take your money and disappear for an afternoon then turn up later minus your money and an explanationThat was actually quite funny.

In my opinion, what purple or any other betting exchange site needs is a huge amount of cash spent on marketing - seriously a huge amount to attract all the plankton. Its taken betfair years and millions of £££ to get its brand out there.

Funny thing is, the owner is far richer than any of the betfair hierarchy with Dermot Desmond being worth some £1.5billion, so it could be done. Even if he sells half of it to outside investors to raise extra cash. Unfortunately i think **** is too far down on the Irishman's priority list.

Betting quant, the liquidity providers aren't just laying, they are offering. So in a correct score football market for instance, they will be backing and laying, and the recreational punter will take what is offered, either backing or laying (although that's a simplification of course).

Also, I don't think purple would become just like bf if they gained more success. I think a healthy level of competition would have the opposite effect and stop future price increases.

You would think that as technology improves over time, Betfair can allow users more data requests and transactions before they charge them, but something tells me this won't happen.

no problem getting bets on with purple at chelt,plenty traded

A good situation wd be to have an API giving access to both of purple and bf's prices at once, allowing bettors to take the better given comm. and liquidity.

Bf really dislike the idea tho and I believe blocked it. No incumbent wants a set-up where their partner can cut a deal w/ a competitor whenever it suits.