General Betting
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 120 comments are related to the topic:
Collectively we have the power to have the premium charge repealed within days.....
Collectively we have the power to have the premium charge repealed within days.....
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 120
|
By:
Mr Magoo, it is perfectly possible to pay PC in the short term but have no edge and be a long term loser, if you can't see that you certainly live up to your name!
|
|
By:
 Incredulous spin doctoring going on here... |
|
By:
Mr Magoo, it's possible to construct a situation like you did where PC payers would come out better than a non payer, but only if you (as you did) have robbed PC from his profits earlier in the week.
You said that if anyone should be refunded it should be those on more than 20 % commission paid. I just think that if anyone should be refunded anything it would be better to refund those that are long term loser rather than those long term winners paying more than 20 % in commission. I know reading the forum makes it hard to believe there actually are long term losers on here, but surely there has to be a few ? |
|
By:
Easy to see that certain people work for betfair on this thread, and are told to put the company line, isn't it?
It happened to me btw, I made a reasonable sum, paid a lot of pc, my edge disappeared quickly, and yes, I was too slow to spot it, meaning I lost most of what I had won. Did I get a rebate? Did I heck. However, had I lost a load first before embarking upon the decent run, I wouldn't have paid a single penny. Please could the pc defenders explain how this is fair and reasonable  |
|
By:
Same here turtleshead. Went on a fantastic run with increasing stakes during this run.
Ended up paying a fortune in PC, then went on a bad run and went wey above 50 %. Have "worked" my way down to 37 % now, but doubt I'll see any refunding from Betfair ever... And I'm certainly not a trader like some on here seem to think are the only ones that will have to pay PC at any point. |
|
By:
I just think that if anyone should be refunded anything it would be better to refund those that are long term loser rather than those long term winners paying more than 20 % in commission.
I totally agree Eddie. They should introduce the all new liquidity generating premium charge to bring pc payers into line with your average gambler and reduce the max commission rate to 4% or less. Same here turtleshead. Went on a fantastic run with increasing stakes during this run. Ended up paying a fortune in PC, then went on a bad run and went wey above 50 %. Have "worked" my way down to 37 % now, but doubt I'll see any refunding from Betfair ever... And I'm certainly not a trader like some on here seem to think are the only ones that will have to pay PC at any point. That is unjust and, as I've said before, pc rebates should be given. Why don't you campaign for that instead of throwing your lot in with a division of Ferengi calimeros who continually cry about paying less of their profits in commission than everyone else. PS I've never held the view that winners don't pay commission. |
|
By:
Mr Magoo's posts show how crazy it is for Ferengi sc.um to place their "fun bets" elsewhere as some have claimed to do. Sharp minds my @rse.
|
|
By:
turtleshead
Do you understand the business world at all? Shock! Horror! - A monopoly that charges higher prices to the customers that needs its products the most!Has this ever happened before? What do expect ? Charity and understanding? I repeat, Betfair doesn't want or need regular winners. Its ideal business model is a seething masses of gamblers doing battle with each other- grinding each to dust.Sometimes winning, sometimes losing, but always coming back - afterall,their money lasted a while and they had fun! In the end Betfair gets all the money deposited as commission. Now along come the pros - sucking regular money out of the game. THIS IS NOW MONEY THAT BETFAIR CAN NO LONGER WIN! This money needs replacing. To do this they need to continually attract more customers and persuade existing customers to deposit ever more.This costs money - huge sums in advertising and marketing. Solution to the problem - Either get rid of the pros or make them pay more! Hence the Premium Charge. (You clearly don't understand what you are talking about! Poker Sites don't care because even the winners will have paid over 75%+ of their net winnings in rake - and probably a great deal more!) |
|
By:
^^^ Absolutely clueless beyond belief. Actually I take that back, you obviously do know what you are talking about, and are clearly a betfair plant to put about misinformation, lies and propaganda.
You clearly don't even know what the maximum rake taken per pot is at poker, or else you wouldn't make your utterly ridiculous claim about all winners having to have paid more than 75% of net winnings in rake! Now go and peddle the company line elsewhere for anyone who is stupid enough to believe it. Nobody on here does. |
|
By:
This year I am around £150 up playing 5 euro heads up.
Ladbookes poker have taken estimated £530, in commision after you deduct rake back from their profit. |
|
By:
Johnny The guesser : Solution to the problem - Either get rid of the pros or make them pay more!
Hence the Premium Charge. I never deposit a penny, but I withdraw every Sunday night. I never pay the PC and I never will. Betfair make as much out of me as I make for myself. How would it be beneficial to them if I was no longer here? |
|
By:
I repeat, Betfair doesn't want or need regular winners. Its ideal business model is a seething masses of gamblers doing battle with each other- grinding each to dust.Sometimes winning, sometimes losing, but always coming back - afterall,their money lasted a while and they had fun!
In the end Betfair gets all the money deposited as commission. ------------- except in that scenario BF ends up with loads of random and part-formed markets, and recreational punters go elsewhere. if you want a competitive range of markets working to tight overrounds, you need to either become a bookmaker yourself or to incentivise pros to make your markets up for you. |
|
By:
Mr Magoo is correct.
I read a thread on another forum written at the time the pc was introduced that correctly identified how to get around the pc and that a bot was needed to do it efficiently. If the pc was aimed at traders and arbers, then I have no doubt it has failed and is mostly catching punters on a winning streak. |
|
By:
I'd add that not only was the pc intended to (artifically?) inflate bf's profits prior to the float, it was intended to hugely inflate trading volumes.
Now there's a story for the Grauniad. |
|
By:
10 per cent would be "fair" , 20 just smacks of greed and a monopoly position being exploited .
|
|
By:
I've paid 34.61% over the lifetime of my account. You 20%ers are the lucky ones!
|
|
By:
There would still be calimeros at 10% (NAP).
|
|
By:
mr magoo,
don't take this the wrong way....but....isn't the 34.61% your responsibility. what i mean by that is we all make choices as to how we use betfair, some punt, some trade. if your comm % is high, but someone else's is low, isn't that just based on your choice and/or skill? |
|
By:
when a company uses exploiting Procedure,s when holding a monopoly in a market place ie PC Charge....this is against the LAW!and company,s cant do it !
betfair get around this LAW by registering as a bookmaker and not an exchange. This is why betfair dont chase people who withdraw all there funds before a PC payment... because the very very very last thing betfair want is to go to court! If betfair were to be found at court to be breaking this LAW then it would break the compnay if ordered to pay refunds to customers. |
|
By:
Mr Magoo has it exactly right.
Part of bf's rationale in introducing the charge is to drive up volumes by incentivising pc players to take on near-to-breakeven bets. The bf staff will actually go out of their way to tell you ways to avoid it--because avoiding it ramps up their volumes and gives them an increased rake. |
|
By:
Yes, keeping incentive on here for recreational betting even though prices are better elsewhere.
|
|
By:
iz77778,
I'm not actually complaining about my commission rate. After all, I'm still here and placing bets! I just find it sickening that premium charge payers are the ones on here moaning and whinging loudly about their fees when they are paying the lowest commission possible. (Ok, accounts with low usage can pay less, but regular users can't) |
|
By:
To give you an indication of how laughable JTG's claim of poker players having to pay 75%+ of their winnings in rake, here is a set of figures which will show that to be a complete load of cobblers:
It is well known that decent stt players have a return of 10%+ roi, especially at the lower stakes. Heck, I even manage it myself some months, and I am a long, long, way from being one of the best players on the site I play at! Total amount of rake in a $7 game is $0.32 (turbo). In other words, $6.68 goes in prize money and the rest to the site. Now, let's have a look over a 1000 game sample... Total staked: $7,000.00 ROI of 10%: $700.00 Total rake paid: $320.00 So this person will have paid $320 in fees out of the total profit of $1020, leaving a net gain of $700.00. I make that a total of 31.4% of profits paid in fees. And that's not even including the fact that you get player points, which (unlike betfair's which just disappear each week!)if you get enough can be used for goods and even cash, which would comfortably bring that percentage below 30. Oh, and they have proper customer service, (example, if you contact a moderator, such as if players are talking in foreign, they appear within 30 SECONDS to warn them - I don't think this applies to betfair!) comparing it to betfair's is a bit like comparing Barcelona's football team to the one of the Red Lion reserves. Emails are responded to promptly from helpfull, knowledgable, courteous staff. Betfair...best not go there.. The idea of them suddenly doing a betfair and deciding they want 75%+ of every person's profit is too comical for words! Any comments about the above, JTG, or are you going to admit that you are an idiot with no idea what you are talking about |
|
By:
Mr Magoo, are you saying you wouldn't have complained about the Premium Charge if the treshold had been 50 % as your 34.6 % would make you a payer of the charge and among those paying the least commission of all Betfair users.
And if you think you would have the right to complain in that case , apart from the obvious difference of 20 and 50 % ,what is the moral and principle differense in making 20 % ok , but not 50 % ? |
|
By:
turtleshead
I make that a total of 31.4% of profits paid in fees. So 20% is a great deal then really!! JTG spot on, cant be doing with whingers either... |
|
By:
Eddie the eagle,
That's a good question. I guess it comes down to how many people would be paying the premium charge at what % level. At 20%, Betfair state that 'a small number (less than 0.5%) of our most successful customers will incur Premium Charges', which is a bit vague (who counts as their 'most successful customers'?) but it sounds like a small minority. Naturally, if the 20% was increased, more would pay. It's up to Betfair to pick the limit that the market will bear. If they put it too high, then I would make a loss and would have to go elsewhere or stop betting. As a 'pro' (i.e. a lazy waster with no other job), much as I dislike being stuck with no real betting alternative to using Betfair to pay my bills, it's clear that Betfair as a company is free to charge what they like. There is no moral issue. No-one compels us to bet here, but we still do because it is currently the best place. Times may change. |
|
By:
turtleshead
LOLOL - you pick an example of a micro game with less than a 5% fee and a long term ROI that's 'world class' at meaningful levels.... and YOU STILL COME UP WITH 31.4%...AND A CAP! Many many more pay 10% fees and have a ROI well below 10%. Don't overlook the cash game grinders. Either way,and returning to your original nonsense - that's why poker sites accomodate the winners - because they more than pay their way! You must agree now - A 20% Premium Charge seems a bargain. |
|
By:
Oh, a micro game is it? And only games on sites with high fees count in your world?
In case you are not aware, (it seems pretty obvious that you aren't!) plenty of players grind a living at low stakes, not always in England, but in countries where the standard of living is a lot lower. There are many who play 10, 20, or even more games at once (maybe with other people playing for them at the same time, but that's another issue..) and can easily grind out enough profit to make it worthwhile. The example I gave is perfectly normal, if you bothered to take your head out of your arse and looked at the site now, you'd see players doing exactly that. If people are stupid enough to play on sites and pay 10% fees instead of the biggest one in the world for less than half that, all I can say is, more fool them! The only justification for doing that would be is if the standard is so bad that they could make a decent roi even after paying that amount of fee. Even in that case they would be nowhere near your truly laughable claim of 75%+. Stop talking rubbish and just admit you are have no idea what you are talking about, instead of digging yourself deeper with every additional post. |
|
By:
So it's "perfectly normal" for guys to play 20 SNG turbos at the same time and make a ROI of 10%.
95% of poker players lose. Guys making 10% ROI will be right at the top of the food chain. Anyway these guys, according to you own figures, still pay 31.4% of their profit to the site. This is their contribution to site overheads/IT/marketing/admin etc etc. Why do you object so strongly to paying just 20%? |
|
By:
Mr Magoo
01 Jun 11 18:24 iz77778, I'm not actually complaining about my commission rate. After all, I'm still here and placing bets! I just find it sickening that premium charge payers are the ones on here moaning and whinging loudly about their fees when they are paying the lowest commission possible. (Ok, accounts with low usage can pay less, but regular users can't) I don't understand where this belief comes from. Feck spouts this utter tripe almost every day but anybody with an ounce of savvy can see why he does it. Where are all these PC whingers? Disregard the one off merchants who log in after their PC reduction and are never heard from again because they are as long term as a fart and who have we got? Where are these 'calimaros' that Feck creates for his arguments? Strip his decent punctuation and dressed up arguments and you most likely have a man who, when speaking face to face, will show signs of nervousness, embarrassment, avoidance, immaturity and outright weirdness. He smacks of a single man in his late 40's who has absolutely nothing to do other than front one man armies. He has no argument. The second he has an argument is the second he contradicts himself anyway by being on the damn site. |
|
By:
You are not comparing like with like, because that 20% is invented by some bullsh1t calculation with implied commission which even betfair themselves can't explain properly.
And also, if someone had a great run on a poker site and won loads (for example several big results in multi table tournaments) do you see the poker site saying, Mr X, you've just won 25k in the last week, we need 5k in premium charge to replace the money you are taking out of the site, for marketing, to attract new customers blah blah blah because you've only paid $50 in tournament fees...erm no I think not somehow Now do you see how ridiculous your comparison is? |
|
By:
It appears that you can't understand the concept that it costs Betfair far more than the 5% commission rate to replace the money sucked out of the site by the regular winners.
Betfair need depositors to churn their money over and over again generating ever increasing commissions, not hoovered up sharks within days, producing but a single commission charge. It does not make any commercial sense to spend £millions in marketing and advertising in constantly bringing new money to the site, when the vast majority of this new money ends up in the pockets of the pros. The premium charge addresses this issue. |
|
By:
Does it make anyone else think how deviously clever the PC is in its construction when, as an interested observer, you can follow the pro and con arguments on here between well informed posters, and swing from supporting one side to the other as they are posted up.
When you really dig deep into the theoretical structure of the PC it seems to be just like a dog chasing its tail. |
|
By:
Christ. From which rock have you been hibernating under FAFH?
|
|
By:
Nah rocket, I just mostly read the forum these days and not post.
Nothing new comes up really, all just a regurgitation of old matters. |
|
By:
I don't believe that for a second.
|
|
By:
Believe what?
I can read and stay silent ? It's tough I admit. Or that all these discussion points are old hat ? |
|
By:
It appears that you can't understand the concept that it costs Betfair far more than the 5% commission rate to replace the money sucked out of the site by the regular winners.
That claim is false. Sports betting generates a whopping subsidy to all the other money losing carp bf churns out. As I pointed out earlier, the pc is all about pumping up the profit and turnover numbers. |
|
By:
At 20%, Betfair state that 'a small number (less than 0.5%) of our most successful customers will incur Premium Charges', which is a bit vague (who counts as their 'most successful customers'?) but it sounds like a small minority. Naturally, if the 20% was increased, more would pay. It's up to Betfair to pick the limit that the market will bear. If they put it too high, then I would make a loss and would have to go elsewhere or stop betting.
The all new liquidity generating Premium Charge = (GrossProfit - 5 * CommissionGenerated) / 2 charges the non liquidity providers more without affecting almost all gamblers. |
|
By:
Feck spouts this utter tripe almost every day but anybody with an ounce of savvy can see why he does it.
Why does he do it? Where are all these PC whingers? Disregard the one off merchants who log in after their PC reduction and are never heard from again because they are as long term as a fart and who have we got? Where are these 'calimaros' that Feck creates for his arguments? You post this on a thread packed with long standing pc calimeros. Strip his decent punctuation and dressed up arguments and you most likely have a man who, when speaking face to face, will show signs of nervousness, embarrassment, avoidance, immaturity and outright weirdness. He smacks of a single man in his late 40's who has absolutely nothing to do other than front one man armies. He has no argument. The second he has an argument is the second he contradicts himself anyway by being on the damn site. You sound like the very type you're describing. Answer this argument r sole. What is it about traders that make them think they're so important that the rest of us should pay for the running of the site while they get to operate virtually commission free. Their attitude is identical to that of the parasitic sc.um in the financial sector who are getting pay rises and huge bonuses while the rest of the country pays for their mistakes. Suppose they deducted 22.5% of your lifetime profit as a running total making deductions / rebates after each market was settled and then each Wednesday they calculated what you would've paid under the old system and, if that was greater than what you'd already paid, docked the difference from your account (i.e. they're swapping over the normal and premium charge deduction times). Then 1) Everyone would pay more or less what they do now 2) The Ferengi wouldn't have a Wednesday payment 3) Almost all gamblers would have a Wednesday payment 4) Gamblers would be up in arms at having to subsidise the mainly worthless Ferengi. 5) The only people who wouldn't be whinging would be the Ferengi. Can any pc calimero please tell us why the gamblers should have to make this wednesday payment? Would giving those NOT being charged on the wednesday a rebate of 75% of their previous week's commission be a solution to the above injustice? If you think so then you need treatment. Under the old system if you had 100 backs at 1.1 and they all won and I had 100 backs at 110.0 and one won, we'd both have the same turnover and gross profit but I'd be expected to pay up to 11 times the commission you would. The premium charge doesn't even go far enough to address that injustice as those paying it are still paying a lower percentage of their profits in commission than all other long term betfair winners. They should lower the max rate of commission and recoup it with The all new liquidity generating Premium Charge = (GrossProfit - 5 * CommissionGenerated) / 2. |