General Betting
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
29 Jun 11
05:32
Joined:
Date Joined:
10 Jan 02
The following is from betfair's message to me regarding the changes
Please note that for the purposes of introducing a change to the Premium Charge rate that applies to your betting, we will assume that you have always incurred Premium Charges at the prevailing rate. This will ensure that you are considered to have generated total charges equal to at least 40% of your lifetime gross profits at the point the new rate becomes effective.
I've pointed the following out on another thread but I think the mathematical mess this is going to cause deserves a thread of its own. If you've won over 250K your new pc rate depends on your lifetime commission generated to lifetime gross profit ratio (hereafter refereed to as ratio). If it's under 5% your rate is 60%, 5% - 10% your rate is 50% and above 10% it's 40%.
Suppose yours is 4.99% and so far you've won a million and paid betfair 200K of that in total (I'm rounding figures for ease of understanding). According to the italicised section above betfair will add an assumed payment of 400K so that you start off as having paid 600K charges. Suppose in the first week you get your ratio up from 4.99% to 5.00%. You're now only due to pay 50%. So your lifetime charges should be 50% of just over a million but as you've already paid 600K (your 200K plus the 400K assumed by betfair) you're not due any pc payment and won't be due one until your gross profits reach 1.2 million.
Now, if that's the way this is being implemented, you might say it serves them right but (as JML points out) consider someone whose ratio slips from 5.00% to 4.99%. Assuming the same million profits with 200K paid, they'd initially get an assumed payment of 300K to make their overall payments up to 50%. At the end of the first week though their ratio has slipped to 4.99% and their now on the 60% pc rate. They're now due to pay 100K despite having won practically nothing in the first week. Similar annomalies obviously exist at the 50%-40% borders.
Either I'm missing something (if so could someone point it out) or this illustrates how stupid it is that this hasn't been implemented using a sliding scale.
While I'm at it, what happens if you have lifetime net profits of 250K, you're told you're on (say) 60% pc and, in the first week, you lose £1?
Please note that for the purposes of introducing a change to the Premium Charge rate that applies to your betting, we will assume that you have always incurred Premium Charges at the prevailing rate. This will ensure that you are considered to have generated total charges equal to at least 40% of your lifetime gross profits at the point the new rate becomes effective.
I've pointed the following out on another thread but I think the mathematical mess this is going to cause deserves a thread of its own. If you've won over 250K your new pc rate depends on your lifetime commission generated to lifetime gross profit ratio (hereafter refereed to as ratio). If it's under 5% your rate is 60%, 5% - 10% your rate is 50% and above 10% it's 40%.
Suppose yours is 4.99% and so far you've won a million and paid betfair 200K of that in total (I'm rounding figures for ease of understanding). According to the italicised section above betfair will add an assumed payment of 400K so that you start off as having paid 600K charges. Suppose in the first week you get your ratio up from 4.99% to 5.00%. You're now only due to pay 50%. So your lifetime charges should be 50% of just over a million but as you've already paid 600K (your 200K plus the 400K assumed by betfair) you're not due any pc payment and won't be due one until your gross profits reach 1.2 million.
Now, if that's the way this is being implemented, you might say it serves them right but (as JML points out) consider someone whose ratio slips from 5.00% to 4.99%. Assuming the same million profits with 200K paid, they'd initially get an assumed payment of 300K to make their overall payments up to 50%. At the end of the first week though their ratio has slipped to 4.99% and their now on the 60% pc rate. They're now due to pay 100K despite having won practically nothing in the first week. Similar annomalies obviously exist at the 50%-40% borders.
Either I'm missing something (if so could someone point it out) or this illustrates how stupid it is that this hasn't been implemented using a sliding scale.
While I'm at it, what happens if you have lifetime net profits of 250K, you're told you're on (say) 60% pc and, in the first week, you lose £1?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 3
|
By:
Remember also that the absence of rebates will put many in a very difficult position because people are starting from scratch with no 250 market backup or allowance. e.g.
Suppose your ratio is already 40%. Let's say in the first week you show a profit of 100K but only pay 20K normal commission in the process. You'll then be charged 20K pc's. The next week you lose 100K. Compare this with you losing 100K the first week and then winning 100K the following week. In this case you escape the 20K premium charge. Given you normally end up paying around 40% of your profits in normal commission the likelihood is that in the former case you'll have paid 20K that you weren't due to and that you'll never see again. |
|
By:
at the point the new rate becomes effective.
I think this is the relevant part. I'm guessing that every time your rate changes, they will adjust your lifetime paid figure. This could still cause mess though if you keep switching from one to the other. |
|
By:
I just took it that meant the day these new charges kick in jabmast but you may be right. Either way it still seems silly not to have a sliding scale.
|