askari I was explaining why Betfair was initially successful...people saw the opportunity to make money in a totally free market.

Having no transaction charges is essential for beginners and newbies and in general but if someone is making too much money without offering enough in return(in Bfs view) it is a far better tool, where the detail can be honed to target the right individuals and also you can discriminate between markets such that markets where there is no liquidity don't incur transaction charges.  It would even up the balance betweeb gamblers and traders, it would be harder to avoid, there would be no sense that the company was stealing your profits, with each bet placed you'd know where you stood and there would be none of this sequential nonsense.

Much much much better.

the detail can be honed to target the right individuals and also you can discriminate between markets such that markets where there is no liquidity don't incur transaction charges.  It would even up the balance betweeb gamblers and traders, it would be harder to avoid, there would be no sense that the company was stealing your profits, with each bet placed you'd know where you stood and there would be none of this sequential nonsense.

Clydebank, a lot of yr detail convinces me (esp. the liquid re the illiquid markets and the avoidance). This raises the question: why haven't bf implemented some sort of targeted transation charge rather than the new pc?

Is it in yr view stupid greed, pushed by the City and their share price? Is it b/c of some sort of supplier relationship as I've tentatively suggested, or b/c of some form of relationship w/ sports bodies e.g the BHA, Levy Board who are in principle unsympathetic to winners?

My position as a bettor is the same as yours: that sophisticated transation pricing wd be fairer, more liveable and massively superior in PR and reputational terms.

But when they introduced the pc, they said that they had considered making the charge specific to certain styles of play but had turned that poss. down.

My sense is that the new move is concerned to root out winners who do not trade w/ them systematically and at levels of churn they like. A bookie who used bf as a hedging strategy, say, is a more desirable client than a pc payer--and bf wd prefer for him 'thoughtlessly' to get the best market price.

""Let's accept that there are 480 people who have won over 250k each from bf while adopting some kind of commission minimising strategy. This is some 120 million pounds when the value of the company is 850 million--so they've taken away 7% of the company's equity."



One of the most hilarious posts I have ever read on here, and what's more, he actually appears to believe it

What a mo.ron argument indeed. How can someone so narrow minded run a billion Pound company?! What a jerk

Funny Turtle, askari strikes me as being about 1000% smarter than you, me or, in fact, pretty much anyone else on this forum.
Whilst I agree that 7% quote of his was somewhat off the mark, probably just made in haste to get across the point of negative impact low commission users are potentially having on BF, pretty much most of what else he says in his well presented posts is extremely perceptive and well argued.
What is it exactly about him that you don't seem to like ?
He's not rude or arrogant, he's not conceited, he seems to be a fairly good listener, he's certainly not stupid.
What exactly ?
So you don't necessarily agree with all that he is saying, then just present your counter-arguments calmly, politely and intelligently.

All these discussions and dissecting of the Premium Charge are as always interesting and informative, but by doing so we kind of give it a respectability that it does not merit. This is a scam basically no matter how BF try to dress it up. That may even earn the thread deletion but those that know me in BF towers will know that my support for the company in former years was almost total. I have however criticised many aspects of the site...particularly the flawed decay system with comm which insults and penalises clients for the simple reason of taking a week or two away from the game to lick their wounds....or just have a break.

The PC is immoral on a gambling site.
That ANY gambling company can discriminate against certain customers for the sole reason that they profit is scandalous. It is equated in my book to Tesco levying housewives who only buy the 2 for 1 offers thus affecting the profits the company CONSIDERS it should be making. Ridiculous analogy ? Maybe...but I am telling non gambling friends what BF is doing here and they cannot believe it...simply cannot understand why they are doing it, other than for greed. Whether there are solid reasons why winners are unwelcome or not here it is hiding the fact that winners are being discriminated against for availing themselves of what is on offer. All the free bets on offer from the firms including here to hook you in, are for what ? To enable you to take your chance against the house or in here against your fellow punters.
Surely the trading people would look down on anyone disguising that with `ah yes but you must not win consistently otherwise we will tax you off our site...`

THIS is what should be hitting the national press and what people really should concentrate on, the fundamental disgrace of a gambling platform withdrawing a chance of its customers` right to win.

Even the worst shyster moneylender will stick to his terms (until you don`t pay him back!!) here we have have a public company moving the goalposts and with the brassnecked audacity to punish you for what some of us achieved TEN YEARS AGO.

Can anybody seriously consider continuing betting with a company that would treat its supposedly respected customers in that fashion ?
I guess that 98.3% of you will say yes...and I`ll wager that many of us 1.7% will do too, and that INCLUDES myself if I can`t get my profits elsewhere.
The message to BF is simple...you will keep winners if they can`t get on elsewhere, but that doesn`t mean we will become losers. You will get your extra slice of the pie, but we will STILL be taking money out of here.
Only a cull of every single punter who wins here will sort that out to an extent...but what damage will THAT do to your already tarnished reputation ?

The only good thing I`ve now got to say about BF is that it has kept the forum alive and allow these views to be aired, just a shame nobody from the company is reading...or listening.

duncan good post

Betfair greedy. Betfair is not taking risks unlike we take. It is totally unacceptable for them to ask 60% of profits. They are providing a platform for punters and should be happy to take commission.

I feel like complaining when they asked 20% but now I am just shocked. It is not even worth talking with betfair. They want all winners to leave. They want to do bookmaking like bookies.

Hazel...yes that was a different Betfair. The idea of a Betfair User Group was mocked my many of the forum..self interest and worse we were accused of and though some of the criticisms were justified the initial idea was welcomed by management. Mr Andrew Black himself took the time to sit round that table and his enthusiasm was apparent as we dived into our sandwiches and chilled Irn Bru lunch... Nothing happened of course and now what...9 years on look at what they are getting away with. In no way would that user group have prevented any of the developments that took place but at least when the PC reared it`s head the anger and disgust would have all been packaged and articulated and delivered to them. The forum is probably laughed at nowadays...and I guarantee they don`t read these most relevant threads. They used to.

This is what annoys me...they have never had a true GAMBLING man on board. That is not to say they were/are all just suits, but a half an hour with say Cubone would have told them more about this PC idea than anyone else could and I include the amazing guys who even understand the mechanics of it. That is their worst crime..BF is now making it up as they go along and further disasters lie ahead make no mistake....because they truly do not understand this hundreds of years old game.
Your example ie a smallish layer trying to knick a few quid is telling. 60% [:o] just think about that figure anyone who reads it. Does anyone think they can beat those maths ?...forget it...it used to be 20% better prices on here...well even if it were still true...just deduct 20 from 60 and that is just a starting point.

Hazel they won`t miss us....though I may HAVE to stay for at least the in running (absolutely nothing else).... and that is what they should hang their heads in shame about.

No wonder Andrew, Mark, Mick etc fled the ship...they knew what was coming as growth slowed to its present standstill.

Best of luck to you Hazel.

befair want the lot,and the 40-60percent will deter some,leaving a nice easy road for betfairs own traders,who could not have been very clever,becourse if they had been any good there would be no need for the tax.

Askari...you are too busy looking for deeper meanings...who cares what why and where they are doing it...the fact is Betfair are targeting certain clients for no other reason than that they win...something Betfair offers when you sign up (the ability to win).

Please comment on this and would you agree with my description of this as `immoral` and if not why not.

I am sure that the NYSE is about to introduce a 60% charge on the most successful traders. The NYSE is also an exchange where the players fight with money against each other. Some win and some lose.

Surprisingly, the NYSE has not decided that the money taken by the winners belongs to them, because the service they provide is: "an exchange". And surprisingly the NYSE is not calculating if the money taken by the winners is a % of the exchange equity value.

Again surprisingly ... this Bf company provides and exchange where people fight with money against each other. Some win and some lose.

But suddenly this Bf company has decided that the money going through the "exchange" service belongs to them.

Quite possibly other companies may decide that such an scheme is also applicable. "If people use the buses of my company every morning, the money they make working belongs to me, because without the bus they couldn't make it to the office."

That winning punters take money from losing punters will remain true, regardless of the PC. It has nothing to do with "accurate pricing mechanisms". It has to do with "losing". And anyone that loses will lose unless he/she changes his ways.

And denying that you are defending the PC ... well ... Maradona also claimed it was the hand of god ...

"too risky" ...

'these people (over 250k winners) have taken away this much of the value of my shares .

Fatuous nonsense...

these people (over 250K winners) have enabled this company to even have a company with the ability to go public and enable them to own shares.

Comment (if you dare) with your answer to my previous post Askari..thank you.

"The question you are not considering (wh/ you might find too refined) is whether bf want any winners operating on their site of any stripe at all. Let's say that bet 3.65 won w/ bf over some 12-month period. Wd bf mind? "

What I am finding too refined is your abbreviations...what on earth does "won w/ bf" mean ?

that they won on betfair over a time period of a year

Askari ...isn't Betfair an Exchange? Since when have they "officially" become a bookmaker?

Because as long as they are not a bookmaker and still claim to be an exchange, the NYSE analogy stands 100% correct.

Of course it may be that you have some information that is not public.

Betting Promotions made a loss in last quarter even before new charges. Havent seen their response to the new pricing if they have given one.

saint-pilgrim, it's public enough that they want to run an integrated bookmaker-exchange platform for IR sports.

Of course they are a bookmaker. Remember what Mark Davies said about the exchange concept in front of the Gambling Select Committee--that it was a metaphor in the same way as a car manufacturer saying their car gave the smoothest ride was a metaphor. Rather (as he said repeatedly) bf were a 'bookmaker that used technology to manage risk'.

And imv this guy had more gamble in him than the present lot--enough to leave when he saw their growth was slowing unless they effectively jettisoned any pretense of actually matching customer bets.

But you have two examples of ordinary punters(layers) on this thread alone (Hazel and myself) who don`t do anything other than find lays on a daily basis. If price-sensitive strategies mean not laying 6/4 an even money chance then we own up to having price-sensitive strategies.
If layers did not have them we would not be inconvenienced by the PC that`s for sure.

Why am I unwelcome here while bookies are not...bookies who lay a mug on course 7 then bet back at maybe 9 on here...is this more acceptable to you and Betfair ? If I depart and Hazel departs who is laying in our absence ? the bottom line is that some punters bets are going to be left unmatched,is that beneficial to either the bettor or to Betfair ?

That management can`t see that is indicative of their crass stupidity.