|
By:
FAFH
I have not spat with noodles - just zero respect. |
|
By:
betfair said that the 20% PC was to pay for cost of bringing new money in...now it wants 40% to 60% , so this isn't about cost and paying the way any more...40%-60% pc is about sonething else
the only way liquidity will go up is if betfair start feeding more money in, which would make sinces why betfair is bring in 40%-60% PC |
|
By:
i am one of the 480 they said to me
The statement of being one of 480 people to make £250k is not quite correct, the figure is around the 540 mark and it is not purely down to making £250k, it is also for those whose total charges generated amount to less than 40% of your gross profit. Therefore it makes you one of the top 540 customers (0.1%) in terms of win rate. >> >>Kind regards |
|
By:
what does that mean pleas/e
|
|
By:
Saint Pilgrim
Example please of my personal attack tactics. If any, they would only ever have been defensive. But if not, then I would be perfectly happy to put my hands up in the air as being a total hypocrite and take the consequences. But let's not get too off point here. I would really like to see some boisterous, nicely and politely agressive replies, to Magician's posted views on the PC, from not only you but all the others in the ante camp. Don't you all go wobbly on me now. |
|
By:
Mr. Fine,
Who has said "attack"? There you go again changing the words to try to take it down to personal arenas. Mr. Magician is not posting non-stop and just expressed his personal view. He's not harassing everyone on this forum by clogging entire threads with meaningless posts. Just like it happened in many previous posts, he asked you a question: "Did heynoodles post about our conversations?" and you have deliberately chosen not to answer the question (like when many others have asked you how the PC will help losers to win or lose more slowly and ...) You are the one that chose to ask me if I felt that everyone/everything was mispricing me ... and that you couldn't understand because I seem to be a very intelligent person (just quoting one example of your "go to personal" tactics) |
|
By:
I think once you are automated your views and mine will be much more closely aligned.
magician, my opinion has always been that it wasn't the bots themselves that were the problem, it was the information that was available to them. Had betfair removed that information they'd have rid themselves of maybe half the people bleeding this site while providing little in the way of liquidity. The other half could've been taken care of by introducing changes to dilute the massive advantage of courtsiding and ir trading. Instead betfair have chosen to allow the leeching to continue in exchange for a greater share of the blood and in the process exposed all existing and prospective regular (for want of a better word) cutomers to needless charges and complexity. I don't know exactly what it is you do but I suspect the absence of that information would have wiped out your current edge. I don't blame you, or anyone else for that matter (including courtsiders), for doing what you do but my view is that betfair would be better off shot of the lot of you. From that point of view I doubt our views will ever be closely aligned. |
|
By:
magician, what noodles said was that you had been pressing betfair to make these charges which is nothing more than you've already suggested above.
|
|
By:
Feck N. Eejit
17 Jul 11 22:16 Joined: 10 Jan 02 | Topic/replies: 4,455 | Blogger: Feck N. Eejit's blog magician, what noodles said was that you had been pressing betfair to make these charges which is nothing more than you've already suggested above. 100% agree, which is exactly what I have said above. I don't care about what he posted, I care he posted a private conversation - and worse in a deliberate attempt to ridicule me... the fact that he failed, because he only repeated what I have openly said here, does not condone his indiscreet actions, it just highlights even more how misguided his post and efforts where. |
|
By:
I'm getting sick of hearing about how these new charges are going to lead to the Ferengi churning us to new unbelievable levels of liquidity and how this is what betfair wants and what these charges are all about. If that's the case why doesn't betfair tell them all how to do it?
I think it's all boll0x. OK, I don't doubt there's the odd one out there that's got a bot strategy that will bring in a net profit that will be wiped out by commission but that commission will reduce their pc's (I think pumpkin said he had one) but I think they'll be the exception rather than the rule. I think most of the "I've got a strategy" strategies being knocked about will do nothing more than shift pc charges to normal charges with the same end profit and will end up dumped as a result. |
|
By:
Feck
Could I win with a hidden cue/volumes etc etc. Truthfull answer. Original Bot (2003) - would win less but probably still win 2nd Bot (2006) - would have close to zero impact - might even help 3rd Bot (2009) - would have zero impact 4th bot (2011) (due for imminent release) - will win regardless but uncertain, if it would win more or less. |
|
By:
I think most of the "I've got a strategy" strategies being knocked about will do nothing more than shift pc charges to normal charges with the same end profit and will end up dumped as a result.
The exception being where someone with less than 10% commission generated is attempting to push the figure up to 10%. |
|
By:
Fair enough magician but I doubt there will be many like you.
|
|
By:
Today I lose, Betfair keep bit, winner win lot. Tomorrow I lose, Betfair keep lot, winner win bit.
Before winner have nice life. Tomorrow Betfair take extra money give shareholder have nice life. Bad peoples who win bad bets make same bets but keep less, money go to Betfair shareholder now. I get no difference except maybe bad peopls try hard to make more bad bets. |
|
By:
I agree with your principle however - that the info provided does provide lots of help to people that are not doing there own fundamental analysis.
the technical bots/trading bots etc... would (generally) be more tricky without such data. |
|
By:
FINE AS FROG HAIR
17 Jul 11 22:03 Joined: 12 Mar 07 | Topic/replies: 3,365 | Blogger: FINE AS FROG HAIR's blog Btw I'm extremely disappointed to hear that you are not part of the 480 club why what makes you think I would be in it? |
|
By:
I haven't read all the posts in between but I don't think the initial post is necessarily too far wide of the mark.
They have clearly been piling money into markets recently and this may well increase. I imagine it's only a matter of time before someone formulates a neat plan to fleece them. |
|
By:
To clarify the noodles thing Magician, all I read on here from him was that he said you treated him disrespectfully somewhere, sometime, and that he didn't appreciate that.
He revealed nothing of the content of any private conversations youu apparently had with him. Noyhing at all. I wasn't trying to stir things up between you two again, or anything like that. I was just really commenting on the fact that whilst I welcomed your somewhat late appearance in this debate on the PC, I didn't think all would necessarily be of like opinion. Just a harmless aside, or so I apparently stupidly thought. Saint Pilgrim I really would like to make peace with you. My posting style just seems to disagree with you. I have come out and said quite clearly many, many times that I don't think the PC is going to help mugs lose less, just perhaps more slowly, and even that is debatable, and that the PC iself is most definitely flawed both in structure and implementation ( to which I have no real consrtuctive alternative suggestions). The essence of my argument has always been that the underlying motive of BF is fair and honest and not driven by money grabbing greed directed to solely supporting the shareprice. It is driven by the quite urgent need to stop the cash flow haemorrhaging being caused by certain big winners draining the pool of betting funds excessively quickly. |
|
By:
FaFH
I was not aware he posted I treated him disrespectfully... which if I did, or he must have a very very delicate temprement. I called him "squirrel" one day by accident - he was not amused, a few people found it funny, so several people started to occasional call him squirrel, because he was so sensitive to it - if that is this big disrespectful thing he is publicly crying about a) it was a number of his colleagues b) GROW UP anyway as feck said - he did post information form my private conversation (which I was aware of) and that is what I don't approve of. anyway - both posts show him in a very juvenile, unprofessional, ingenuine and indiscreet light. but good luck to him |
|
By:
Don't know why I thought that Magician tbh.
Just did. Suppose I am just subconsciously hoping that one the real 480 memmbers, or more than one in fact, would come on here and join the debate and add some real substance to it. eganswer questios like will they depart or not, and will or should it matter one way or another? Or perhaps more importantly, are they the ones most guilty of draining the pot excessively and if not, then who is, and how can BF capture them ?. We all want real answers to these types of questions. Not just endless conjecture by wannabes based on incomplete first hand knowledge and experience. |
|
By:
It is driven by the quite urgent need to stop the cash flow haemorrhaging being caused by certain big winners draining the pool of betting funds excessively quickly.
And what have betfair done to stop that drain FAFH? You wont stop the drain on blood by attaching leeches to the leeches. |
|
By:
Squirrel ?
Quite cute actually ? Now rodent. That would be an entirely different matter. |
|
By:
FaFH
I think you need to remember, there are 'many' winner >250K that escape the PC2 they just win at a slow rate - and as such betfair view them as better customers |
|
By:
anyway as feck said - he did post information form my private conversation (which I was aware of) and that is what I don't approve of.
To be fair magician, did you tell him it was private? If not, he's no more guilty than you reporting the same thing in a 'private' conversation with betfair. |
|
By:
Feck
I am saying that the intent of BF is to do that. I am agreeing that the PC is seriously flawed in carrying out that intent. I'm really more calling into question the whole diatribe against BF, of it being a money grabbing group of lazy, incompetent ratbags. |
|
By:
I originally called him Squirrel, as an honest mistake - confused with another punter that goes by the name of Squirrel.
anyway, enough time spent on heynoodles |
|
By:
will they depart or not, and will or should it matter one way or another?
I'll answer for me, and I am one of the 480. My bots will stay, because they generate loads of commission and can be tweaked to generate more. My manual betting is less clear. I am going to have 3 weeks off for certain, and after that I will at the very least duplicate my offers elsewhere. I'm a realist though and there is little chance in the short to medium term that I will get anything meaningful matched anywhere else. In the longer term I expect I will spend more time on compiling and botting. should it matter one way or another? I think the losers do need market makers to keep the spreads reasonably tight in running. Unfortunately their needs are now not aligned with Betfair's who are now effectively the sharks. |
|
By:
Magician
And as such those select few are presumably not too impacted by or worried about the PC. They're not the target. The point is what percentage of the 480 is that target ? Small or large ? More importantly are the big bleeders going to now be caught by the super PC and is BF going to achieve their basic intent of stopping the excessive one way outflow of betting pool funds ?. |
|
By:
Nice to hear you're staying Bayes.
|
|
By:
I can't imagine there is going to be any liquidity difference tomorrow. If all it takes to increase liquidity is to raise the fees, perhaps the purple site should raise its charges to 70% and then get a flood of money? The concept of paying money, therefore betting more, is flawed.
To be sure, one way to 'avoid' the PC is to start 'churning' some bets, as people have called it. If you think of a PC charge as paying commission upfront for bets you haven't yet made, then there is logic behind placing more bets on the site (because you have effectively paid the fees for them already). But these bets still need to have an edge. There's no point placing more bets on here at random, or at 'true' odds. You end up either losing more or betting more for the same eventual profit. And if you have some strategy with an edge, you should already be using it. So where is this fresh liquidity going to come from? |
|
By:
You wont stop the drain on blood by attaching leeches to the leeches.
Very true. I should point out though that Betfair have not tried to justify the new PC charges as being 'fairer' to losing customers, or in some way helping customers that are losing. It is only people on the forums who seem to have assumed this. Betfair have more or less stated the truth - they just want more money from us. (Well, I don't believe their talk about 'breaking-even' or using the money to invest in the exchanges. The company is profitable, if they wanted to pay more money to develop the site then they could have done so) |
|
By:
ding ding
|
|
By:
Mr. Magoo, this is form the Service Forum: "The current Premium Charge mechanism will remain in place but higher rates ..."
Anyone with basic reading skills would conclude this is the same old PC with new higher rates. The arguments brought to the table by the company to support the introduction of the original PC do still apply. Ah no ... they can change the rules and the arguments at any time ... |
|
By:
they say i have to 52k before pay charge but i lost 14k last week but they,now say need to win 57k before pay charge?
|
|
By:
One of the issues with the PC is that it takes away the incentive for Betfair to create a level playing field.
People that win at 'too fast a rate' will pay Betfair massive fees. The PC means that Betfair will be less inclined to stop them. |
|
By:
Which seemingly is OK to BF.
They don't want actually to stop winners, despite what many seem to claim on here, they just want them to pay for the damage they're doing to the betting pool. That is give BF appropriate repair funds. Not unreasonable ? |
|
By:
they said somewhere they lost a lot tradeing themselfs on here,made 5 millon on crossbetting bot had one year to tell us told us on the last day
|
|
By:
Claim: The pool is being drained by "sharks"
Logic: 1. We take money from the "sharks" to theoretically replenish the pool 2. We use the money to build the arcade games (which have nothing to do with the betting pool) 3. In the process, the replenishment of the pool is forgotten (decrease budget in advertising) 4. Because the money is gone with the arcade games 5. Go back to step 1 (and change "arcade games" for what you wish) Other steps not mentioned) (0. We have forgotten who our customers are and in this process we don't care if we destroy any loyalty and good feelings our customers had for us: we are a big corporation and we don't care) (3.1 Outages happen more and more because the pool is not being taken care of) You may also add "pay bonuses", "pay dividends", "pay ..." |
|
By:
I heard the magician wasn't very popular among the highgate fast picture players, he complained how he hadn't hit his yearly target of a million this year & annoyed other users to the point they wanted him out.
His bots must really be flying to avoid being in the 480 despite making a million a year, they must be churning 90% of liquidity on betfair. If the magician leaves it will be all over for betfair & they know it. |
|
By:
I thought you'd promised to stop posting on the PC froggy?
|