addressing all bf users, share investors and betfair company I have a wonderful idea!

What about the customers who have paid higher rates of commission than the customers you seek to prefer in this way?

My ears are ringing after that

Email bf, see what they say.  May I propose that you don't type it in upper case.

dilutes the value of the shares which the pc hike is designed to increase

regarding which  premium charge payers would receive a possible share return at some point in the future, all premium charge payers would receive this incentive as there liquidity and value too the company is equal, this would only be the fairest decision.

valued customers who arent yet on the premium charge will still receive the points reward system
which has been in place for some time as has a good track record!

So, supposing I have made 500k gross last year and generated 250k of commission and another customer has made 500k gross, generated 100k of commission and paid 100k pc, you would propose to betfair that I get no shares but the other customer does?

no i disagree charlton, how would this incentive scheme dilute the value of the shares!

betfair can happily carry on receiving the premium charge to the relief of investors and investors will be on a par with the premium charge payers so there will be a natural dilution of positive ethos not share value, share value can only be enhanced, betfair wont have too pay any shares out until say a future point of there choosing, somewhere along the projected positive growth point of the company.

I think the op has fallen for the hype that pc payers=best customers

i shall explain how my idea would work in a philosophical manner,

an exchange model like betfair involves exchanges, all markets through history have a form of exchange
be it beads for flints, money for gold , apples for oranges, the owners of an exchange can only survive on a small margin of business so really on liquidity and thats why betfair matched more bets
last year in history than any other company ever because they are still the owners of an awesome
exchange.

because betfair has become so successful they have had to raise the game or betfair would of come too a grinding halt, instead they have built up the business in spite of competition, legal battles,
etc

part of a companies future growth has too include floating on the stock market and betfair have been brave enough todo this even when it wasnt the best time in the world because of current global economic conditions, they have had to do this to better propel the company and seal its destiny.

betfair has had too tighten its finacial ship too better fund its growth, expansion into new markets and raise its comapny profile, but also all this time there has been a growing number of successful
bettors and traders that have on the one hand increased liquidity but on the other hand put nothing into the revenues and only take out, this is actually not a bad thing as it shows how good the betfair exchange model is, no other gambling site in the world can claim too have such a group of successful punters beating in its business heart.

so in the last few years the premium charge has had to be considered and appied to allow the growth and upkeep of the exchange for the sustainable future.

what must be considered is that good business is when money flows freely and harmony in markets is maintained, to expect all profitable players to simply hand over a large percentage of there profits over without any form of exchange really upsets the applecart so there must be a fiscal exchange at some point that justifies the action of what is really revenue investment, granting a future share payback at some point in the future is a brilliant incentive to allow customers too have a slice of betfairs success in the future.!!!!

Possibly but my point is you wouldn't limit it to pc payers

hi capfleppo ,no i would propose that all pc payers not matter how small or big would receive some future reward in betfairs success for contributing there premium charge payments, it would be volume indexed and if shares would be relative of course to the performance of the company, premium payers then would have 2 reasons to stay and increase liquidity.

1.....increase there profit margins

2.....increase the profit margins of the company via liquidity to ensure share price growth.

a simple but elegant idea!

You have missed my point Mr Fanatic.

ALL LOYAL CUSTOMERS THAT HAVE PAID HIGHEST PREMIUM CHARGES AND WILL DO IN THE FUTURE WILL BE PROMISED IN RETURN SHARES IN THE VALUED COMPANY AT SOME AGREEABLE AMOUNT AND POINT IN TIME.

That is a terrific idea.

Unfortunately for BF they can't do it, it would affect its stock price too much,

But I happen to know its in the plans of a competitor,

no i disagree charlton, how would this incentive scheme dilute the value of the shares!

because presumably you are issuing new shares, watering down the value of existing shares. if not where are they coming from?

ffs.......David Yu has resorted to posting on the forum.

David Yu now wants to dilute the shareholder base ?
I thought he was buying shares back ?
I'm confused.

thats a CAPSLOCK-TASTIC idea bf_fanatic

Come to think of it, has anyone ever seen a good idea written in CAPSLOCK ?

is there such a thing ?

If he wrote in smaller case letters would it then be any good ?
I thought and still think that it was posted in jest.
At least I hope it was.

Catfleppo : So, supposing I have made 500k gross last year and generated 250k of commission and another customer has made 500k gross, generated 100k of commission and paid 100k pc, you would propose to betfair that I get no shares but the other customer does?

Bf_fanatic, do you understand the above post?

Hi trevh, it seems catfleppo has made an error somewhere as his comment makes no sense, my idea is just saying that if the payers of the pc charge and i mean all of them, recieved in the future a return for there contributions then there would be a higher level of harmony that would be good for the betfair ethos and reflect well then with investment consultants who very well understand that the fair in betfair underlines the basic principal the betting on an exchange can be profitable, to say it cant be profitable and winning is wrong is too move towards the saturated market of general bookmaking
which would cause a downward appeal in betfair and even a problem with its very name betfair as fairness would have gone, all players would only be accepted on the basis that they on average lose as on all the other gambling sites and only addicted gamblers would be welcomed, quite a huge drift from the old brilliant betfair that everybody has come too know so well.

If betfair made a promise to the pc payers for the future or even had the maturity too address them about there worth on the site instead of sending them the wrong message then most of the damage in confidence could be repaired and more people will be urged too invest more ito the shares.

does anyone even the staff at betfair know currently which direction betfair and its army of users are heading!

How dare you [;)]

I think my maths is correct but it doesn't really matter.  My point is that you have failed to take into account the users who are not going to be affected by the new PC because they are already generating more than 40% commission.  They are more valuable than the 480 and you should, if anything, offer them your spare shares first.

oh i see now, well all payers of the premium charge would be involved and it would be related by any premium charge payment made. that would only be the fair solution

What about those that aren't affected by the pc?

theres an old saying, you cant please all the people , all the time. if players have not made a profit then they must re-address there betting strategy, achieving this though in the light of pc charge being raised form a v.a.t. level to a super tax level cant fill them with optimism!

While you're at it, why not suggest they should have betfair babes **** the pc payers while neanderthals go round slipping the non pc payers a diseased length?

bl0w j0b

Ha ha, Mr Fanatic still hasn't got it I don't think.  The brainwashing powers of your Ferengi are not to be underestimated!

well i think i can see which side of the profit margin you guys must bet on but as long as your having a good time, dont blame others if your not happy.

I'm on the 40% pc rate bf_fanatic. I don't see why that makes me better than a loser or someone paying more than 40% of their profits in normal commission.

Me too, on both counts.

what a load of rubbish - betfair wont have a decrease in in its liquidity as it has its own bet matcthing logic software - why do you think they dont want the 400 odd winners?

well i dont see if your bright enough to earn that much premium charge you are stupid enough to use the word neanderthal as a reference to a backward kind of human when in reality when cromagon crawled out of africa and into europe 40,000 b.c. who was totally outclassed in brain size 1200cc as oppossed to 1650cc, was physically inferior  , only survived because he ate half the calorie intake and could eat a combination of meat or vegatable matter, neanderthals were close in hunters, large game, anything, cromagon would of run a mile from any neanderthal or there favourite prey.

it was climatic conditions that affected the large game and the loss of so many ice age adapted species that led to the neanderthal demise.

betfair may also become extinct if they like they neanderthal decide to get in close and personal and kill off all there big game, the top pc payers, without adapting to new or sustainable old food sources.

so when all this clubbing and elitism has finished between the corp and the players and the payers let see who is left standing if you want to put it in a caveman relative sense lol

and whilst on the subject of survival of the fittest, do you think the success of cromagon has been beneficial to the planet generally when 40,000 years on, other species are being wiped out at an alarming rate, the planet and the oceans are getting slowly but surely polluted and there is no apart from china, working population control.

yes too much growth can turn out to be fatal error , sustainable long term management is the only model that will ever succeed!

fairness and balance are principals that exist in the natural world , not just in boardromms

it may be a jungle out there and dog eat dog in here but the jungle bar adverse climatic change or being felled for cash was always a sustainable long term model designed by nature!

and whilst on the subject of survival of the fittest, do you think the success of cromagon has been beneficial to the planet generally when 40,000 years on, other species are being wiped out at an alarming rate, the planet and the oceans are getting slowly but surely polluted and there is no apart from china, working population control.

What a load of nonsense, much like your original post. I bet you demonise harmless essential carbon dioxide, I just know it.

Do you at least understand now that many punters pay much more in commission than the pc payers you're so concerned about?

trevh, organic system models or betting exchage models, perhaps if you think non pc payers pay more than pc payers it all goes way over your head mate.

go and check the current freefall in the stock market today if you think the pc hike goes over investors heads, we will all lose if betfair sinks trevh, charles darwens phrase survival of the fittest will do for me lol

bf_fananatic
trevh, organic system models or betting exchage models, perhaps if you think non pc payers pay more than pc payers it all goes way over your head mate.

You have got this wrong over and over again.  It is quite straight forward, if you generate more than 40% in commission you don't pay pc. Someone in this situation clearly pays more commission that their equivalent pc payer.

Do you at least understand now that many punters pay much more in commission than the pc payers you're so concerned about?

trev, that's because they lose more often......answer? stop losing! if they can't that is their problem, not pc payers...!

trev, that's because they lose more often......answer? stop losing! if they can't that is their problem, not pc payers...!

Banning / penalising losers is your advice to betfair?

iz, you are confusing success with strike rate.  It's not the same thing.

if everybody won on betfair then the exchange would of only lasted a week, losers make winners, thats always been the case, you cant have just winners and more winners, losers are an important player in all games, turning winners into losers is an old concept though, the communists would love the pc hike except they would make it say 99% and then send the winners off to siberia, all losers would win the right to live lol.