General Betting
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
18 Aug 11
01:22
Joined:
Date Joined:
17 Jul 11
A point that no-one has realized so far is that if you look at betfairs liquidity growth this last 3 years its incredible
some sports have doubled and tripled so anyone paying pc2 now and lets say making as an example
gross profits of £300,000 this year and paying 60% in charges (£180,000) netting £120,000
will at this level of growth thanks too betfairs aggressive expansion campaigns make in say 3 years time
gross profits of £600,000 -£900,000, total charges (£180,000-£360,000) netting £240,000-£360,000
Thus the the effect of the pc2 charges have effectively disappeared and no company in the world can offer that sort of
liquidity on a winners are welcome basis!
So if your lucky enough to make those sorts of profits well done and well done betfair for providing the successful platform
to do this on!
some sports have doubled and tripled so anyone paying pc2 now and lets say making as an example
gross profits of £300,000 this year and paying 60% in charges (£180,000) netting £120,000
will at this level of growth thanks too betfairs aggressive expansion campaigns make in say 3 years time
gross profits of £600,000 -£900,000, total charges (£180,000-£360,000) netting £240,000-£360,000
Thus the the effect of the pc2 charges have effectively disappeared and no company in the world can offer that sort of
liquidity on a winners are welcome basis!
So if your lucky enough to make those sorts of profits well done and well done betfair for providing the successful platform
to do this on!
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 80
|
By:
dont think it works like that somehow .
why is every post you've ever made about the PC2 and how great it is? You work for BF or something? Its clearly an abomination |
|
By:
No i dont work for betfair, I just think there there greatest thing that ever happened in the betting world, period, there on the up and up and there going to kick asse in the future and one day those people that valued them at only sub 600p on stocks will be kicking themselves, they haven't matured yet and when global markets increase in size and yield they will dominate
They have winner wrote all over them  |
|
By:
You honestly think winners haven't factored this in???
Chances are if Betfair come out of this undamaged, they will increase charges further. |
|
By:
Glad you're finally showing PC payers a bit of respect, instead of constantly labelling them weak-willed etc.
But it's misguided of you to think that you have realised something which no-one else has. I think you're wrong - liquidity will not grow as you predict but we don't need to make subjective comments on that - let's see how Magician's objective summary goes over time. Perhaps Betfair might plan to increase liquidity themselves with their "sportsbook" but if that is what they plan then they should get a move on. There is a good reason why gross profits might go up for some (and I'm sure others have realised this) - PC2 wipes out some of the competition, and represents a considerable barrier to entry for those stuck at the lower end of the learning curve. So in that sense, those of us who've been around for a while now have a bigger advantage relative to other customers than we had before. But overall we all have less. |
|
By:
I do have a lot of respect for nearly all the posters on the forum because they mostly seem a bright bunch and could teach me a thing or too. I think the growth will continue and certainly they wont stop
being the biggest sporting exchange around so I wouldn't write them off just yet, as for a further charge increase well its not perceivable that this will happen in next 2-3 years as the general projection would then be far too negative against other up and coming exchanges so its looking less likely. And I reckon betfair will have some tricks up there sleeve to surprise us all in the future and prove the doubters all wrong, just have that strong gut feeling that something very good will happen with betfair in the next 5 years, just you wait and see[;)] |
|
By:
I think you need to stop stating opinions as fact.
"Certainly..." followed by something you cannot be sure of. Intriguing analysis about the comparison with other exchanges - you draw the line at 60%? Seems a bit arbitrary. I mean at 60% you are posting ad nauseum about how great things still are relative to the competition. Why does this not apply at 65%, 70...? We went from 20 to 60% and you immediately joined the forum to defend this. Now you say any increase above 60% is not perceivable. Doesn't seem an intelligent stance to me. |
|
By:
Well if you look up what perceivable means then you will find that what it doesnt mean is impossibilty, its a perception as there hasn't been any major charge increase over a shorter period then around 2-3 years which is the condition of my perception if you check, this fact allied to the large increase meaning the over-growth of successful profit making clients has been addressed plus
the higher rate of growth in competition if a further charge occurred means its very less likely than before when it has never happened in any 2-3 year period since the start of the exchange. I never said a charge increase or alteration of existing charge will never happen as this looks more likely with 2 charges already introduced since the start of the exchange! Whether you declare I am intelligent or not based on my assumption is of little importance if you cant understand its content then your probably not able to determine intelligence also as intelligence would bring my observations logically to your attention, its your choice to replace rationality with and some emotions to arrive at a state of argument that suits you as is the norm for most homids of average genetic variation in my worldly experience. |
|
By:
AH. The usual deluge of words, meaning very little. Denying things that haven't been said.
Your posts are inconsistent. You deny 60% will benefit other exchanges, and then say that anything higher would favour other exchanges. The trouble with inconistent posts is that they indicate a lack of integrity. You don't actually believe much of what you post. You're just a relatively simple man with an agenda. |
|
By:
Theres no point in talking to you weatherman, its like trying to put 32 bit machine code in an 8 bit z80a processor , then the usual deluge of words as a word is a 16 bit chunk of data means very little to you when you have such a small instruction set he he
|
|
By:
weatherman
 ...just hit your head with the cricket bat 10 times, it save time |
|
By:
Look at it like this, they created the premium charge in 2008 September, lets say back then you were
using a winning method shall we call it and lets also presume you were maximum bet matching which I doubt many really are but we will assume in this case bettor Mr X was, now almost 3 years later Mr Xs sports market has tripled in 2011 and the pc2 comes in, the fact he is facing an extra 40% loss in charged profits means its really only a 13% effective rise in the charge compared to what he was making back in 2008 and along that projected rate of liquidity growth in 2-3 years time he will be making still the same profit as he was at this point as described in my thread so in effect his profit volume has grown since he first started making a profit back in 2008, the factor me and you don't have access too is the number of mr xs making higher profit margins out there and the cost to betfair against the costs of finding more customers etc , we can only assume that betfair are doing there job well to maintain such good records on growth and company profits against many negative business hurdles they have been faced with. You don't have to work for betfair to understand how good there business strategy is, nearly all the press and business world will tell you that and they also don't work for betfair. |
|
By:
I`ve largely given up posting here or even reading, but your name bf_fanatic is a constant when I have a glance.
Your username says it all and I`ll give you the benefit of the doubt that you are not a seed...even BF wouldn`t waste as much time here as you do defending the company and the PC. You remind me of myself in the early days, when indeed Betfair was the greatest innovation in the industry and I too defended its position constantly though still criticised many of its decisions, as it seemed to be making them up as they went along. The fact that I make money here was no doubt a contributing factor but genuinely this was a great company and a breath of fresh air after the traditional parasite bookies. However though Betfair still retains its attraction for virtually all its customers (98.3%)who do not win let alone pay the PC, those of us with a broader view see the company now for what it has become. That you can even contemplate defending or justifying the PC shows how little you understand betting. I could go on as I did on my thread of a month or two ago but I.... like the others have exhausted the argument. But to narrow it down to a few sentences, the whole ethic of gambling is that you do not penalise winners. Winners are only doing what it says on the tin. If you do not honour the client simply because he wins you are taking an immoral stance. That winning is disallowed by all traditional bookies is a given, and as wrong as that is, at least they could argue that winners are affecting their profits. Betfair`s winners are not affecting the company`s profits and are paying comm just like the losers. So why are they being taxed ? Because BF is unhappy that they produced a model that allowed a tiny percentage of their users to profit in undreamt of sums far too cheaply in the first place. Or put simply, GREED. If I win £100 from you what difference does that make to BF ? They receive the comm, but it is you that paid the fiver and you then paid me the £95..that is how it works, like the spread firms made their profits in the spread...they shouldn`t care which side won. By introducing the PC Betfair have abandoned all aspects of a fair bet...by backdating it a decade they are stealing. 60% is outrageous and they know it, they are asking winners to leave BUT the implications for the company are far more serious than those for the winners. What it boils down to is that the losers, break levellers or the small winners are at the mercy of the company and have no doubt that you and the others will be paying at some time in the future whether by an increase in comm or a harsher decay system...or as I think certain a PC for ALL winners, ie one that doesn`t feature a £250K start point. Summing up, you sir are a keen supporter of a company that will penalise you if you have the audacity to win ! You may be comfortable with that, but freethinkers are certainly not. These include all serious gamblers, the stock market, the markets that BF hope to crack and possibly worst of all for BF the authorities who need to be shown that this is a fair playing surface. The PC destroys all chances of BF`s progress and growth and rightly so. That purple is already showing the benefits is clear and worse for BF will follow. Why would a company shoot itself in the foot so clearly and actually encourage clients to defect to the opposition ? Because they are clueless about gambling that`s why. The board lacks direction, vision and the goodwill lost by the PC is unrecoverable. In these economic times that is disastrous and it would not surprise me if BF was gone within 5 years or sold to a company with more industry experience. Basically you are being blinkered bf_fanatic and while there are clients like yourself who thinks the sun shines out of the company`s anus the future will be all too clear for Betfair.Squeeze the punters until they squeal will remain their policy and by your constant justifications of their behaviour you are hastening that process. Why do you think that all the guys that were there on the first day are now gone ? Do you think they just got bored or do you reckon that they saw the storm ahead ? Answer that honestly and you will have the reason why Betfair has hit the buffers. |
|
By:
Very good post Duncan with very many good points included, I don't like paying charges for anything as much as the next person just like we all wont like paying increased energy bills this winter but
business nearly always have solid reasons for doing so and in betfairs case it is illogical to argue with the pc2 too much as they have such a huge monopolistic lead in sporting exchange liquidity that for nearly all sports there is no-where else to go betting that can fetch such a healthy profit even after these charges, of course my case is different as it will be for many customers as I haven't made a profit yet on here or even bet and many will have seen a big drop in there expected net profits but surely there are ways to increase this and with betfair backing you up with such an amazing growth and liquidity profile, how can you go wrong sticking with them in the future, as for defecting to inferior exchanges thats like being in a premiership football team and when hearing of a wage cut in wages that rise say 30% a year stating that all the players are going to join Accrington Stanley for a promise of no wage cuts on a pay structure that is tiny in comparison. |
|
By:
And on the subject of platform migration if your one of the 99% plus who don't make a profit
then using another exchange wont stop you losing it will just mean your doing it on a less professional site with a poor 10 year growth record and far too few markets who haven't spent more than 10 quid on there upgrading programs in my estimation. And if your one of the lucky few that make persistent profits then most markets on other exchanges suffer from less than 10% liquidity so you will actually be making a huge loss in moving! And if your betting in the few markets where there is a comparable liquidity on other exchanges then why would you just use the other exchange when you could double up your profits and bet on both exchanges. Surely the only real advantage in complaining about charges is too see how far persons can spit there dummies out, to me that is the only logical advantage in this act but it is a desperate act. |
|
By:
bff, you are a perfect case of a "thinks he knows it all, but really knows nothing" person.
|
|
By:
Eddie your dummy went about 5 yards, not the best effort seen, try harder[;)]
|
|
By:
it is illogical to
argue with the pc2 too much as they have such a huge monopolistic lead in sporting exchange liquidity er excuse me ? That is EXACTLY why one should argue with it surely. Are you suggesting that they should have the right to change the goalposts simply because there is no opposition ? That is no longer true either..Purple is a viable alternative for many of us. That does not mean we would rather bet there...as I`ve mentioned 98.3% don`t care about the PC including yourself. It is not just about self interest, the PC cannot be defended and because BF looks much the same it does not mean that it is actually the same. My comm through lack of turnover has gone up by around 22% since PC and will continue to rise if I don`t bet..how does that help liquidity and Betfair ? They suggest that I am costing them too much to run weekly...even you don`t believe that nonsense surely ? how can you go wrong sticking with them in the future again a simple answer..by removing my business elsewhere until the absolute only alternative is to bet here...which won`t occur while Mr. Desmond is solvent. If we all made a stand because of the immorality of the PC (losers included)..then there is a simple outcome..no more Betfair ! That won`t happen we know that, but that is how fragile this site is...punters ought to vote with their mice, that they don`t says more about them than it does about BF. |
|
By:
DD huge respect for you over the years
BUT "If we all made a stand because of the immorality of the PC (losers included).." cant agree with that.... if anything it would be IMMORAL for betfair to continue letting the retail player get fleeced by the PC2 payer... as well as being bad for business.. There is actually a law against many of the PC2 generating bets... it is just sadly neither BF or the GC understand betting or that law. or if they do they both do a very convincing job of being stupid |
|
By:
if anything it would be IMMORAL for betfair to continue letting the retail player get fleeced by the PC2 payer
That's exactly what they're doing though magician. They are an immoral outfit. |
|
By:
Huge difference between some of the PC2-payers. To be hit by 40% you don't have to do anything remotely immoral/fishy/illegal, just being a (very) skilled gambler is enough. In the 60%-category especially I'm sure there are some people that they should ban rather than take 60% from.
|
|
By:
Purple is a viable alternative for many of us.
Spot on DD. The whiners on here have an alternative, especially after today's new innovation by purple. I'm sick to my back teth of PC threads on here. Fk off or stop punting/trading. (imo) |
|
By:
*teeth
|
|
By:
The Magician (101)
18 Aug 11 10:44 Joined: 25 Sep 07 | Topic/replies: 109 | Blogger: The Magician (101)'s blog DD huge respect for you over the years BUT "If we all made a stand because of the immorality of the PC (losers included).." cant agree with that.... if anything it would be IMMORAL for betfair to continue letting the retail player get fleeced by the PC2 payer... as well as being bad for business.. So after 11 years they’ve decided to take a moral stance and protect the retail player by taking up to 60% from the PC2 payer! Yeah, that really offers them loads of protection. I can’t help but feel that if you were affected by the charge your tune would be different. |
|
By:
Feck
Granted would be better for them to stop (change the exchange) or ban, many of the PC2 payers - but the simple truth is they dont really undertsand thier own exchange.... and they dont even attempt 1/10 of the data analysis that would be required for them to make better decisions. the immoral bets that are allowed to stand are getting reduced, and short of the above suggestions, taxing the immoral operators is the better option than letting them keep it. Eggman I am not sure they have done it for moral reasons.... but business reasons... either way it better to tax thier thieves, and be complicit in thier theft than to do nothing. |
|
By:
Magician, I’m not too sure that taxing thieves is generally the way to go. Surely you lock them up (stop them using the site), otherwise you are complicit in their thievery.
You’ve been around for a while and surely you realise that it’s not just the thieves and the cheats caught up in this mess. Anyone who has worked at being profitable for a number of years has been lumped together with those who exploit unfair advantages (I should say that I’m not actually pro or against unfair advantages - there will always be people with an advantage over others). Any exchange that penalises successful use of the exchange is destined to eventual failure. You can’t have a list of supposed issues with long-term viability and attempt to solve those problems with a solution that creates more problems. I agree with DD that more people just need to change their habits. I’m surprised when I see that someone is paying 40-60%. When will they stop? For me, 20% was bad enough, there’s no way I’m going to pay 50%. |
|
By:
Magician(100), do you approve of PC just because what you call thieves has to pay more of their profit to Betfair or do you also think it's fair that good gamblers/position takers also have to pay up to 40/50/60 % extra of their winnings ?
|
|
By:
eggman,,this is right...if they are breaking some law, get the police....don't take 60% of their profits ...lets rob the bank and because it "IMMORAL" should betfair tax us 60% or call the police
|
|
By:
the immoral bets that are allowed to stand are getting reduced, and short of the above suggestions, taxing the immoral operators is the better option than letting them keep it.
All well and good if they were redirecting the money back to those who were mugged. They may not understand their exchange but they're not that dim that they don't understand the morality. |
|
By:
covering several points raised.
PC2 is better than doing nothing, especially if the money is redirected back to those that where thieved from or into a better retail customer experience and expanded user base Agree thieves and ahrd workers are both caught in this net – but not certain that is a bad thing... the net should have been more thief specific.... but there is reason in taxing the hard working winners also PC2 is imperfect in several areas... thieves should be targeted before or more aggressively than hard workers that win at the same RATE, and MO. PC2 paying thieves are bad morally and for business (long term viability of the exchange) PC2 paying hard workers are bad for business... even if morally sound as participants. Agree with Betfair helping thieves (or not stopping them) and just taxing them is inexcusable, even if they claim they don’t understand. The issue is the enforcer of the law is the Gambling commission, and all of the many interactions I have had with them confirm three tragic things 1) They don’t understand gambling 2) They don’t understand Betfair 3) They want a easy life Given those three things they will never effectively enforce the Gambling Act and as such it is a completely useless piece of legislation. |
|
By:
PC2 paying hard workers are bad for business... even if morally sound as participants.
This may be true for some of the PC2 poayers, but there will be several PC2 payers that are very good for Betfair's business. And one of the bigger flawswith PC2 is that it will probably not stop the ones bad for business operating, but it will in all likelyhood stop the majority of the good business PC2 payers from doing more here. |
|
By:
I do agree with Feck on this one... finally
 Magician, who do you think fall in the category of 'immoral operators'. 2007 4.14% (on 4-5% comm but mainly trading AH at 1% promo rate) 2008 9.67% 2009 10.92% 2010 18.96% 2011* 23.80% Commission paid as a percentage of GP (* first six months) It's already the case that if the original PC was introduced now, it's likely I would never pay it. There's another argument for rebates. As my turnover and profits have grown, my margins have dropped, leading to more commission paid. 40% is astonishingly high though, we're getting to the point now where trading on a betting exchange profitably becomes more expensive than traditional trading of financial instruments, where some pay as little as 30% of GP in fees. Are you not at all concerned that this is just the start of a series of price increases that will eventually hit you too? |
|
By:
investor2 is right. betfair will target magician and other big winner in the future, who are not currently affected by pc2.
|
|
By:
PC2 paying hard workers are bad for business... even if morally sound as participants.
I don't see how that can be possible. Someone that earns £100k a year and generates £30k a year in commission is bad for business. Another customer with a similar profile decides to have a few big bets to get comm up to 40%+ is suddenly a good customer? If they're bad for business, why not just ban them? It's fairly easy to see what kind of profile fits a PC2 payer. Some will be using fast pics, some will be using superior form analysis coupled with a very low appetite for risk (sub optimal even), some will use mathematical models to derive odds very accurately and trade around that. One example to highlight is the people that seed illiquid markets. This carries a high cost of capital, but is rewarded with high margins. My question is, if people seeding these markets are making 10%+ ROI, would Betfair be better off removing the market? That's not a rhetorical question. There's another thing to consider. Say someone is making £10m a year and paying £5m in commission. If Betfair can accurately estimate their costs at £1m a year, there is good reason to tax them more even though they are already paying a lot. Take it up to 60%, and with a £3m net profit they'll probably stick around. It's a dangerous game though. |
|
By:
There's lots of free money available for those with the best technology, taking advantage of extremely simple underlying principles. Betfair could stop this in the same way they stopped people taking advantage of markets before cross-matching.
The sad thing is that the leisure punter is unlikely to benefit, as any 'free money' now going to the supertech crew will just be diverted to bf instead. |
|
By:
The Magician..when I speak of the immorality of the PC, I am in no way referring to those who fleece punters both willing and unsuspecting on a daily basis (though that is a no brainer naturally)...BF see fit to allow them to prosper that is their prerogative though as a public company they need to address their image in that matter. If the platform was tweaked you could eliminate them overnight, BF for their own reasons prefer a free for all.
What I mean is that the charge itself is immoral full stop. That a company can penalise its long serving clientele for what occurred a decade ago is inexcusable. Why offer a service both then and now and then punish those who did nothing more than avail themselves of that service ? It is outrageous behaviour and surely would not be tolerated in any other business. Can anyone quote me a company in any field that will levy you in the future for what you have done in the past ? It is breathtaking in its unfairness and therefore from a gambling aspect immoral. A fair bet should be just that. A bet with BF carries the added clause that if it contributes to a profitable figure you will be penalised. That is against all ethics of gambling and even the racecourse spivs of the past might blush at that three card trick. I`d also like to emphasise one major point. This PC is not just affecting the hooverers, trap bet merchants, aftertime course boys, arbers, Feck`s beloved traders, inside dealers..and other undesirables who you could certainly make a case for penalising. No, this includes ordinary gamblers who miraculously make this game pay. I repeat the figure 1.7% of the millions of BF users and that includes myself. My only crime has been to win over the ten years...and win fairly. There is a misconception that most PC payers are the sharks....that may be true but it is those that win by their own methods that I speak for, as they are being grouped with those sharks and though that is unfair, the PC stands as immoral and disgraceful for the fleecers as much as for myself. When I speak of losers as well as winners defecting, I do so not as a crusader. It is simply unthinkable that we should bet with a gambling company who will penalise you financially for winning at betting...what the hell do they think we are here for ?  |
|
By:
Investor.
I could pay the PC if I wanted to pay it.... but was not sure that was the target :o) Ballybriggs likewise... Investor the move from bad customer to good customer is obviuosly grey... and one component should be if you make or take bets.... and the market maker in an illquid market should be rewarded for making bets. a flaw of the many of the PC2 is that is does not segregate making or taking Liquidity in the valuie of the customer to betfair. DD Agree that PC should be more rate dependednt... and not 10 year dependent.... thought clearly you need some period of time to prove consistancy of winnings. PC2 net should have been more shark specific hills ladbrokes and every higstreet shop penalises you for winning - dont they? |
|
By:
magicman, tobin tax would make better system for betfair, if tax per trade was used, and then pc2 could be reduced. would make fairer if more successful traders were tobin'd, whilst losers did not pay it. i guess you would not like tobin.
|
|
By:
"hills ladbrokes and every higstreet shop penalises you for winning - dont they? "
An important distiction, the firms will restrict rather than penalise..they will deter rather than steal..even those philanthropists would not dare envisage offering you evens and then add the proviso if it wins it will contribute to you paying a surcharge at a future date. A bet used to be between two gentlemen...of honour and committment. Only at Betfair can a bet not mean what it is supposed to mean. Yes..immoral indeed. |
|
By:
I think a more shark specific PC2 would just be too difficult to implement and very unclear.
Investor. I could pay the PC if I wanted to pay it.... but was not sure that was the target :o) Of course it's better to be in your position. However if you think PC2 payers are bad for business, does that not also mean that if we were to take your most consistent strategies in isolation (the ones that generate little commission) are also bad for business? Or does everything you do generate loads of commission? In my case, my most consistent strategy generates about 7% comm over GP, and the least consistent ones around 100%. Anyone that market makes in illiquid markets successfully and does nothing else will be a PC payer, at least in football as illiquid = large spreads. |