General Betting
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/alistair-osborne/8782920/Betfair-pantomime-sidesteps-the-critics.html
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 12
|
By:
good to see press relations going well
 |
|
By:
and this too- allegedly banning shareholders from AGM because they worked for the press.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/sep/22/bounced-from-betfairs-annual-meeting?newsfeed=true ------- I remember a time in the past when Betfair stood for transparency |
|
By:
On September 20 he received an email from Betfair's "pricing team" stating his account shared a similar betting strategy with four others, all of which would be taken into consideration for the charges.
This is the statement that, for me, is so 'opened ended' that, on its own, won't hold water in court. How I interpret it means that if five of us are using the 'same strategy' to lay dogs, are accounts could be 'linked'. I recently built some filters I have been testing for dogs for potential lays. 75% of these dogs drift extensively, sometimes triple the opening odds. Does this mean that if I lay it and four other of you are using 'the same strategy' to find a dog, we will be linked? I know I am 'simplifying it' but Betfair are treading on dangerous ground unless their "e-mails" can give more detailed evidence BEFORE ceasing funds. |
|
By:
similarly if you all subscribed the to the same very successful tipster.
it will be very interesting to see if the gentleman in question does start legal action, and if it ever reaches court. very little good can come of it from betfair's perspective, in fact regardless of the rights or wrongs of the case in question, the PR is unequivocally bad. you only have to look at the handful of comments on the telegraph site to realise that discussion of the PC in the wider domain is not good for betfair or its model. but it wouldn't surprise me if they miss that point. |
|
By:
Only matter of time before tested in court, then everyone has opportunity to put forward their claim.
Wonder where has jurisdiction |
|
By:
i'm not sure about everyone brendan, but i would imagine it would clear up the situation with "Peter Webb's missus"
(i.e. what happens if another account holder uses your strategy) i said it at the time, and in an email to betfair, that the single biggest problem with PC3 is that two customers can be employing the same strategy and be making the same amount of money but be charged staggeringly different rates. the simplest solution for betfair would have been to have introduced variable pc rates depending on how much money was made in a cyclic period (like conventional income tax) irrespective of the total lifetime balance. it would have placated some and made their policing of avoidance easier at the same time. |
|
By:
Banning the press from the AGM
  [smiley:crazy]Next stop will be Panorama and Watchdog at this rate |
|
By:
Fecking depressing stuff being a Betfair gambler these days
|
|
By:
We can only guess to why the press were banned, was it..
1. to avoid further publicity about salary and bonuses of CEO and Finance Officer? 2. to avoid publicity about re-election of management? 3. to avoid publicity about......(performance?)....? Who knows why the press were banned, I read elsewhere that active users are down 19%, I don't know if thats true. But whatever, banning the press at the door is somewhat a provocative action. |
|
By:
i'm not sure about everyone brendan
meant everyone in any court case, not like everyone in the world  |
|
By:
i'm not sure about everyone brendan
meant everyone in any court case, not like everyone in the world |
|
By:
It's not just the press who can't attend these meetings. People with clown phobias are also unable to attend (imo).
|