General Betting
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Evening all! Dug up a choice morsel for the lawyers representing VLV claimants:
David Yu: "What we do," he says, "is bring a community of users together and match people who have opposing views. They're betting through us but against each other. The bet is legally with us. We hold the bookmaker's licence.
"We're the bookmaker that takes the bet but we only accept the bet if we know we can perfectly hedge it with someone of an opposing view. That's the magic of our technology. We never lose money on the betting."
David Yu: "What we do," he says, "is bring a community of users together and match people who have opposing views. They're betting through us but against each other. The bet is legally with us. We hold the bookmaker's licence.
"We're the bookmaker that takes the bet but we only accept the bet if we know we can perfectly hedge it with someone of an opposing view. That's the magic of our technology. We never lose money on the betting."
Show More
I agree, knowing that Betfair legally were the layer could be a very important point for those thinking of going to court.
To take something to court, you need evidence. Speculation plus the supported by a comment won't win any case.
Terms and conditions will be a bigger hurdle for those wanting to take it on.
Chances are, a software glitch took place. The engineers will be able to show it and show the correction.
The question which needs to be confirmed is that it was betfairs 'main frame' and not a betfair bot in, say, Gibralter who I believe, like a user, would not be able to claim palpable error.
A footnote: chances are this error took place before but perhaps on a Tuesday greyhound race with no liquidity. So tracing it/correcting it would have been difficult.
Also, this could have been a 'coming together' of several small 'bugs' so it had been undetected till then.
Everyone expects software to be infallible. It is not the case.
But it seems people only take notice of the engineering when it has a glitch.
Terms and conditions will be a bigger hurdle for those wanting to take it on.
Chances are, a software glitch took place. The engineers will be able to show it and show the correction.
The question which needs to be confirmed is that it was betfairs 'main frame' and not a betfair bot in, say, Gibralter who I believe, like a user, would not be able to claim palpable error.
A footnote: chances are this error took place before but perhaps on a Tuesday greyhound race with no liquidity. So tracing it/correcting it would have been difficult.
Also, this could have been a 'coming together' of several small 'bugs' so it had been undetected till then.
Everyone expects software to be infallible. It is not the case.
But it seems people only take notice of the engineering when it has a glitch.
If you compare the revenue from their "risk sports" in 2012 they did a lot worse than 2011. They said the results were bad in May
"Non-risk Sports revenue, which is predominantly commission earned on the Betting Exchange, was flat at £59.5m (Q1 FY11: £59.6m),
Revenue from risk Sports products was lower at £0.3m (Q1 FY11: £3.9m) following adverse sporting results in May."
http://corporate.betfair.com/investor-relations/~/media/Files/B/Betfair/press-releases/2011/betfair-q1-fy12-ims.pdf
"Non-risk Sports revenue, which is predominantly commission earned on the Betting Exchange, was flat at £59.5m (Q1 FY11: £59.6m),
Revenue from risk Sports products was lower at £0.3m (Q1 FY11: £3.9m) following adverse sporting results in May."
http://corporate.betfair.com/investor-relations/~/media/Files/B/Betfair/press-releases/2011/betfair-q1-fy12-ims.pdf
Not in 2012, it was comparing Q2 2011 with Q1 2011
"adverse sporting results"
I think I'll use this expression with Mrs Shapeshifter when discussing my results
I think I'll use this expression with Mrs Shapeshifter when discussing my results
BTW, risk would be multiples that betfair traders arb as well as those with multiples will sometimes lay off creating liquidity and commission.
You would need a bit more lateral thinking to assess "risk sport" revenue.
You would need a bit more lateral thinking to assess "risk sport" revenue.
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539