General Betting
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Today for the first time I attempted to have abet at fixed odds, I asked for
500 ew, i was offered £12, on par with skybet.
Now, first things first, I didnt expect the bet to be excepted in full,
because I knew I would be marked through my exchange history.
But when you examine the facts , it bears ill for betfair shareholders,
betfair exchange has an unrivalled product in exchange betting, they are top
of the tree, the brand is without equal.
They have decided to branch into fixed odds, they must have invested
millions in the product, but by offering punters a pittance of a bet it
doesnt equate, its ridiculous, its like tesco deciding to compete with the
corner shop, so what??, its ladbrokes, and hills and 365 who you are going
have to compete with to justify your fixed odds fixation.
A startup from the school playground will accept bets of £12,on fact I
remember plenty of £20 bets whilst still at school, its pathetic.
You are going to make your brand a laughing stock, on par with skybet, and
sporting bet.
Betfair you are going to spunk away everything you have earned from the fantasic exchange vision which your founders envisaged, for a gamble on fixed odds, which frankly, you have neither the skill, or experience to fulfil.
500 ew, i was offered £12, on par with skybet.
Now, first things first, I didnt expect the bet to be excepted in full,
because I knew I would be marked through my exchange history.
But when you examine the facts , it bears ill for betfair shareholders,
betfair exchange has an unrivalled product in exchange betting, they are top
of the tree, the brand is without equal.
They have decided to branch into fixed odds, they must have invested
millions in the product, but by offering punters a pittance of a bet it
doesnt equate, its ridiculous, its like tesco deciding to compete with the
corner shop, so what??, its ladbrokes, and hills and 365 who you are going
have to compete with to justify your fixed odds fixation.
A startup from the school playground will accept bets of £12,on fact I
remember plenty of £20 bets whilst still at school, its pathetic.
You are going to make your brand a laughing stock, on par with skybet, and
sporting bet.
Betfair you are going to spunk away everything you have earned from the fantasic exchange vision which your founders envisaged, for a gamble on fixed odds, which frankly, you have neither the skill, or experience to fulfil.
Show More
I tried to bet Tiger Woods for the masters on fixed odds last week . Was allowed a max of £25.00
Anyone who has won anything on the exchange is not welcome at fixed odds, they only want you to bet
exchange and carve you up for premium charges, a quite vile organisation in my very honest opinion.
Anyone who has won anything on the exchange is not welcome at fixed odds, they only want you to bet
exchange and carve you up for premium charges, a quite vile organisation in my very honest opinion.
I think its fair to say that the current fixed odds website is very very poor. It is characterised by terrible prices and terrible limits. It has joined the current fad of being a soft bookie - i.e. refusing bets to anyone who has a clue. In short it is a pathetic offering and if it was launched without the Betfair name it would not last five minutes.
Betfair is struggling to find its identity. In the early years it was all about 'winners welcome', 'sharp minds betfair'. When they took over Flutter they stressed that the merged markets would mean more liquidity and thus higher limits for customers. They developed the technology to match more bets that than all the European exchanges put together.
Then what did they do? They started looking for soft targets. They branched out into games and poker. At the time it was all still person to person. I remember one of the founders telling me they were not being greedy and they were sticking to their p2p principles. Then came the casino. The p2p games were replaced by ones run by Betfair themselves. The crossmatcher came in - to this day I still dont know if it gets to beat the clock inrunning to match bets.
This was still not enough. They have since walked further from the starting point. They introduced the Premium Charge. Uproar at 20%. But really this would only affect traders, cheats and extremely good position gamblers. Then it went up to 40% and 60%. Now 40% gets all good big players. Arbers - gone. Decent position gamblers who have a long term return of over 3% on stakes - gone or slowly moving. The consequences of the Premium Charge are huge.
Then there are the data charges and bet placement charges. Great in theory. But a 1000 bets an hour max? Try pricing up and adjusting books for 30 races or football matches a day (with all their secondary markets) with that. You cannot. So early markets are no more.
So what started as the perfect limit order book market has evolved into a monster. It has not been helped by the lack of regulation by Betfair itself. Instead of the Premium Charge why did they not look to level the playing field? Encourage people to leave offers up rather than take them with commission rebates. Get rid of obviously unfair markets like inplay horses until real time streams are available. Not allow connections to bet on here. The list is endless.
Betfair could have hired someone who has experience of running a real exchange to run the company. Prices and policies and new markets would have been completely different. Maybe LMAX would not have failed if this was the case. But we now have an out and out industry man at the helm hired out of another soft bookie. So what can we expect going forward?
I would have liked to have seen a lot more thought going into the sportsbook. There are some bookmakers that do actually take bets and offer sharp lines using a proper dealer market. If Betfair had gone down that route I could see the point of it. If they could have offered decent prices to a fixed amount to everyone and adjust the lines if they believe a sharp has just placed a bet they could have had a winning product. The UK is crying out for this. Surely a crack trading team is capable of building the software to do this.
A rubbish sportsbook is a bad fit for the exchange. They need a fair limit decent price one. Lower margin yes but much much higher volume.
Betfair is struggling to find its identity. In the early years it was all about 'winners welcome', 'sharp minds betfair'. When they took over Flutter they stressed that the merged markets would mean more liquidity and thus higher limits for customers. They developed the technology to match more bets that than all the European exchanges put together.
Then what did they do? They started looking for soft targets. They branched out into games and poker. At the time it was all still person to person. I remember one of the founders telling me they were not being greedy and they were sticking to their p2p principles. Then came the casino. The p2p games were replaced by ones run by Betfair themselves. The crossmatcher came in - to this day I still dont know if it gets to beat the clock inrunning to match bets.
This was still not enough. They have since walked further from the starting point. They introduced the Premium Charge. Uproar at 20%. But really this would only affect traders, cheats and extremely good position gamblers. Then it went up to 40% and 60%. Now 40% gets all good big players. Arbers - gone. Decent position gamblers who have a long term return of over 3% on stakes - gone or slowly moving. The consequences of the Premium Charge are huge.
Then there are the data charges and bet placement charges. Great in theory. But a 1000 bets an hour max? Try pricing up and adjusting books for 30 races or football matches a day (with all their secondary markets) with that. You cannot. So early markets are no more.
So what started as the perfect limit order book market has evolved into a monster. It has not been helped by the lack of regulation by Betfair itself. Instead of the Premium Charge why did they not look to level the playing field? Encourage people to leave offers up rather than take them with commission rebates. Get rid of obviously unfair markets like inplay horses until real time streams are available. Not allow connections to bet on here. The list is endless.
Betfair could have hired someone who has experience of running a real exchange to run the company. Prices and policies and new markets would have been completely different. Maybe LMAX would not have failed if this was the case. But we now have an out and out industry man at the helm hired out of another soft bookie. So what can we expect going forward?
I would have liked to have seen a lot more thought going into the sportsbook. There are some bookmakers that do actually take bets and offer sharp lines using a proper dealer market. If Betfair had gone down that route I could see the point of it. If they could have offered decent prices to a fixed amount to everyone and adjust the lines if they believe a sharp has just placed a bet they could have had a winning product. The UK is crying out for this. Surely a crack trading team is capable of building the software to do this.
A rubbish sportsbook is a bad fit for the exchange. They need a fair limit decent price one. Lower margin yes but much much higher volume.
i still cant see the logic behind it, its beyond comprehension
Frog 2
One of the best and most honest post's I have read on this forum highlighting the never ending downhill spiral the Betfair appears to be taking.
One of the best and most honest post's I have read on this forum highlighting the never ending downhill spiral the Betfair appears to be taking.
agreed, just finished reading it, superb summary
Frog is right. Unless it's a top product, the sportsbook will just further damage the Betfair brand, confusing customers and distracting the company from the focus needed to restore the fortunes of the ailing exchange.
Is the bottom line for them not their share price? what's the difference between now and this time last year and the year before etc.?
I like your post frog.
I am convinced the original directors would have made much more use of their exchange product to produce a sports book that would have wiped the competition.
One difference between times gone by and now is that the original directors aimed to improve their product; the current directors aim to improve profits. the directors dont have that original feel for the product and their goal is solely to increase their own remuneration.
I am convinced the original directors would have made much more use of their exchange product to produce a sports book that would have wiped the competition.
One difference between times gone by and now is that the original directors aimed to improve their product; the current directors aim to improve profits. the directors dont have that original feel for the product and their goal is solely to increase their own remuneration.
Target set for year ended 30th April 2015. Thats another 25 months to make Betfair work which is not too short term..
PITY the poor, traditional bookmaker. His familiar world is rapidly falling apart. Generations of monopoly over enslaved punters have already met challenges from the Internet and tax-free offshore rivals. Now even the last bastion of bookmaking - the ability to set the odds - is being taken away. As from today, those who have longed to back the Derby favourite, King's Best, at 5-1 rather than 3-1, or to take the money of anyone foolish enough to think that England can win Euro 2000, can theoretically do so. The opportunity comes courtesy of a revolutionary form of betting that banishes those irritating middlemen with their sheepskins, sleek limos and bulging satchels.
The idea has been kept carefully under wraps for months but tonight, in Covent Garden, just in time for one of the headiest sports betting weekends of the year, it will be launched to a gathering of gamblers and celebrities. A company called betfair, describing itself as a "sports betting exchange", essentially gives the punter a chance to decide his own odds. Put simply, the mechanism is a website that provides a dynamic screen on which it will be possible to call up a variety of sports events, nominate a bet and await it being taken by some other anonymous gambler in cyberspace. Participation will be restricted to account holders, who will be required to deposit a sum of money that will either grow or shrink depending on their success rate.
It is all the brainchild of Andrew Black, a sports-mad computer analyst, whose background includes being thrown out of university for failing exams and spending successive years as a professional gambler and a full-time bridge player. "I've worked in the city and I have always gambled on sport," Black explained. "It was an extension of both activities to come up with a trading system for sports betting."
Conventional bookmakers will view this as yet another threat to their once sacred territory and will bridle at their role in the launch today, when a mock funeral cortège for bookmakers is staged through the City's square mile. Leaflets will be distributed simultaneously outside Underground stations proclaiming "The bookie is dead" and bidding a sombre farewell to the turf accountant "who emptied punters' pockets, took shirts off their backs, never made a decent price and died with the birth of open-market betting".
Such audacity, from a marketing team that includes Mark Davies, the son of BBC sports commentator, Barry, will ensure irksome questions about the legality of a scheme that ignores betting conventions. It seems that betfair has already covered this problem, however, as Linklaters, the firm of solicitors, is a shareholder in the company. "They assure us that we don't need to pay betting tax because, effectively, we are brokers rather than bookmakers," Black said.
The new company will make its profits through commission on winning bets. It begins trading today on Epsom's big races and Euro 2000, but its parameters could spread in unusual directions. "As we don't need specialist odds-layers, we can offer any sporting event at all," Black said. "We will put up sumo wrestling if people want it, so long as we can authenticate the results."
The idea has been kept carefully under wraps for months but tonight, in Covent Garden, just in time for one of the headiest sports betting weekends of the year, it will be launched to a gathering of gamblers and celebrities. A company called betfair, describing itself as a "sports betting exchange", essentially gives the punter a chance to decide his own odds. Put simply, the mechanism is a website that provides a dynamic screen on which it will be possible to call up a variety of sports events, nominate a bet and await it being taken by some other anonymous gambler in cyberspace. Participation will be restricted to account holders, who will be required to deposit a sum of money that will either grow or shrink depending on their success rate.
It is all the brainchild of Andrew Black, a sports-mad computer analyst, whose background includes being thrown out of university for failing exams and spending successive years as a professional gambler and a full-time bridge player. "I've worked in the city and I have always gambled on sport," Black explained. "It was an extension of both activities to come up with a trading system for sports betting."
Conventional bookmakers will view this as yet another threat to their once sacred territory and will bridle at their role in the launch today, when a mock funeral cortège for bookmakers is staged through the City's square mile. Leaflets will be distributed simultaneously outside Underground stations proclaiming "The bookie is dead" and bidding a sombre farewell to the turf accountant "who emptied punters' pockets, took shirts off their backs, never made a decent price and died with the birth of open-market betting".
Such audacity, from a marketing team that includes Mark Davies, the son of BBC sports commentator, Barry, will ensure irksome questions about the legality of a scheme that ignores betting conventions. It seems that betfair has already covered this problem, however, as Linklaters, the firm of solicitors, is a shareholder in the company. "They assure us that we don't need to pay betting tax because, effectively, we are brokers rather than bookmakers," Black said.
The new company will make its profits through commission on winning bets. It begins trading today on Epsom's big races and Euro 2000, but its parameters could spread in unusual directions. "As we don't need specialist odds-layers, we can offer any sporting event at all," Black said. "We will put up sumo wrestling if people want it, so long as we can authenticate the results."
Yep a fantastic summary frog
If not for the monopoly position this company would be long dead, absolutely horrific what they've done to this once brilliant site.
Nearly all my bets nowadays are placed at the few bookies who still welcome me. When paying the premium charge betfair is nearly always worse value than the high street.
Thanks a bunch betfair
If not for the monopoly position this company would be long dead, absolutely horrific what they've done to this once brilliant site.
Nearly all my bets nowadays are placed at the few bookies who still welcome me. When paying the premium charge betfair is nearly always worse value than the high street.
Thanks a bunch betfair
"I don't agree with it, therefore it's rubbish" thread.
Betfair is a business. It determined that an Exchange model offers low returns, and so is now concentrating on other forms of income and growth. And why not? Why not enter the Sportsbook markets? Why sit back and watch competitors get rich by offering rubbish sportsbooks? That's where the money is. Why not use it's international brand name to profit? That's what successful businesses do - adapt or die.
So the ultimate question is, can an Exchange model ever be as profitable as a sportsbook?
Betfair is a business. It determined that an Exchange model offers low returns, and so is now concentrating on other forms of income and growth. And why not? Why not enter the Sportsbook markets? Why sit back and watch competitors get rich by offering rubbish sportsbooks? That's where the money is. Why not use it's international brand name to profit? That's what successful businesses do - adapt or die.
So the ultimate question is, can an Exchange model ever be as profitable as a sportsbook?
Mr Angry, you're right. Betfair is a business. Take a look at the share price to get an idea of how investors think they're getting on.
1. It was overvalued from the start.
2. Recent international licencing issues have dented future prospects.
That has zero to do with PC and Exchange.
2. Recent international licencing issues have dented future prospects.
That has zero to do with PC and Exchange.
Why sit back and watch competitors get rich by offering rubbish sportsbooks?
I must of missed something? what exactly is NOT rubbish about this one. It's just one to add to the list.
I must of missed something? what exactly is NOT rubbish about this one. It's just one to add to the list.
Dozens of substandard sportsbooks have closed down or sold at a loss. 10s or even hundreds of millions have been spent on software for them. Even more on marketing and bonuses.
Like the games and poker as an individual entity on the p and l it might appear to make profit but the damage it does to the brand and stunting the growth of the exchange is unquantifiable.
Like the games and poker as an individual entity on the p and l it might appear to make profit but the damage it does to the brand and stunting the growth of the exchange is unquantifiable.
I don't think anyone disagrees that Betfair (now at the mercy of shareholders) look at all other ways
to make additional revenue. The problem they have introduced is confusion of their brand. There were 3 main selling
points to Betfair previously:
1) Better prices
2) Ability to Lay
3) To offer prices.
The sportsbook offers none of the above. There is nothing unique about the sportsbook. It will just confuse and thus dillute the exchange.
Very risky imo.
What they should have done is released the sportsbook under a different name/website, fine that it would be under Betfair umbrella
- there would then be a clear distinction. The addition of games/casino etc to Betfair was fine (in this context) because these are
"different" types of betting (there is no confusion). I understand that they want to re-use their brand name but this is the issue.
Everyone knows Betfair as being an exchange! Potential new customers will be confused what it is, and where to go and why they can't get the good odds as advertised etc.
There is rumour of Betfair buying out BluSqr, if this is true, I wonder why they didn't just wait and put the sportsbook behind that?
If not true, a separate site with different marketing would make much more sense (imo).
The opportunity Betfair have with their own sportsbook is they can lay off bets on Betfair without having to pay PC/Commission (for a risk-free profit) so they should do pretty well with a sportsbook as a different entity still.
They may even be able to beat the clock inrunning to lay off bets - though not sure this would be legal (certainly doesn't seem ethical).
to make additional revenue. The problem they have introduced is confusion of their brand. There were 3 main selling
points to Betfair previously:
1) Better prices
2) Ability to Lay
3) To offer prices.
The sportsbook offers none of the above. There is nothing unique about the sportsbook. It will just confuse and thus dillute the exchange.
Very risky imo.
What they should have done is released the sportsbook under a different name/website, fine that it would be under Betfair umbrella
- there would then be a clear distinction. The addition of games/casino etc to Betfair was fine (in this context) because these are
"different" types of betting (there is no confusion). I understand that they want to re-use their brand name but this is the issue.
Everyone knows Betfair as being an exchange! Potential new customers will be confused what it is, and where to go and why they can't get the good odds as advertised etc.
There is rumour of Betfair buying out BluSqr, if this is true, I wonder why they didn't just wait and put the sportsbook behind that?
If not true, a separate site with different marketing would make much more sense (imo).
The opportunity Betfair have with their own sportsbook is they can lay off bets on Betfair without having to pay PC/Commission (for a risk-free profit) so they should do pretty well with a sportsbook as a different entity still.
They may even be able to beat the clock inrunning to lay off bets - though not sure this would be legal (certainly doesn't seem ethical).
*I don't think anyone disagrees that Betfair (now at the mercy of shareholders) shouldn't look
There were 3 main selling
points to Betfair previously:
1) Better prices
2) Ability to Lay
3) To offer prices.
And now there is:
1. Exchange functionality
2. Sportsbook
3. Casino
4. Arcade
5. Slots
6. International brand recognition
Just like any other of the big names, plus a built in Exchange.
points to Betfair previously:
1) Better prices
2) Ability to Lay
3) To offer prices.
And now there is:
1. Exchange functionality
2. Sportsbook
3. Casino
4. Arcade
5. Slots
6. International brand recognition
Just like any other of the big names, plus a built in Exchange.
They are if they get blacklisted and destroy the reputation of your brand.
Ah, so you ARE concerned about the interests of Betfair shareholders. You don't want to see their brand ruined. Fair enough, that's very good of you.
They're not good for punters, obviously, otherwise they wouldn't be offered by BF, the kind of people that use the games, arcades, Poker and casinos are the type that hang around betting shops walking around aimlessly wondering whether he should go back in to play Russian Roulette with the last few pounds of his dole money, you can't win on them long term, the only thing bf is good for these days is losing money - on the exchange.
It kind of reminds me of when they was fuel shortage in the UK one year, one petrol station put his prices up so high to take advantage knowing their was little alternative for those running low, the car owners paid but never returned, he went bust. Betquack as useless a competitor as they have been may be the end of them now their in ladcooks hands.
It kind of reminds me of when they was fuel shortage in the UK one year, one petrol station put his prices up so high to take advantage knowing their was little alternative for those running low, the car owners paid but never returned, he went bust. Betquack as useless a competitor as they have been may be the end of them now their in ladcooks hands.
BETFAIR WAS EXCELLENT IN THE EARLY YEARS
WHY ITS execs and shareholders cannot realise that the PC SUPERTAX and MOVE FROM EXCHANGE PERSON TO PERSON BETTING and SPORTSBOOK/BOOKMAKING is BAD FOR EXCHANGE PUNTERS AND THEMSELVES IS BEYOND ME
IMO BETFAIR SHOULD
1. SCREP THE PC
2. OFFER COMMISSION BASED PRICING RELATIVE TO COMMISSION AND WINNINGS (LOSERS PAY LESS/BIG WINNERS PAY MORE, CAPPED AT SAY 7-8%)
3. OFFER SPORTSBOOK/POKER/ARCADES UNDER DIFFERENT COMPANY (PAR OF BETFAIR)
4. RE-ESTABLISH BETFAIR AS A PERSON TO PERSON BETTING EXCHANGE
BEFORE IT IS FINISHED
WHY ITS execs and shareholders cannot realise that the PC SUPERTAX and MOVE FROM EXCHANGE PERSON TO PERSON BETTING and SPORTSBOOK/BOOKMAKING is BAD FOR EXCHANGE PUNTERS AND THEMSELVES IS BEYOND ME
IMO BETFAIR SHOULD
1. SCREP THE PC
2. OFFER COMMISSION BASED PRICING RELATIVE TO COMMISSION AND WINNINGS (LOSERS PAY LESS/BIG WINNERS PAY MORE, CAPPED AT SAY 7-8%)
3. OFFER SPORTSBOOK/POKER/ARCADES UNDER DIFFERENT COMPANY (PAR OF BETFAIR)
4. RE-ESTABLISH BETFAIR AS A PERSON TO PERSON BETTING EXCHANGE
BEFORE IT IS FINISHED
some of the best companies have just done that by not listening to their CORE customers and then adapting
BETFAIR WOULD BE FINISHED IF IT SCRAPPED IN RUNNING ACROSS ALL MARKETS AND/OR ALLOWED TRADERS NOT TO LOCK IN PROFITS LOSSES
BETFAIR WOULD BE FINISHED IF IT SCRAPPED IN RUNNING ACROSS ALL MARKETS AND/OR ALLOWED TRADERS NOT TO LOCK IN PROFITS LOSSES
Imv the main reason that bf's second 6-7 years or so have not matched the massive success of their first is the greed of a second generation of non-founding executives who have seen the wealth of Messrs Wray and Black and wanted a piece for themselves.
Customers were always going to be marginally more difficult to acquire, but the essential model of a person-to-person exchange was superior to anything conventional bookmakers cd offer on horses or other multi-runner markets. Original bf cd have gone on to destroy the opposition and become a dominant form of online betting.
Instead bf went on to become another industry player, w/ their terrible reputation-damaging sportsbook, cosy relationships with other books and increasing revolving-door employment policies w/ the FO firms.
The company need to recover their central idea--the exchange--but I can't see it happening as 1) it isn't making them enough to justify the original stock market valuation, and 2) different execs have entirely diff. views of the company, with some of the most energetic championing games (a growth area) and mobile.
In the end, only the exchange and pricing-based dominance of markets like horses can make bf a bigger company than 3.65 or Viktor. But over the longest term, I doubt it will be bf that dominates the global betting market. It will be an exchange run as a legal monopoly in its own territory by the Chinese govt.
Customers were always going to be marginally more difficult to acquire, but the essential model of a person-to-person exchange was superior to anything conventional bookmakers cd offer on horses or other multi-runner markets. Original bf cd have gone on to destroy the opposition and become a dominant form of online betting.
Instead bf went on to become another industry player, w/ their terrible reputation-damaging sportsbook, cosy relationships with other books and increasing revolving-door employment policies w/ the FO firms.
The company need to recover their central idea--the exchange--but I can't see it happening as 1) it isn't making them enough to justify the original stock market valuation, and 2) different execs have entirely diff. views of the company, with some of the most energetic championing games (a growth area) and mobile.
In the end, only the exchange and pricing-based dominance of markets like horses can make bf a bigger company than 3.65 or Viktor. But over the longest term, I doubt it will be bf that dominates the global betting market. It will be an exchange run as a legal monopoly in its own territory by the Chinese govt.
The existence of a crack trading team is the biggest myth of the year. It is obvious from the sportsbook that no trading team is being employed at all.
and how many inexperienced customers r using the sportsbook thinking it's the exchange? my mum for 1!!
Actually I have just found that the do take a bet so I take back the above. They just layed £100 at 21 on Sand And Deliver in the 14.45. Other firms were only offering it to takeout £1k. The exchange had virtually nothing up.
Betfairs "does your bookie give you value" advert comparing prices has just been on Sky suprised they are still running this.
The small print says "exchange prices only" but there is no reference to the web address. And as we know if you goto Betfair.com you get the sportsbook. Very misleading in my opinion.
Strangely the next ad shown was someone complaining about a website called compare the merkat confusing customers!
The small print says "exchange prices only" but there is no reference to the web address. And as we know if you goto Betfair.com you get the sportsbook. Very misleading in my opinion.
Strangely the next ad shown was someone complaining about a website called compare the merkat confusing customers!
Firstly, Return on Investment determines whether a product is profitable. Revenue is irrelevant. BF's exchange will be several times more profitable than say B365's sportsbook.
Secondly, when you have a unique brand. It is business suicide to dilute that brand unless the dilution brings large profits. I see no evidence this is the case.
Thirdly, the IT world is littered with companies that acquired other technology companies and lost several times their original investment, as management was distracted trying to integrate the acquisition and make it work.
Having said that, BF running a sports book does make sense, but it needs to be a separate business under a separate brand.
Secondly, when you have a unique brand. It is business suicide to dilute that brand unless the dilution brings large profits. I see no evidence this is the case.
Thirdly, the IT world is littered with companies that acquired other technology companies and lost several times their original investment, as management was distracted trying to integrate the acquisition and make it work.
Having said that, BF running a sports book does make sense, but it needs to be a separate business under a separate brand.
I am sure their are some individuals on here given the balance of probability who will most likely make substantial profits if Betfair allows them unbridled access to the exchanges sportsbook.
Fact..........Betfair is a business
Second fact...the reason many of the people on this thread are getting so annoyed is, that they too beleieve that they would make substanial winnings if allowed a free rein on the sportsbook.
Why should Betfair act like a benevolment uncle to profresonal gamblers it is not a charity.
If you ran a business and you knew certain clients lost you money would you continue with that relationship? Well would you?
Fact..........Betfair is a business
Second fact...the reason many of the people on this thread are getting so annoyed is, that they too beleieve that they would make substanial winnings if allowed a free rein on the sportsbook.
Why should Betfair act like a benevolment uncle to profresonal gamblers it is not a charity.
If you ran a business and you knew certain clients lost you money would you continue with that relationship? Well would you?
PEOPLE USED TO THINK BETFAIR WAS THEIR FRIEND
THATS WHAT THEVE LOST
THATS WHAT THEVE LOST
SOME ONE WHO A GAMBLER COULD TURN TO FOR A FAIR DEAL
I spoke too soon. Requested £80 on Valley View at 12.0 and was offered £41.67.
Odds are unmoved so I assumed I could bet again. Now max is zero!!!!
Other firms are allowing bets of £80.
I have only had one bet on the sportsbook here and it lost.
Odds are unmoved so I assumed I could bet again. Now max is zero!!!!
Other firms are allowing bets of £80.
I have only had one bet on the sportsbook here and it lost.
Never mind Frog in a couple of weeks you will be able to see if the new BetSquare will accommodate you instead 
No moves: "If you ran a business and you knew certain clients lost you money would you continue with that relationship? Well would you?"
The above is exactly what Pinnacle are making a business out of. Yet Frog has his horse bet and is restricted to less than yesterday and cannot now have any more on. Yet BF have not changed the price.
Why don't they drop the price, let Frog have another £40 on and drop the price and so on until he is either happy with the total stake or not happy with the odds now given? It's a b*llshit way to run a book and Pinnacle are one of the very few who actually know how it should be done.
The above is exactly what Pinnacle are making a business out of. Yet Frog has his horse bet and is restricted to less than yesterday and cannot now have any more on. Yet BF have not changed the price.
Why don't they drop the price, let Frog have another £40 on and drop the price and so on until he is either happy with the total stake or not happy with the odds now given? It's a b*llshit way to run a book and Pinnacle are one of the very few who actually know how it should be done.
Its not just the fact they haven't moved the price. Its drifting now on the exchange anyway so I am on the wrong side of this bet.
I placed a couple of bets on the exchange and they were snapped on in milliseconds for the horse even though there was only a couple of quid available. It is almost as if there was a dark pool ready to swallow up my back bets.
I placed a couple of bets on the exchange and they were snapped on in milliseconds for the horse even though there was only a couple of quid available. It is almost as if there was a dark pool ready to swallow up my back bets.
Today asked for £100 on Harbour Captain @ 13. Same price with most of the bookies.
Was offered a max of £22.41
So far
Bet 1 : £100 @ 21 Lost
Bet 2 : £41.67 @ 12.0 Lost
so £141.67 down after two bets and yet I am restricted to even lower levels. Its a mad way to run a book. I am a profitable customer for them. Even if they think after two losing bets I am too good they could take the bet and lay it off if £100 is too much and then cut their odds.
Was offered a max of £22.41
So far
Bet 1 : £100 @ 21 Lost
Bet 2 : £41.67 @ 12.0 Lost
so £141.67 down after two bets and yet I am restricted to even lower levels. Its a mad way to run a book. I am a profitable customer for them. Even if they think after two losing bets I am too good they could take the bet and lay it off if £100 is too much and then cut their odds.
Frog, what they should be doing is taking your full stake and then lengthening the odds
Exactly. I asked to give them £280 profit and they only wanted £164. If they were not based offshore paying a voluntary levy that would be about £10 less towards the racing levy. Its no wonder its dropping with firms refusing to take bets from losing customers.
i suspect that part of their downfall has been in their recruitment.
if you want your XOs to find "creative" ways to increase revenue you should not be employing people with long careers at established bookmakers.
the sportsbook could have fitted in very nicely - offering opportunities where there were none on the exchange, as well as possibly providing a hedging platform should the exchange go down.
the monstrosity it is, and the way it's presented, along with the brutal violation of the company's originally stance, have done little more than make betfair look directionless and a bit stupid.
the PC hike to 40%+ was a clear message to all those "welcome winners" that they were no longer welcome.
so we see a vanilla sportsbook and anti winner stance. if you recruit from businesses where these ideals are ubiquitously enshrined, how can you be surprised to see them implemented at your company?
but perhaps it's no bad thing. if regulatory issues continue to make life difficult, as well as the seemingly endless follies and self harming initiatives, the share price could become low enough to make a majority stake an attractive investment for someone who sees the intrinsic value in the core product.
if you want your XOs to find "creative" ways to increase revenue you should not be employing people with long careers at established bookmakers.
the sportsbook could have fitted in very nicely - offering opportunities where there were none on the exchange, as well as possibly providing a hedging platform should the exchange go down.
the monstrosity it is, and the way it's presented, along with the brutal violation of the company's originally stance, have done little more than make betfair look directionless and a bit stupid.
the PC hike to 40%+ was a clear message to all those "welcome winners" that they were no longer welcome.
so we see a vanilla sportsbook and anti winner stance. if you recruit from businesses where these ideals are ubiquitously enshrined, how can you be surprised to see them implemented at your company?
but perhaps it's no bad thing. if regulatory issues continue to make life difficult, as well as the seemingly endless follies and self harming initiatives, the share price could become low enough to make a majority stake an attractive investment for someone who sees the intrinsic value in the core product.
Frog2, what does it mean? "I am a profitable customer for them" Are you saying that your overall profit and loss is in the red on the exchange? I'd be suprised if that were the truth given betfair's atitude to your bets on the sportsbook?
I am a profitable customer for them - they have made £164 so far from me.
I backed three horses. All of them drifted to a bigger price on the exchange at some point which I assume they can hedge into the exchange commission free.
I am just about in profit overall on the exchange but at a very very low margin and probably a loss maker overall from backing. I think my gross overall position the last 12/13 years is 60% of gross win to Betfair and 40% to me before taking off the cost of the API.
I certainly doubt I could make a profit overtime backing horses at the prices the sportsbook offers.
The more sensible approach would be:
1. Advertise that they never close winning accounts on the sportsbook.
2. Advertise they offer the same limits to everyone without discrimination. The limits could be fairly low. e.g.
* to take out 0.5k before 9am
* to take out 1k 9am to 12pm
* to take out 2k 12pm until half an hour before racing
* to take out 3k the last half hour
3. Profile accounts and adjust their prices after a winners bet.
4. Actively hedge back into the exchange thus increase liquidity there that they can get commission on.
If they can advertise they will play the market not the person (like we all have to do on Betfair) they will at least have a USP with their Sportsbook. It would be true to core punter friendly ideals Betfair was set up on.
The other option is to run a inferior paddy power clone that has no USP.
I backed three horses. All of them drifted to a bigger price on the exchange at some point which I assume they can hedge into the exchange commission free.
I am just about in profit overall on the exchange but at a very very low margin and probably a loss maker overall from backing. I think my gross overall position the last 12/13 years is 60% of gross win to Betfair and 40% to me before taking off the cost of the API.
I certainly doubt I could make a profit overtime backing horses at the prices the sportsbook offers.
The more sensible approach would be:
1. Advertise that they never close winning accounts on the sportsbook.
2. Advertise they offer the same limits to everyone without discrimination. The limits could be fairly low. e.g.
* to take out 0.5k before 9am
* to take out 1k 9am to 12pm
* to take out 2k 12pm until half an hour before racing
* to take out 3k the last half hour
3. Profile accounts and adjust their prices after a winners bet.
4. Actively hedge back into the exchange thus increase liquidity there that they can get commission on.
If they can advertise they will play the market not the person (like we all have to do on Betfair) they will at least have a USP with their Sportsbook. It would be true to core punter friendly ideals Betfair was set up on.
The other option is to run a inferior paddy power clone that has no USP.
But why bother with step 3? If they have determined that you are a good judge and that your bets won't be profitable to them (long term), then it makes financial sense not to take any more of your bets.
If they let you have any money on, then:
1) They can expect to lose money (again, long-term, obviously no guarantee that any one bet in particular will)
2) If they then have to adjust their prices, they've made their sportsbook less attractive to other, more lucrative customers.
If you are going to offer good prices, you want mugs to take them. Letting you continue to bet as a way of you sharpening & tuning their odds is probably not worth it to a bookie. (Just look at the wages they pay odds compilers...)
Now, we can talk about how bookies are far too quick in deciding whether or not a customer will be profitable to them, but that's a different issue. The point is, once a bookie decides that you are going to cost them cash, there is no reason for them to let you continue to bet.
If they let you have any money on, then:
1) They can expect to lose money (again, long-term, obviously no guarantee that any one bet in particular will)
2) If they then have to adjust their prices, they've made their sportsbook less attractive to other, more lucrative customers.
If you are going to offer good prices, you want mugs to take them. Letting you continue to bet as a way of you sharpening & tuning their odds is probably not worth it to a bookie. (Just look at the wages they pay odds compilers...)
Now, we can talk about how bookies are far too quick in deciding whether or not a customer will be profitable to them, but that's a different issue. The point is, once a bookie decides that you are going to cost them cash, there is no reason for them to let you continue to bet.
Whats bothering me....only read first page, is everytime I log onto betfair it's directs me to the sportsbook rather then the exchange. When i'm never going to use, as in ever unless there's a free bet attached
Had a look at fixed odds today for the first time, I did not find an odd higher what other bookies are offering and in every football game other bookies had tighter spread than betfair. Don't need the product, thanks.
October 22nd 2010 share price 1550p
march 23rd 2011 share price 940p
march 23rd 2012 share price 869p
march 23rd 2013 share price 696p
is something broken here.Why don't they listen to many good people on
here who helped them build the company from 2000 onwards?
march 23rd 2011 share price 940p
march 23rd 2012 share price 869p
march 23rd 2013 share price 696p
is something broken here.Why don't they listen to many good people on
here who helped them build the company from 2000 onwards?
BECOURES THEY KNOW BETTER
And the custermer comes way down the list.
And the custermer comes way down the list.
frog2 for prime minister!
BF think they're leveraging their brand with the sportsbook. whereas actually what they seem to be doing is poisoning it.
BF think they're leveraging their brand with the sportsbook. whereas actually what they seem to be doing is poisoning it.
outstanding post Frog; very articulate. Can I ask your background? How did you end up as a pro punter?
howisurluck,
I started betting at school and after uni I started full time. VC then started the offshore move and cheaper betting. Then Betfair came along and offered even cheaper betting and increased liquidity. Then the Asian bookies arrived and provided even cheaper betting and much more liquidity. Its a great time to be a gambler.
I started betting at school and after uni I started full time. VC then started the offshore move and cheaper betting. Then Betfair came along and offered even cheaper betting and increased liquidity. Then the Asian bookies arrived and provided even cheaper betting and much more liquidity. Its a great time to be a gambler.
I was given a free bet to use on the Sportsbook.
When I checked the odds for my selection it was 3/1 on the Sportsbook, yet on the exchange I could get odds of 3.7.
Take the first race today at York, it's 2.9 on the exchange but only 2.5 on the Sportsbook at the time of writing.
Who are they trying to kid?
When I checked the odds for my selection it was 3/1 on the Sportsbook, yet on the exchange I could get odds of 3.7.
Take the first race today at York, it's 2.9 on the exchange but only 2.5 on the Sportsbook at the time of writing.
Who are they trying to kid?
YOMOMMA,
I'd advise you to keep your stakes to a minimum when you bet if you're confused by something as straightforward as that.
I'd advise you to keep your stakes to a minimum when you bet if you're confused by something as straightforward as that.
did you mean 3.0 on the sportsbook crippen? otherwise your post makes little sense.
Hmm, the prices I quoted for every instance were without stakes returned for an easy comparison.
That's why I said ''the odds,'' and not odds plus returned stakes.
2 quid stakes sounds about right for anybody who struggled to see that.
That's why I said ''the odds,'' and not odds plus returned stakes.
2 quid stakes sounds about right for anybody who struggled to see that.
fair enough, but I've never met anyone who used 3/1 to mean anything other than 4.0 before.
"fair enough, but I've never met anyone who used 3/1 to mean anything other than 4.0 before."
Correct. Enter 4.0 = 3/1. 3.7 < 4.0.
Correct. Enter 4.0 = 3/1. 3.7 < 4.0.
SPORT BOOK.Work it out, who the hell wants bits on.MUGS and thats what betfair wants
Post Your Reply
Please login to post a reply.
Wonder
Instance ID: 13539