Feck (who he is not) is not anti exchange, he is just anti courtsiders, trading, using market prices for book making, trapping and insiders.  Feck (who he is not) ideologically believes in the concept, but is frustrated by the reality.

Why is in running on horses an abomination? It's fairer than ever since the speeding up of Betfair video, something they disappointingly don't advertise enough.

Whether you like it or not, it's on these swings that everyone can make a buck.  THAT is the appeal of BF in-running markets - to all comers.  1000 shots can and do win. 

I still don't see how putting in a back bet at the odds the player is going to be if they lose the next point is beating the clock?  Since it's unlikely you will get matched (* unless cross-matching is off, in which case it becomes a definite possibility) unless they do indeed lose that point, surely that just means you're backing at market price?  (ie not hoovering up prices that are already available)

It's all automated. All the tennis "experts" have to do is click on the player who wins each point.

I can agree with you, that you have no idea how tennis markets work.

The discussion about tennis brings us back to the point about abolishing the pc. Why has pc not affected tennis/cricket liquidity? As bot suggested earlier, if all sorts of pc players are leaving then a bigger share of the pie is there for those who chose not to. Is that what's happened in tennis/cricket? What about the other markets? Is the house "edge" not big enough for the rest of you or is it just that there's fewer and fewer mugs on the site? What has happened to all you "you must evolve to the ever changing market conditions" and "churn to avoid pc" merchants?

Bury your head in the sand if you must but abolishing the pc for anyone other than REAL liquidity providers (i.e. positional players) will not stop the rot. In fact, if anything, it will make it worse. Why should positional players pay multiple times what parasites do. Let's all become parasites, pay next to nothing and get betfair over and done with as soon as possible.

Feck (who you are not), as I have said, the fast pic boys ARE the problem - the problem that the rest of us are bearing in more than one way (PC and the ensuing downward spiral of the exchange).  I have already stated what I think needs to happen.  I do not believe BF are doing enough to 'tax' these individuals and I do not believe the proceeds that BF are receiving in PC from these people are being reinvested in the necessary manner. 

I still see the definition of 'liquidity providers' very differently to you, too.  The REAL liquidity providers are those that stick a book up. 

I'm afraid I'm not even going to bother to try to explain the IR tennis situation.  Just watch a market.

I do not believe BF are doing enough to 'tax' these individuals and I do not believe the proceeds that BF are receiving in PC from these people are being reinvested in the necessary manner.

I mainly agree with that but short of admitting the "edge" is too big, taxing them at 80% and sharing the tax out among their victims in proportion to their losses what do you do to stop the exodus of the fleeced? Going by some of your other posts it seems to me you're wanting your cake and to eat it.

lots of self interested posts on here lately

BTW Lat. Again I'd like to thank you for making a reasoned argument. As you can see, the rest of the opposition is of the torched villager variety.

The traders think the fast pics are the problem, the fast pics think the bots are the problem, everyone thinks the traders are the problem... it's like a monty python sketch.

Ann, as an opinion player I wd want to retain the option of smoothing returns by trading prices.

More than that, I want to be able to bet at out-of-line prices i.e. prices when my judgment edge on average gives me an edge on the market. I don't really mind when this is, though it's plausible it's far from the off, rather than bang on the off. Ideally, I'll try to get on at Pricewise box prices, with offers left up. For my size requirements and number / reliability of placers, this is OK. If I have more time, I'll make a partial book, but this begins a day before and 70%+ of the volume is on the lay side.

The only difference is that the books take down their offers between points.

i pay PC , i bet before the off , i bet in-running using RUK on sky and betfair live video .
why am i a mugger in your eyes ann witt ?

watch tennis often enough and you'll know from watching the odds who has won the point that has yet to be won on tv, courtsiders are the fastest scoreboard service

There's an element of truth to what annwitt says and tbh if what he said made no sense at all it wouldn't wind people up.

If the experience punters have on here isn't what they were expecting they'll likely leave.  It was a site that was more likely to draw people with greater expectations of winning than a normal bookie.  That was recognised on here before the PC came into force by the majority of people here.  There are greater barriers to entry for punters than there were before, more automated software, more clued up punters, more professional hovering.  None of it helps.  Where I fundamentally disagree with annwitt is who has more effect on people leaving.  If we exclude fast picture automated users the sharp straight gambler is going to cause more people to leave than either the trader or the market maker.  He often matches recreational gamblers directly, and indirectly through market makers, but is also instrumental in why many markets don't form and why many have little liquidity.  If he generally takes the best prices, he leaves the recreational punters with worse ones.  Not to mention I think a majority of people combine betting, trading and market making, so distinguishing between all three is partly pointless.

It was also widely recognised and agreed years ago before the PC charge that Betfair had a natural monopoly and would want to exploit that in the form of higher charges at some point in the future.

Either the PC has been a resounding failure or Betfair was destined, even without it, to lose significant ground to its biggest rivals.  To argue it has been a success you would have to argue that Betfair would have lost even more ground to its rivals than it has.  That's the bottom line.  Also Betfair has figures that we have no idea about.  Based on those figures the BoD priced it's shares at £13 three years ago.  Now they are £10 and this is despite a booming sector and a general increase in the FTSE.  This would indicate the charge hasn't worked as they would've hoped

Thing is by scrapping it, it doesn't put the company back in the position, it would've been without it.  Not even close.

and one of the problems about discussing this on here is that it always seems to boil down to

a bunch of sharks all shouting at each other 'my liquidity is more important to betfair than your liquidity' (how convenient)

There is only one real question, "are there positive steps which can be taken which would benefit both BF, and BF customers".  The answer is probably yes. 

There is no excuse for BF, a 21st century company, having a far weaker website than WH.  Maybe BF has become too unwieldy, when it should still be the punky new upstart. 

There is no excuse for BF having such miserable adverts for the last few years.

There is no excuse for BF not harnessing twitter and social media effectively.  There have been many memorable bookmaking stunts in recent years, none of them have been from BF. 

After this, BF has the data which bot talked about.  Having looked at and seen the old data, he said it made him realise he knew far less about the ecosystem than he actually thought.  They will have data which accurately analyses the impact of PC, and they may go in to work tomorrow morning in Hammersmith and have a good old chuckle at this thread.  They may on the other hand believe they have a big problem on the horizon, and they are looking for answers, and taking some of the positive stuff on this thread as at least some positive food for thought.

When was the last time anyone can remember BF being successively innovative?  (What the hell was LMAX anyway?) The things that stand out are stuff like hiding the 3 million account details which were lost, and the warnings from analysts in the city saying BF had irregular payments to its top team (£11m for David Yu,....). 

To make an impact and get BF to change towards doing something positive for us it has to be something which helps both them and BF customers.  Scrapping the PC, as Clydebank highlights, may make them worse off, and the PC may have actually been a sticking plaster, as the exchange market had already perhaps peaked.  Maybe the PC has ended up boosting BF heavily from where it would have been without it.

ALTHOUGH THE CHARGES ARE GROSSLY UNFAIR I don't agree the premium charge would discourage anyone from trying to make a living on here -that's nonsense and everyone knows it's nonsense  ,what it could do however is to drive away those that already make a living .

If you earn minimum wage working in a chicken factory and paying something like 20% plus in stoppages  as well as travel expenses ,the idea of a 20% charge wouldn't exactly stop the would be full timer in their tracks.


When you make a living on here there are enough barriers without additional charges -the premium charge should be at the end of every financial year -and rebates should be allowed too.
Weekly payments are taking the p1ss .
When the straw breaks there are alternatives . Employment,Self employment . Exchange gambling sites do not hold the monopoly on earning a living .

i think most people know if they have the ability to win after a very short time of here ,it's not like buying a lottery ticket .

most gamble for the chance to enjoy the one off win and the buzz this brings  ,very few  'gamblers' look at gambling as a means to earn a living

Coachbuster, there's no harm in shouting loud and clear from the rooftops that you can make a living from BF, (even though that will prove elusive for all but a very few), compared to other companies where if you start winning they tell you to ann witt off.