acc, i don't think a low base commission like Pinnacle that would work  - you just need the site to have in place a fairer charge and a well maintained site to attract more folk so it's easier to make a decent whack in the first place .

In other words ,p/charges are used to make the site better ,and not worse

I don't think Swedes e.g would opt for lower taxes at the expense of much lower wages

ballabriggs 20 Oct 13 23:37 Joined: 11 Jul 11 | Topic/replies: 487 | Blogger: ballabriggs's blog
I'd have a running total on the BF homepage of the amount won by winners.  Let it go up in close to real time.  It would be the sum of all the winning accounts. 

"BF, the site where our winners have taken out £217,534,143.50 in winnings etcetera, going up on a daily basis.  "Our winners have won £217m so far, bet now on BF and you too could join them".  Most people have no clue about the size of the winners on BF, and publicising that a few people have become fantastically rich through using BF can only do BF good.  People don't necessarily mind if they don't become betting bourgeoisie, all they definitely do want is a fair run for their money and think that, well, it could be them too.

Yeah that would be great. And we could be given sponsorship deals like poker players

I guess there is a downside to publishing that kind of info as well though.

When BF started, narrowband was all the rage, and I'm not even sure broadband existed.  Looking at the BF site, it doesn't seem to have changed much since around 2004.  There is so much clever stuff out there, and stuff that could be gleaned from elsewhere, in both the betting industry, and outside it, and BF never seems to embrace anything new.  Grokr is really clever with what it does musically, it is stuff like that which should inspire BF.  Instead, they hired the crack trading team, and put often much shorter prices, at often tiny amounts, in a sportsbook which complicates the BF message.  Google and FB snap up the brightest and best IT guys and IT startups, whereas BF rests on some increasingly ancient laurels.

Nobody will convince me or any of us there isn't a massive market out there of people who want to have a bet, so the problem isn't the target market/audience (in the way that demand for narrowband collapsed, demand for betting hasn't).  So a good platform, fairly priced, will be attractive.  It's up to BF if it wants to be that platform, but the chances are it is unlikely that will happen if they don't fix the problems they face, and sooner rather than later.

Yep, sounds like Lad's are close to launching 'laddaq' (they bought betdq earlier this year i believe). If they seed it them selves and other high street bookies follow suit, might be an interesting combination?

Looking around for stuff which is innovative and cutting edge, this company Ezugi have this video to market their products

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7vhqFIebEY

Now, these guys are B2B, so they are not a rival for BF, so this is not spamming their stuff on here.  But if you look at their promo video, there is the mix of social media, twitter, social gaming, live roulette with attractive female dealers, quick spins on other games available.  This is the direction BF should have gone in light years ago. 

If you compare the BF, WH, and LB sportsbooks, BF is in 3rd place again, when it should really be in 1st place.

This is a live statistical game analysis of Crystal Palace v Fulham, which at the moment is at about the hour mark.

http://www.whoscored.com/Matches/720037/Live

The BF game page for this match should incorporate many of these features/analysis.  This is what a good exchange should look like.

btw the way go to betfair sportsbook homepage and you will see the new 'live dealer casino' has arrived.

"Do you want a professional no frills exchange that is cheap to use or a recreational site with live dealers and fancy data?"

If I had the choice between owning a no frills exchange, or a rec site with all the bells and whistles, the latter would win hands down.  BF have that moneylust too, where they smell the juicy profits and growth flowing towards their rivals.  Tbh, any exchange computer/laptop page should look to be a one-stop shop as an entertainment and betting hub.  (On a mobile it cannot be that, it has to be simple and clean).  On a computer/laptop it should be THE page to have open along with the actual match itself on your tv screen.

Out of all the posters on here only 2 or 3 seem to think that being able to put up large bets without spooking the market is of any importance. Obviously anyone can drip feed large bets in over time using the API but do we only want large bettors who are capable of utilising the API. It seems the answer is yes. Most on this thread prefer paying for each sweetie individually so they can ponce off the information. Not many more than that seem to be at all worried about losers leaving the site with a bad impression. Betfair made a big mistake when they brought out a pc that threatened all winners rather than the parasites **** responsible for the rot but they'd have to be insane to turn round and let the ponces go back to the free lunch they had for 8 or so years.

Get rid of the ponces by getting rid of the ridiculous interface and the dodgy rules that support them. Betfair taking over Asia? Don't make me laugh. When the Asians look at a betfair market they're probably rotfptl at the liquidity and if one of the big players did decide to try it they'd be rotfptl at the reaction to their offer.

Ann witt, the same phenomenon has happened in financial markets, showing your hand/giving away information is a problem in all efficient markets, and not intrinsic to BF.  There's not a lot at their current low level of sophistication in the sports markets, that they can do about it.  Dark pools would be great in your case, where you could leave liquidity up, and it would only be matched if a sufficiently lumpy opposing trade was placed.

rcng, re your penultimate post. I wasn't calling all pc payers parasites. As I've said, bf made a big mistake applying it to all winners regardless of m.o. Re your latest question, once I was going racing at Hamilton the following day. Didn't want to take barrowloads of cash so stuck up something like 10 1K+ backs overnight. By the time I had to leave peanuts had been matched so I cancelled. Half of them started longer than the requested odds. Had I left them up they'd have been the only bets matched. Such bets just act as bookends unless the momentum starts working the other way.

balla, dark pools (another finger lickin nausea from our city friends) would be better than nothing but I'd like to see the back of the first come first served rule as it facilitates insiders.

what about putting up a £3,000 back bet 5 minutes before the off at 14.5 , what would you expect to happen to the price , i am guessing the so called parasites would shorten its odds , into what iyo ?

To be fair this only really an issue in horseracing when there is so much inside information. As it gets closer to the off the liquidity grows. Are people really going to bet thousands on opposing opinions early in the morning if there are no prices and volumes to see? Can you just change it for racing and nothing else?

With soccer (and other sports) there is less inside information so you see pinny, ibc, sbo putting up price and max volume per bet on each outcome. As the game gets closer for the big matches this gets into tens of thousands. They are showing their hand to 102% to 103% books.

The same is true to an extent on Betfair except the basic commission rate makes it expensive for soccer.

I am not convinced that removing the limit order book from view will help Betfair grow.

Getting rid of the PC obviously would. I have models virtually ready to go which would place decent liquidity into soccer and tennis markets. This could be used for cashout and general bets for everyone.

But with the PC in place I am better off playing small on Betfair and placing my big bets elsewhere. Its crazy. But with or without the PC I would still like potential opponents see what I am offering so they can decide if they want to bet against me.

I hate looking in a shop windows and not seeing how much things cost (I would not bother going in and asking) and I don't order things unless I can see they are stock.

I hate looking in a shop windows and not seeing how much things cost (I would not bother going in and asking) and I don't order things unless I can see they are stock.

You don't bet with UK bookmakers then? As I said earlier, by drip feeding into early markets I could often get 2 or 3 hundred on one earlier that shortened considerably later on. Why though do I have to make thousands of API requests over hours in order to do so and why do some of the people I'm being matched with have to do the same? Wouldn't it be better if we just put up larger orders at various prices on the horse and every hour or so the exchange matched those limit lay orders that were consistent with those limit back orders. Or should the exchange only be a place where people with computing degrees are allowed to bet? Just because you can see exactly what's there that doesn't mean a) it's what you want or b) it will be there if you do. In fact on betfair b) is certainly not the case. particularly if you're a newbie on a 30 second refresh rate. As I was looking up betfair, I saw a bet that wisnae there, it wisnae there again today, I wish that bet would go away.

what about putting up a £3,000 back bet 5 minutes before the off at 14.5 , what would you expect to happen to the price , i am guessing the so called parasites would shorten its odds , into what iyo ?

It would depend on what was showing on the other side but, generally, it would shorten unless it was an insider lay (in which case the bet would be snatched up IF it was there long enough).

askari , if it is 25s on here and 20 in the shops .
could you not get lumps on by dutch laying the field and taking that percentage cut which in effect would probably mean you are still getting 20/1

could you not get lumps on by dutch laying the field and taking that percentage cut which in effect would probably mean you are still getting 20/1

A good point rsng, and people, like myself but without the programming knowledge, would be more ;likely to attempt that on an auction based system where it wouldn't require thousands of api calls.

Exactly frog.  The only way realistic to get matched on outsiders is via a market maker laying a book