General Betting

Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
18 Jul 16 13:59
Date Joined: 02 Jun 03
| Topic/replies: 4,862 | Blogger: Gin's blog
Purple have told me that they are increasing my commission rate permanently. They denied that it was a Premium Charge but then went on to explain that it was because they didn’t make enough money from me (i.e. it’s a premium charge under a different guise).

I searched the forum for any other mention of this but have only found one thread:

This guy is lucky it’s only 5% - mine is higher.

I’m surprised nobody else has mentioned it on here.
Pause Switch to Standard View Purple have introduced “Premium...
Show More
Report pablo-fanque July 18, 2016 2:34 PM BST
how much is yours ?
Report Gin July 18, 2016 3:45 PM BST

But I get the feeling that figure will increase if I don’t change the way I bet with them.

The point is that I’m sure some people have been holding on to the possibility of Purple making a stronger challenge to Betfair at some point in the future and bringing with it increased liquidity and no premium charge.

Although past history shows that to be unlikely it is now a non-runner.
Report pablo-fanque July 18, 2016 4:05 PM BST
poor move by purple
Report pxb July 20, 2016 10:37 AM BST
because they didn’t make enough money from me (i.e. it’s a premium charge under a different guise).

Bookie thinking.

I hope you closed your account.
Report TheFear July 20, 2016 2:00 PM BST
You'd swear purple don't want to succeed they are so incompetent.
Report Latalomne July 20, 2016 3:20 PM BST
Quite, TheFear.  Failed to capitalise (generally looked pretty uninterested in doing so) on every single gift-wrapped present given to them by BF - and there have been plenty.
Report CLYDEBANK29 July 21, 2016 5:11 PM BST
Impossible task
Report DStyle July 21, 2016 9:37 PM BST
the murkiness of it all is the worst bit.

fine to have a premium charge if they want it, but it should surely be in the T&Cs and completely transparent.
Report Total Bosman July 21, 2016 10:50 PM BST
Feels like a strange move when they are still so far behind BF in terms of liquidity - when BF introduced PC they could maybe afford to piss some people off but purple aren't exactly in the same position, in particular with so little else to differentiate them.  At the same time, they desperately need to attract rank and file punters alongside the PC refugees, so if (big if) the money really does go into advertising and product development it might be a good thing.  I'm not sure how much sponsoring Charlton will help but at least it shows they're still trying.  Kind of strange that Lads haven't done more to integrate the exchange a bit better, could have been an opportunity.
Report kavvie July 23, 2016 11:53 PM BST
this is like saying a bank that charges 20% intrest is better than on that charges 10..
Report siwaadupa July 24, 2016 9:57 AM BST
Are these PC Purple players eligible for every Wednesday paybacks? If they do(up to 150 Pounds per week refund in commission) someone who is on 10% will pay 5%. If they are on flat 5% then its 2.5% per week.- it's been(commission refund) extended to the end of the year- still not bad option.
$markets are doing extremely well, having pure exchange there. No video games, no matterless matches - flat 2% commission, plus pre play markets are deep with decent amount of money to bet(very often even more than on bf!)
Report TheVis July 26, 2016 5:44 PM BST
Purple have simply been a non-runner in exchange history. So many chances but never capitalised on a single opportunity.
Report trilby22 July 26, 2016 7:47 PM BST

Black Knight, for me.
Report the whizz kids July 27, 2016 11:44 PM BST

Jul 26, 2016 -- 7:47PM, trilby22 wrote:

Purple? Black Knight, for me.

How funny, It brought back memories of this guy I used to work with when I was a manager at Hills a few years ago.

He was was the drummer for Tygers of Pan Tang.

Nice guy to start with but turned out to be a right see you next Tuesday.

Report Gin August 11, 2016 3:22 PM BST
It makes a mockery of this - The B*tdaq Manifesto:


All customers will benefit from Punting Equality – pledges by **** to keep commission low and check this out…. the first UK race will be commission free every day – you can’t get lower than that !

The manifesto includes no horrible ‘Premium Charges’, more liquidity, events and markets on the site where winners are always welcome.
Report Gin August 11, 2016 3:24 PM BST
The forum won't show the link because it shows Purples name.

Try this link instead:
Report stu August 11, 2016 9:14 PM BST
out of interest, Gin, what sort of player are you primarily and do you think they targeted your 'type' of play?
Report Gin August 12, 2016 12:01 PM BST
Mostly trading cricket which has resulted in lots of small wins with not too many losses (therefore a high win/loss ratio).

They told me that they were targeting me because they didn’t make enough “yield” from me (ie % Gross PL / Commission paid).
Report YOMOMMA August 12, 2016 4:56 PM BST
How about Smarkets? They are 2%.
Report Gallivanter August 17, 2016 6:58 AM BST
How long will Sm@rkets last? Good luck to them.

The Gambling Commission (or whatever name it goes under now) should ensure that all bookies offering a price should stand to lose a certain amount at that price, first come, first served.

After that, they can adjust their prices to suit their books. Rinse and repeat.

Exchanges should charge a fixed commision to all punters, no "special" clients, and no exchange should "seed" their books. When you seed your book, you're no longer an exchange.
Report longbridge August 17, 2016 2:55 PM BST
Why does anyone care if Exchanges 'seed' their markets?  So long as they don't treat customers who win their seeding money any differently to customers who win other customers money, that is?
Report Gallivanter August 18, 2016 8:03 PM BST
If you seed your book, you're no longer an exchange operating only on commission. True exchanges don't care who wins. Bookies do care. Remember all that stuff about "welcoming winners"? You won't welcome them if it's your money they're winning.
Report bettinghelp August 18, 2016 8:56 PM BST
Exchanges seeding their own markets invites conflicts of interest.
Report Gin August 19, 2016 1:30 PM BST
Gallivanter 18 Aug 16 20:03 Joined: 10 Mar 08 | Topic/replies: 2,930 | Blogger: Gallivanter's blog

True exchanges don't care who wins. Bookies do care.

Not quite true - exchanges do care if you win too fast (and therefore they don't make enough money from you).

That's why BF have had a premium charge for the last few years and now purple have followed them.
Report stu August 21, 2016 12:37 AM BST
Still find it crazy that they care if you win - they still make money from you. With no risk on their part.

The PC debate is and was founded on a crazy idea that the winners will ruin the exchanges, well guess what, they did it themselves long before winners ever had the chance to do the same.
Report stu August 21, 2016 12:38 AM BST
winners will stop exchanges from working....I know what, let's just stop them working ourselves...Crazy
Report Johnny The Guesser August 24, 2016 7:44 AM BST
The big winners killed the exchange model. They are the ones to blame.
Report stu August 28, 2016 3:32 PM BST
How will we ever know if that's true Jonny, you're speculating on something that wasn't allowed to happen - the PC killed the money before the winners got the chance to.
Report pxb August 29, 2016 3:14 AM BST
The idea that big winners killed the exchange is simply wrong. If were true, the many thousands of exchanges across the world (stocks etc) would be in trouble and they clearly aren't.

Ignoring the PC, the bf exchange problem is one of pricing the cost of trading. The solution would be a small additional charge per trade, say 10 cents.

The PC was really about maximizing short term revenue, without regard to the long term consequences for growth of the exchange.

I've said before, all successful internet businesses are volume businesses (think Amazon). Once you get to a certain size, it becomes almost impossible for viable competitors to emerge. Something bf will learn to its cost, sooner or later.
Report stu September 2, 2016 9:16 AM BST
will there be another 'amazon' exchange to rival BF then...?
Report pxb September 2, 2016 9:42 PM BST
will there be another 'amazon' exchange to rival BF then...?

A some point there will be. The main barrier IMO are the legal restrictions almost everywhere, which make any kind of transnational exchange difficult. It may well come out of India, where cricket betting is huge and is gradually being legalised.
Report bingo bongo September 3, 2016 3:48 AM BST
There are a few start ups already trying to get in on this market, using the bitcoin analogy. However, crypto currency is still too complicated and volatile for most people to use, and I don't think the technology is quite there for a decentrialised exchange on the scale needed. If these issues are resolved then a global low cost exchange could be viable.
Report pxb September 3, 2016 10:01 PM BST
There is a general misconception that building the software application is a major barrier to entry. It isn't. I have a pretty good idea how much it would cost. The main barrier is getting a critical mass of punters and traders, which is why I think it will come out of somewhere like India.
Report spurs to buy big September 7, 2016 12:45 AM BST
so its India then ..
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.


Instance ID: 13539