There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
12 May 15
09:25
Joined:
Date Joined:
08 Aug 07
I'm looking for opinions on when a quoted price could be considered "materially different" from the general market price.
Should it be a percentage deviation from the general price - for example 25% either way?
Should it be a percentage deviation from the general price - for example 25% either way?
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 9
|
By:
Its not as easy as a percentage. Depends how high profile the market, how long the discrepancy has been there, how many firms are quoting and who they are, how big the odds are (200's instead of 100's is 50% less chance but no big deal, 2's instead of evens is 17% less chance but a very big deal)etc. I've had this with IBAS before now and IMO they ridiculously adjudicated that 11/4 on a draw on which lots of firms were 9/4 and 12/5 was materially out!
|
|
By:
We are living in a material world ...No I'm a bloke..
|
|
By:
can palpable errors it be figured out from the book percentage?
|
|
By:
When the selection wins!
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
test
|
|
By:
'When does a price become "materially different"'
think it's about 12.30pm |
|
By:
To be serious I think dave has it right.
|
|
By:
The ironic thing about this is that the case involves a firm who are out on their own at being under the general market price.
If they are claiming the right to correct prices which are "materially different" from the general market price in that they are "obvious errors", it only seems right that anyone who takes one of their shockingly bad early prices without BOG should in effect be able to claim that this price was clearly an "obvious error " too. No doubt they will wait until they receive the court papers before coughing up as usual. |