There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 77 comments are related to the topic:
Beating the Premium charge. Help please
Beating the Premium charge. Help please
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 77
|
By:
dusty . i was told that the allowance will be for those that don't take from the boxes, but put offers up , for both backing or laying .
betfair are just nit picking imo . sure it's a good start that they are trying something , but they need to just make it fairer across the board and not worry about making it even more confusing . get rid of the 40%-60% for a start, that's just scandalous . |
|
By:
I was told it was because layers are risking more and effectively adding liquidity which then gets converted over the selections due to the cross matcher, dont know if theyve also added people who put up their own odds as well
|
|
By:
I think layers are more valuable and have dried up in the most part as most are backers.
There maybe truth to what you say but I havnt heard that. |
|
By:
@pablo
"if the USA have an exchange , they may have to re-jig it" - BF have had an Exchange in the US for a couple of years (in New Jersey). Most they might have to do is charge US players differently, I haven't seen their US T&Cs so can't tell. "get rid of the 40%-60% for a start, that's just scandalous" - why scandalous? I have a HR strategy that's doing what I'd consider very well, and over the 5 years it's been running I've paid 48% of my gross profit to BF in commission, and I'll never be a PC payer. I'd guess most successful recreational punters on here pay 40%+ of their profits over, but it's only PC that seems to attract attacks for the high % of players' profits BF takes. |
|
By:
You need both. Layers don't bother laying if they don't think anyone is going to take what they put up. Over the last few years there has been a desperate lack of price takers in a lot of the markets that I play.
|
|
By:
Possibly linked to them all being directed to BFSB!
|
|
By:
Well apparently there is a shortage of those offering lys to those prepared to back, which is what I was told, hence why only certain ppl are offered it
|
|
By:
This was the argument I always maintained, liquidity (real, matched liquidity) is king. Once the backers disappear, so will the layers. And so it goes on. It becomes a death spiral.
|
|
By:
longbridge, whay irks most PC payers is that 'traditional betting' involved lots of winning to losses which naturally created large % commission. People dont try to be as inefficient as possible, they try to do as well as they can, so traditional bettors whould try to be more efficient and pay less commission as a result.
But the PC is an artificial way to chastise success which everyone wishes to be. To beat your oponent is one thing... but then to have the same fines for doing so is quite another. |
|
By:
longbridge , i remember you saying that before .
i have no edge, use betfair video and RUK for in-running , with gruss. back and lay in running and pre race . i don't think i should be in the 40%-60% bracket regardless of how much commission i generate, do you ? |
|
By:
You clearly do have an edge, PF, but you do not have what I consider to be an unfair edge (same boat as myself).
|
|
By:
A great point Dusty. In my opinion Betfair has no right to take more than its share. Anything above its position as the middle man is tantamount to theft. Especially if one is merely taking a position of a straight lay or back bet.
|
|
By:
i have no edge greater than anyone else has or can get tbh latalomne
the same way as a good poker player will always beat a poor poker player in the long run . no one can see eachothers cards or what is about to be turned over for the flop etc . facetime, on course players, those in the know. that is an edge |
|
By:
Don't get me wrong, PF, I'm not accusing you of anything, just pointing out that if you're in the 40-60% PC camp you clearly have an edge on the market (through your superior judgement)
 Clearly you should not be punished for this. |
|
By:
To OP: depends how successful you are with you're approach.
As already noted by others, it's dependent on the ratio of commission generated to gross profits, and this needs to remain above 20% (if net lifetime winnings are below 250k) and 40% (if greater than 250k) if you wish to avoid being subject to any PC. To put some numbers to this, ie what sort of edge you can get away with before paying it, it depends on the average price you bet at. If you're a straight overs/unders better on the footy for example, and are betting always around the 2.0 mark, it's more straight forward, but if you bet on the nags at a range of prices it's more messy. Consider you're lifetime is below 250k, then you need the ratio above 20%. Let's assume 5% commission. Then at a given average price, these are the ROIs that put you right on the threshold; if you have good run maybe you'll be subject to PC, but a bit below this and you should always be fine, barring a really massive win. Ave Price ROI(%) 1.5 4.83 2.0 7.49 3.0 10.35 5.0 12.79 10.0 14.71 Now for a big hitter, lifetime > 250k, and on 2% commission: Ave Price ROI(%) 1.5 1.36 2.0 2.07 3.0 2.79 5.0 3.38 10.0 3.83 |
|
By:
If betfair seeded the exchage and took on risk rather than simply being a tech company offering a platform I could see the point of PC.
But as far as the exchange is concerned they are not a bookie. |
|
By:
I understand the idea behind the PC charge regarding traders. As they generally make a lot of bets on each race. If you worked in the City as a trader, you are taxed and I think that was the main reason for the PC charge. No doubt by Government instruction.
|
|
By:
Much simpler than that.
They saw the most successful were taking out large amounts due to their ability and bf couldnt stand it. |
|
By:
thanks latalomne , and i know you weren't accusing me of anything.
i think we all agree that when it comes to betting on horse racing , an edge is know or having soemthing that others don't . fast pics, inside info etc. i have nothing ( apart from tips from bigmart,,,,,,,,,,,to offset PC of course ) |
|
By:
|
|
By:
Someone needs to test this in a courtroom then don't they??
|
|
By:
See if it really does constitute theft??
|
|
By:
Latalomne
I think its telling they are offering some of us sweets to do that seeding |
|
By:
My approach is to find favourites I believe have a great chance of winning, but more importantly being placed. OK I may find a selection drifting out from the early morning favourite to 3rd favourite come race time. Alternatively in races where I believe the favourite can't win, I look to find the winner beyond the favourite. So generally the odds I target will rarely go into double figures.
|
|
By:
The blockchain will blow legacy exchanges out of the water in the not too distant future.
No fraud No commission No PC Shared global liquidity |
|
By:
Can you explain please Richie?
|
|
By:
Betfair is not a tax institution. Yet it behaves as one.
|
|
By:
Expenses will be non-existent. No advertising, regulation etc
|
|
By:
Thank you
|
|
By:
Bettors are viewed as degenerate by nature, the change of tax rules in 2000 was all the vidence you need to see that the govnt are happy to help corporations as they collect al the profits, employ people etc...while they wont even acknowledge that 'professional gambling' is a trade.
|
|
By:
The more Betfair takes in profit, the more it pays in taxes. Taking the issue before a court would most likely be found in favour of Betfair due to that fact. Too much money at stake for the political grabbers
|
|
By:
no it would be "found in favour" because it is by and large legal. The only possibility being that the "commission charges" used in the calculation are inaccurate.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
Legal is not the same as lawful. Betfair are unlawfully acting the same as HMRC. If the Government cannot tax you on your winnings, how can Betfair legally or lawfully.
|
|
By:
wonder if its worth a legal team taking up a no win no fee challenging it in courts......could make someone a fortune
|
|
By:
Cardiff
 |
|
By:
Smarkets2%
****2% Matchbook0% |
|
By:
Bet
Daq |