![]() |
You are correct jfc, I had it just confirmed over the phone.
The $1,000 allowance is already used up and is a 60 week rolling allowance. Riddle me this caped crusader..... How can I use up something that never existed historically???? ? This will do far more damage than the announcement of the introduction of the charge imho. People will withdraw funds to avoid the first charge and then never redeposit because they'll be charged. I want to know if Betfair are paying VAT on this....might be worth an overseas call to the Gambling Commission :D |
Sounds like BF were offering a "free lunch"? (after all)
|
Would be interesting to get the Tasmanian Gaming Commissions or even the ACCC's perspective.
This reads to me as if the Tassie government would have to give permission, but I'm no lawyer. 76ZDD. Betting exchange commission (1) A Tasmanian gaming licence with a betting exchange endorsement entitles its holder to such commission in respect of brokered wagering as the Commission from time to time authorises in writing. (2) Authorisations under subsection (1) may be of – (a) general application; or |
Quote:
JFC, bit of a blast from the past but it looks like under the terms of the Act an active player is one that has placed a bet witin the past 2 years. 76ZP. Remitting funds of inactive player If no wager has been recorded on behalf of a registered player for a period of 2 years, the licensed provider – (a) must remit any funds held on behalf of the player; or |
Quote:
In the just concluded Waterhouse case, the judge spent a massive amount of resources to figure out what "publish" means. Imagine the amount of legal resources required to determine whether a "charge" is a "commission". |
Quote:
So if I drop dead tonight, I'll still be considered an active player for another 729 days. |
Yes and you'll have to haunt them so they can find you, otherwise they'll keep it :)
|
Onto the fanciful notion that this charge is somehow good, because it will be easier to win once the big winners have moved elsewhere.
This flies in the face of well proven and documented strategy for such capers. Considering this is a sub-zero sum game, a key strategy of the top echelon is to crush all potential competitors. Even if that involves sustaining short term losses. While it makes dollar sense for these leviathans to transfer some action to BETDAQ, they have adequate resources to still be active on Betfair. And ensure that no one gets a leg up. And if by some miracle the reduced leviathan action gives you a marginal advantage, rest assured the retrofitted Betfair Premium Charge will end up leaving you worse off than last week. |
Quote:
Actually, that is true. It is a zero sum game if we didn't pay any commission, add on Premium Charges and transaction charges and bot tax and we have a very large minus game. Pay only commission, and still it isn't a zero sum game! |
One thing that most people miss that Betfair causes quite a large demage to profit even with the normal commision. The commision payed on every win has a snowball effect. The normal punter might take 20 wins to increase his bank by 10% those wins are charged a commision, however a loss isnt aforded a refund so the next win that actually only places you at the same level that you were before, has cost you 2 commisions, so you could be 10% better off in just 2 wins. This movement and constant commisons is what costs, and ensures that sucessfull a punter pays far more in excess of 20% in commision due to this.
A person that hardly loses does not reuse the funds, they move forward, tharefore they do not re-pay the commision. Well they do now, all being equall this is 'fair'. While 'fair', it ensures that no one esscapes the 20% tax on gross profit be it that you pay it in small amounts or large lump sum. What needs to be done is to have this factored into your betting strategy. Will you still be better off ? Is the batfair advantage that great to offset the money grabed in exchange for the services provided? Diversification of betting accounts is probably the best policy. There will be people whose strategy requires laying a horse be it in trade or straight out . They have nowhere else to go. Those that bet straight out need to reases the situation. Lets asume that we place $2 bets in TAB and BEtfair and we get $2 win divs every time (for ease of calculation) Bet TAB Betfair 1 $2 $2 Win 2 $2 $2 Loss 3 $2 $2 Win 4 $2 $2 Loss 5 $2 $2 Win Sumary, Each account has same risk that is 5 x $2 = 10 TAB account has a profit of 12 - 10 = $2 Betfair has 12-(6x0.05) -10 = $1.7 profit you are 15% behind the TAB. The more you use Betfair the greater is the gap that you need to fill I would suggest that the 20% is a nice round and realistic figgure. As long as you have a reasonable strike rate but your divs arent 20% greater then the next commision free betting facility, over all you are not going forward as fast as you would like or COULD. There was an interview with a well known punter who said something to the effect that you cant beat the Betfair takout, he was, I realise more right ten I thought then. I have been meaning to write this for some time but never quite found the right words and example, I hope that I have now. This isnt meant to be defamitory its meant to serve as a help in developing a better bet placing strategy I would say that if you arent getting 15% better you are infact loosing more then you realise. Michal |
Very well put Michal.
I saw that interview too and was wondering how he could make such claims. All has been proven in the long run. I now also understand why Australian liquidity will never even be close (by ratio of population) to that of the UK, and why arbing and trading is so attractive. I haven't done the simulation myself, but I'd guess that the average punter is laying and backing horses at prices where he cannot win long term because of commission. Traders and arbers could win if they were good enough, but now the only winner is Betfair. They have effectively shut the door on an edge. |
This drama shows little sign of subsiding.
Various players are now detailing their charges on the Betfair Forum, revealing the difference between Betfair's claims and reality. How about this customer: "I have just payed my first premium charge and after adding the commision I had payed during the week, the whole thing equates to 24.7% of my overall profit." I've just wasted more time trying to figure out these charges, and have ended up more confused than ever. |
Hey Moderator, how are we going in the defamatory stakes on this topic???
|
I'd love to know who "the well known punter" was. What a silly statement, "you can't beat the BF takeout". Funny thing is I've had my best week in ages as the bots appeared to be asleep early on in the UK markets. Or have some moved on?, suits me fine if they have.
|
Quote:
|
Post deleted. If you believe there is a "scandal" then alert the appropriate authorities. Do not make such accusations here. Moderator.
|
Crackone, thank you yes that was the guy.
Mark, good on you that you had a great week, what you are refering to is your ability to win, you may have had the best week, if you didnt have to pay the commision you would have had a better one. I dont belive that the statment was silly, I certainly didnt understand it untill much later and for the most part I dont think that many have understood. HE wasent refering to the fact that you cant win money, he was refering to the fact that you cant beat the over all percentage against you , that you lose any benefit or edge. He was also talking about betting straight out not laying or trading . Michal |
Deleted. Potentially defamatory. Moderator.
|
Quote:
Mark, he meant the takeout from paying commission on all win bets, the winning ones as well as the losing ones. One may have cumulatively won $20,000, but only cleared $2,000 in profit. So based on 5% commission, paid $1,000 in commission. That's 50% of the nett profit gone! No punter can win paying 50% of winnings back to the provider. Now as a trader, bookmaker or market maker, you might make $2,000 profit and this is cumulative. You've effectively paid $100 in commission or a miserly ;) 5% to the provider. Most certainly any successful market maker can win paying 5%. That's the basic but mammoth difference. SB combats this commission by arbing. So SB is paying the same commission rates as you. He was implying that unless he did it this way, it would be impossible to make a profit due to the cumulative effect of commission. I think you may have had a good week and will have a good week next week also, because many players have shut down their autobots after being stung on Wednesday with their Premium Charge. I have also noticed the price chasers aren't there like before. I have to wait another 3 hours and 20 minutes for my big race at Dundalk to go off. They should pay me a Premium Discount for providing liquidity when I should be asleep :D |
Quote:
I have heard this argument many times, and at one time (for a short period of time) actually thought this myself. However this is a very simplistic view of the situation. It is only the fact that the commission is paid post-collect that makes this argument appear to be valid, however it is not necessarily the case. In the case you cite above, let's assume the punter in question has bet $18,000 and returned $20,000 for his $2,000 profit. If commission were factored into the dividend (as it is with bookies and the tote) then he would have bet $18,000 and returned $19,000 for a $1000 profit and he may consider himself to be a reasonable punter. If we can agree that over a very large number of bets, the better dividends will be where the market takeout (including commission) is the lowest, then if that same punter had put that same $18,000 into the totes (if a horse racing punter) at 17% takeout, then the $18,000 bet would have only resulted in a return of something like $17,000 and they would be in a loss situation. Regardless of whether the $1,000 in commission is paid before or after the collect, $1,000 profit is still better than $1,000 loss. If the punter in question was a sports punter, and were betting on a book with a percentage of around 8%, then the difference would not be so great, but would still be there. Regardless of whether the commission is paid before or after the fact, they would still be ahead by paying the 5% commission - as long as the dividends received were better at BF than elsewhere. I am a punter and not a trader. By my calculations I don't pay any commission. My software displays the betfair dividend "post commission". I record all my bets with this post commission dividend. The commission is irrelevant to me. If I put a bet on at $2.00 (assuming a 5% commission), I consider this a dividend of $1.95. I only put this bet on if the $1.95 available is better than what I can get elsewhere. If I put $100 on that $2.00 shot, my profit is $95. The fact that they pay me $100 and then take back $5 is totally irrelevant and confuses the issue. The above argument suggests that I've "lost more" by paying that extra $5 in commission. If the $1.95 was better than what I can get elsewhere then I'm far better off. I suppose what I'm trying to say is that if that selection was a true 50% chance, then the 5% commission (net $1.95) is far LESS significant than a tote takeout of 17% which would show that selection at something like $1.85. Quote:
They most certainly can. |
Quote:
Not necessarily, the assumption is that he'd still be winning after commission were paid on every single winning bet, not just net profit. Quote:
The dilemma being - a) longer odds on Betfair do not necessarily equate to better value, in fact all studies reflect that Betfair prices are a better indicator. b) You're assuming that a profit on Betfair is equal to a loss on the tote. Quote:
Really? I just don't agree that paying 17% on everything is the same as paying 24% and up to 50% on everything. By default, Betfair's biggest mistake with the premium charge was not in implementing it, but rather opening some punters eyes as to how much commission they were really paying. It's not 5%, never has been 5% for most punters. Traders, arbers, book makers yes, punters - no. This is exactly why some punters cannot believe they still aren't winning when 12% better off. There are heaps of systems that are close to breakeven at tab prices, yet with another 12% they are still losing. Surely it is money for jam?? Nope. I see what your point is however, that if you are getting better odds after commission, that you are better off regardless of commission. That's true in theory, in practice it's quite different. Money is a far better indicator on betfair. I know a couple of people who are currently doing extremely well looking for horses that are below TAB prices on Betfair, and taking bookies odds. But your point is noted. |
Originally posted by Stebbo - "I suppose what I'm trying to say is that if that selection was a true 50% chance, then the 5% commission (net $1.95) is far LESS significant than a tote takeout of 17% which would show that selection at something like $1.85."
It should be noted that TAB's Commission on Win Pools in Australia are on average 14.5% and not 17%. |
A "true even money chance" on a TAB pays $1.70 not the $1.85 Stebbo has stated.
If the TAB were betting on Two-Up and I had a $1 on heads and Stebbo had a $1 on tails then the pool is $2, the TAB take 14.5% commission (29c) and the winner collects $1.71, recuced to $1.70 after rounding. |
I have a program that totals the TAB divs percentage for the whole field with a percentage total at the bottom.
It always comes to 18.5% on UniTAB because of the rounding down. That is a big difference to the 14.5% the TABs state that they load it at. They try to not tell the truth where ever they can & wish to stop others if they dare to make a better offer.e.g. Betfair. I compare TAB prices all the time with Betfair & for the life of me , I can not see why any serious punter would line up to take the consistantly terrible fluctuating prices. One would not want to do Dutching with the TABs One could get seriously burnt with the ever fluctuating prices even after they jump. One would not not wish to be betting to price either. Cheers. |
Bhagwan, it can't always come to 18.5%. You might be confusing Market Percentage with the Commission and even Market Percentages vary.
TAB Win Market Percentages (at 14.5% commission) will vary from 117% to 119% depending on the effect of rounding, the total commission deducted including the rounding component will vary from 14.5% to say 19% if a $2.09 (rounding down to the $2.00 divi adds another 4.5%). You cannot work out what the total commission is on the TAB's after rounding because we don't know the actual dollar amounts invested on each runner, but a guess is that rounding adds another 1.5% commission to win markets and more to place markets because of the lower dividends and greater affect of rounding. |
The VFG real time odds has the percentages at the botton of each betting pool take a look to see what the amounts are, i will i will list a random race from yesterday.
Gosford Race 7 Betfair 100.49% Stab 119.37% NSW 118.47% QLD 117.35% |
Paging Shaun
How is the VFG Real Time Odds accessed?
Regards |
virtualformguide.com/cgi-bin/tvf/access.pl
On the right hand side drop down box select RTO for the race you want. |
Further to the fanciful notion that this charge is somehow good, because it will be easier to win once the big winners have moved elsewhere.
In contrast to normal winners, these big ones will typically find it very easy to evade the Premium Charge. If you open an account in your spouse's name, the Betfair will treat the 2 accounts as linked. BUt the leviathans with their staff and extensive international contacts can easily find ways of opening other accounts that cannot be linked back to them. Presumably until now they used a sole account to maximise bonus points and minimise commission. So they'll beat the charges while other regular winners will have to bear the brunt. How on earth can such a situation be good for mainstream punters? |
As others throughout this thread have said, I cant get my head around this Premium charge, but thought I'd bump this to see how it all panned out? Have many people been charged with this? Or is it something that very few people have been stung with?
|
As JFC eluded to.....open several accounts.
|
Quote:
Betfair has designed the Premium Charge specifically so that no one can get their head around it. And in trademark style, once the initial 60 week window had elapsed Betfair then changed the rules to a lifetime window. Wouldn't surprise me if that snared more people. And of course, it changed commission generated to an imaginary 3%, being extremely favourable for their most Premium customers who then get slugged less than the proletariat. The Betfair Forum has regular accounts of people (who don't present as overly-capable) getting slugged. |
All times are GMT +10. The time now is 01:03 AM. |
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.