- This topic has 27 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
If they floated the comapny even in these harsh economic times there will be enough investors to ensure the floatation is a sucess.
Paul Eatcott in yesterdays R.P. reports the company report a rise in revenue last year of 27% to £303 million.
He also wrote the comapny will look to go to the market in the final quarter of 2009 or the first 3 months of 2010 so its way off at the moment. By then many forceaster are predicting that the current on line ban in the USA could be lifted and they then would have the funds to go global.
The company already have access to 32 million homes in the states where they provide horse racing coverage from TVG an American company they paid £34 million for.
The ones that must be kicking themselves are Ladbrokes and Hills who both turned the invitation from Andrew Black to invest with them!
Glad to see a British company taking on the World.
Very interesting comments from the Betdaq users. Checked it out for the first time in ages yesterday and was pleasantly surprised. The liquidity would be more than adequate for my fairly moderate level of staking. In fact the liquidity at the lower ends of the markets was frequently better than Betfair. There does appear to be a lot of cross platform trading between BF and BDAQ with 2 tick holes between Back and Lay a regular in the final 10 minutes on BDAQ but that would be a fairly minor gripe. I’ve just had BF bite into a chunk of my PC allowance for the first time, it wasn’t nice. Also the commission payments on a very rough calculation would be more favourable. I need to get matched on every bet so if they had an SP product they’d have a new customer for sure.
I do honestly believe that there is a lot of this going on ………… more than Betfair or the Premium Charge victims are prepared to admit!
Anyone who is smart enough to have to pay the Premium Charge must also be smart enough to know how to avoid paying it!
Backing a horse on Betfair that one expects to lose, whilst Laying it on Betdaq at the same price ( or preferably lower) can do wonders for your Premium Charge deductions, hah.
(Losing on Betfair is the "new" winning on Betfair.
)What if it wins? Someone having premium charges of a few hundred would have to back and lay a substantial amount to cancel their premium charge but would incur further substantial premium charges if the beast wins wouldn’t they?
Absolutely, there is always that danger lurking in the background.
But I’m sure you will agree that it is "easier" to pick a loser than a winner?
Anyway, the gambler smart enough to qualify to pay the Premium Charge will by definition be smart enough not to make a habit of overly Backing winning horses on Betfair which — after form study — he expects to lose.That’s about as cunning as one of Baldrick’s cunning plans.
It’s just a variation on the theme of ‘arbing the balance’ out of a bookie that’s knocking you. Do I have to spell out the flaws?
Let’s say Betdaq commission, BF commission and implied commission are all 3% and you’re not on the borderline of the pc, so all losses are offset.
You back £1000@evens and lay £1000 on Betdaq@evens.
Horse wins you lose £215: £30 commission + £185 pc.
Horse gets beat you win £185: £215 saved pc less £30 commissionSo you’re effectively laying an even money shot at circa 2.16 in this little ruse. Is that good business?
Yes it is ………….. because you have assumed in your above example that the Betfair player will be already liable for the PC charge. As suggested in a previous post, the smart Betfair punter will have found a way around avoiding this Premium Charge ……. quite possibly by trading between the Betdaq/Betfair platforms.
So, in the specific example you’ve illustrated above the fairer scenario would be that the differential between the Back and Lay sides would be 2%-3% ………. the normal commission rate. Not a huge penalty for that Betfair gambler in order to maintain his avoidance of the Betfair 20% Premium Charge.And all of that is assuming a kind of worst-case-scenario. In most instances the informed gambler who has done his form-study to identify a Loser will feel fairly confident that the market will vindicate his conclusions later in the day by lenghtening out the price of his Loser. He will have first Laid the horse on Betdaq and Backed back nearer the Off on Betfair at higher odds. Usually, the smart informed gambler will in fact turn a profit on his trade even though his prime intention was as a mechanism to avoid his Premium Charge.
Not an entirely Baldric-esque strategem, if you think about it.
I don’t quite understand your purpose in personalising this issue, and I am loath at any time to discuss my betting levels. That is a private matter.
But yes, at the back-end of September 2008 when the new charging model was introduced, a proportion of my Betfair returns became subject to a Premium Charge deduction. I immediately took measures to ensure that such would not happen again.
Now, can we leave it at that, perhaps?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.