- This topic has 71 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 19 years, 12 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Thankfully I took a large chunk of winnings out of my Sporting Options account yesterday. Seems like a good move.
Theoretically customers account money is ‘ring fenced’, but we shall see if remaining funds are recoverable.
Back to Betfair, I suppose!
Rob
This will be some test for the notion of ‘ring-fencing’, and the overal credibility of exchanges. If the money proves not to be ring-fenced, who would keep thousands on account with anyone again, including Betfair?
Ian.
Many thanks to the people who posted on here in August (Mounty? Tony25?), pointing out that all was not well with Sporting Options. It made me withdraw my money that day, just in case.
<br>
Same as tooting – thanks a lot for the tip-off. :)
In theory everyone should be ok anyway, shouldn’t they ?
There is only ONE EXCHANGE thankfully for me.
Undercutting the market leader is not an option.
There’s a statement on their website at the moment and it says you can still log in , right at the bottom of the page.
I’ve never dealt with them or even visited their site , so don’t know how well founded any rumours are.
I’m safe enough with Betfair and Betdaq.
The client money will be ringfenced from others owed money by sportingoptions. However, I fear that those who are under the impression that it has been untouchable by those running sporting options are in for a rude awakening……..
I understand the concept of ring fenced funds but is there any legal reason why the business creditors should not have access to the Clients funds. It is ok saying they are ring fenced but how does this stand in law.
Ian, one question for you WHY?
There is no point in anyone trying to conduct exchange business with the likes of your operation. No liquidity = no business.
I can’t see how the level of business can justify the cost of running a wanabe exchange. I was under the impression that Sporting Options was a lost cost operation and they have now failed.
Bogside Posted on 8:04 pm on Nov. 15, 2004 <br>Ian, one question for you WHY?
There is no point in anyone trying to conduct exchange business with the likes of your operation.  No liquidity = no business. ÂÂÂ
I can’t see how the level of business can justify the cost of running a wanabe exchange.  I was under the impression that Sporting Options was a lost cost operation and they have now failed.  <br>
Let me answer that … I use backandlay every day and get matched on all reasonable requests.
If you are the sort of numpty who just wants to go and bet or lay at whatever is available then backing on exchanges is not for you anyway. You are going to lose money what ever you do with that approach.
I’ve never spoken to Ian personally but I don’t think he will have any exposure to charge backs, or will he have unstainable over heads. This is what has done in SO …
I deposit funds, at backandlay by cheque and withdraw them in the same way. I don’t use a credit card and never bet more than I can afford.
The new ‘Know Your Customer’ policy at Betfair is a definite worry … are they being skinned ???
IMO, you have to spread your liabilities and Ian is a solid contender for the future. He’s going to be there when plenty of the others are not.
Ian, not so long ago you were holding up Sporting Options as a fine example of a small exchange from West Sussex.  Quick change of position now.
You must run your site as a hobby as I can see no way it can ever break even on the current levels of business.  Liquidity is the life-blood of exchanges and I would not be surprised if there is only one operating in a years time.
(Edited by Bogside at 10:21 pm on Nov. 15, 2004)
Getting back to Sporting Options, and possible implications…
I sent Ian a cheque for £250 when backandlay started. Prior to the rumours stated on here I had £1000 on account with Sporting options. Both are amounts I could shrug off, unhappily, but easily enough.
I have £10000 currently on account with Betfair. I am far from a big player there (3.75% commission). Assuming the worst for Sporting Options’ clients, I’m wondering how many punters like me will be happy to have 10K sat with Betfair, for all their supposed strength etc.
Not to mention the people who provide the real liquidity, who must have closer to £100000 on account.
This strikes me as a defining moment in betting exchange history.<br>
Quite simply SO made markets liquid by playing them selves a bit like a bookie. Its quite easy to do you open an account as acustomer and play in the markets, its an direct way of borrowing. The trouble is then that there is a hole in the "ring fenced" account. Ie all the customers money less whatever they have squandered. I am not stating facts here just possibilities.
Backandlay nor betfair do this, clients money is treated with respect ie it is not their money. All they do is redistribute it accordingly. Taking commision as required.
We need three or four liquid exchanges, to ensure healthy competition and for forwarding of the business. Betfair may not be the biggest exchange in 5 years time and may go to the stock exchange at which point business men will take over they will be similar to the bookies. Ohterwise all the eggs will be in one basket, a very precarious situation as the BHB is finding out.
Furthermore it is good to have competition and
The Guardian reports speculation that Betfair will step in to plug any hole in the client account in order to avoid adverse publicity over exchanges.
I suppose it is dependant on the size of any shortfall, but this could be a good move. I can’t be the only person who has just significantly reduced the amount I leave on deposit in various accounts as a result of what happened yesterday
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.