A bumper crop of comments on the Premium Charge discussion yesterday, and now I'm more confused than ever. When I was told that "special deals" were being given out, I assumed they were "special deals". Now I'm not so sure.
Robbo the trader, who has apparently sorted out his Internet connection issues, was first to comment with this:
I think you're misunderstanding the trial, it's supposed to level out your income so you don't get a fat payout on Wednesday, PC is still calculated as normal on your weekly income just that you're paying up front with an estimate of your likely PC rate. Paying at 40% per market with loosing markets could easily mean you'd make no money in the week. I've got mine set to 12.5% and generally I'll pay little or no PC on wednesdaySo now this is only a "trial", which would certainly explain why only a sub-set of users were selected, but I'm still confused as to how Betfair could estimate my likely charges.
The second comment was from Trader247 who wrote:
Australia, for example, has rates of 6% and 8%. For those events based in Australia, your location is irrelevant. But, for Australian customers, they pay 6% on international markets.Australia may have different base rates for different states / territories, but who'd want to live there anyway? No decent sports...
As for Bossman's rate, could it also be paid on implied commission (the Matchbook way), ie on losing bets?
I was trying to explain why someone had a commission rate of 8.5% and thought it might be because other countries had higher base rates. I had no idea that some people were able to avoid the PC!Well apparently they can't - they pay the same total, more earlier (at settlement time), and less later (at Premium Charge assessment time), which would make no difference to me.
And finally Bossman Megarain returned with this comment:
I am not trying to be argumentative .. and, if we can get Bf to change PC, so that we pay less OVERALL, then, sure its a win for us.
But, and its a big but ..
Bf have 10 yrs of your records. Maybe u win £100k a yr, playing in 10000 mkts.
They know, based on history, the ratio of winning mkts, to losing ones.
Therefore, they can calculate, what comm rate would need to be applied to your mkts, so, u pay, based per mkt, rather than weekly.
If the calc is wrong, they will re-do, it .. so, maybe u get away with a few percent this mth, but, they will get it back.
If u accept a 24% comm per mkt, u are hamstrung, in that u dare not lose .. as u get no relief for this. This .. to me, makes it less likely I would play a non-advantage mkt with Bf, and is why I dont see how Bf would go forward with it - at least, without some modifications.
Anyway, the dialog is all good ..Yes, the dialogue is good, and no one is trying to be argumentative. Now paying less OVERALL is what I thought the 8.5% deal was all about. Not sure that is the case now.
I do wonder, if customers in Aus/USA/other are treated equally. Maybe the argument, geographic location is different, can lead to a diff overall PC rate .. but, then, why wouldnt big PC payers, re-locate / get nominees, in foreign countries ?