Sunday, 18 December 2016

Special Deals And A Chat


I took a few minutes last night to email the Competition and Markets Authority with some observations on Betfair's Premium Charge, and encourage you to do the same if you are similarly affected.

Bernard wrote:

Good news that people are raising the matters of discrimination in PC charging by Betfair. I think that anyone who has an interest in the matter should look very closely at @premiumcharged twitter where there is other evidence of serious differences in how Betfair treat their customers. Also @denis_mikan and @kingkauto1 have relevant material.
The BHA HBF Forum is lucky that they have Mr Scott Ferguson @borisranting who is a former senior Betfair employee. He has full knowledge of all the special deals and will no doubt be advocating on behalf of punters.
Scott Ferguson is a familiar name of course; the other names mentioned, not so much, but I'll check them out. It's important to know why some customers are apparently being given an advantage over others, and if Betfair are encouraging the court-siding syndicates run by former employees to the detriment of the majority of their customers, it's a story that might interest a budding Michael Lewis.

Trader247 suggested that the 8.5% commission could be a low value win (which means that rounding produces some higher market commission rates as shown below) but if you read the @PremiumCharged timeline, you'll see evidence that others have been offered the 8.5% deal.

Lee Von Dangerous had a similar concern, writing:
Hi there,
I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm wrong but the screen shot of Commission being charged at 8.5% is from an individual market and has nothing to do with PC. As you're aware PC is calculated on weekly profit not individual markets and is never presented in this way.
Followed by:
Sorry I should correct myself, PC is charged on lifetime profits but calculated weekly.
Lee is correct that Premium Charges are charged weekly based on lifetime profits, but the allegation is that some PC payers are being given the option of a flat 8.5% commission rate charged on each market in the same way that commission was charged prior to September 2008. 

@PremiumCharged asked me to clarify my rate and whether I had ever been offered or asked for a special deal, and the answer is that I pay 50% and have never been offered or asked for a special deal. Again, if you are affected by Premium Charges, take a few minutes to write to the CMA. You have nothing to lose but a few minutes of your time.

Moving on, and James Butler's writing talents reached a new peak yesterday with an amusing review of a post which contained the astonishing revelation that:

The most famous loss recovery process is the good old, double after every loss, ‘martingale‘ system. The problem with all these systems is that they ultimately fail.
Who knew? I shall keep the writer's name to myself and spare his blushes since his openly low opinion of his readership's intelligence probably isn't going to help sales of his training classes. Sadly James deleted the post for some reason, (one hopes it was not as a result of any threats), but bounced back with a new one today "The Management Would Like A Word" comparing the world of Victorian medicine, snake oil salesmen, charlatans and quacks with today's unregulated betting world of e-book writers, trainers and tipsters.

Read the full post, but this was an interesting sequence of paragraphs:

Recently, I was contacted by someone who wanted to "have a chat" with me. They wanted to put me straight, to make me understand their position. I declined. Some of what I have written went against their self-perception. Their desire to be in full control of the message on their website and on independent websites meant that I had to be put in my place.

Business is business. Vendors have product to shift and need to protect the message, the message that trading is not hard and anyone can succeed. I have just one aim on this website, to tell the truth. On this website I will tell you how hard it is to trade and that most will fail. A vendor will sell you some software and a training course with no caveats. The majority have to fail in order to compensate the lucky few who win large sums through skill or through luck.
Because my message is different there are those who feel I should be silenced. After all, who is going to buy miracle cures if the salesmen admit that most of their cures don't work and any that do only cure a few.
Who indeed? Certainly no one with the ability to understand that in a zero-sum game it simply is not possible for everyone to be a winner. 

As for someone "wanting to have a chat", this sounds a little threatening, something I've had to deal with myself in the past.

Unlike James, I have nothing to sell - no service, no books (yet), no courses - so I can be completely impartial, but James nevertheless calls it like it is. I don't see him saying "buy my book, and financial success is guaranteed" even though that would likely boost sales! 

I have yet to read his latest book (it's on my Xmas list), but his blog is refreshingly honest and it's sadly not surprising that he's apparently ruffling a few feathers.

1 comment:

bossman megarain said...

I am far from a defender of Bf, but, I think this is a bit of a storm in a teacup.

The 8.5% rate, is based on lifetime mkts, and basically just makes u pay PC per market, rather then weekly. There should be no overall change, in the amount u end up paying Bf. (which is the key point)

I was on a rate .. of 12% for a trial period, but, Bf then found, I was overall paying less, so quickly wanted to change it to 22% per mkt, which I declined.

I got the 'trial' rate, by moaning .. which is a fair tactic, in life.

This was over a yr ago - and maybe Bf will introduce changes to PC next yr, but, I am only expecting it to change the way its collected, not, the amount its collecting.