Re the Betfair premium accounts July newsletter...
(can't seem to link to it from my phone but you'll have it anyway)
I'm not sure how trading capital allowances will help as bank isn't the limitting factor really. Exposure re-use might help some on the simultaneous weekend footy though.
But its good to see some innovative thinking in these times of gloom about the govt guidelines so I for one aren't going to knock the ideas or intent.
Trading capital allowance etc
Spook! What happened there?
Somebody edited my post, and answered my question!
I never wrote that “offering a credit line effectively line”. This place is weird!
- ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
Nobody escapes scrutiny. And there's got be some perks for paying thousands in fees every month which funds the low commission rates for "normal" users.
What it isn't though is a line of credit, that's illegal for starters, it's just a way to recognise that if you're offering lots of liquidity, and shown you know how to manage a position, then they'll look at your likely liability rather than the strict adding of plusses and minuses. Without a certain type of user putting thousands or tens of thousands up in every market there wouldn't be much action so its something recognise that which won't cost them anything, but as bank size isn't a problem for most it's a gesture rather than anything particularly valuable.
-
- Posts: 3193
- Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2019 8:25 am
- Location: Newport
Wonder what the gambling commission will think about that.
- ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
Can't see the problem, premium charge payers have proved their affordability críteria far and beyond what's expected, most cultivating a B2B relationship rather than that of a casual punter. And undoubtedly they'd have cleared it because they're no mugs.Archery1969 wrote: ↑Sat Jul 23, 2022 8:09 pmWonder what the gambling commission will think about that.
I'd be surprised if the GC is relaxed about winners. They'd think we'll lose everything we've won eventually and borrow money to fund our habits, leading to alcohol and drug dependency, glue sniffing and finally suicide.ShaunWhite wrote: ↑Sat Jul 23, 2022 8:27 pmCan't see the problem, premium charge payers have proved their affordability críteria far and beyond what's expected, most cultivating a B2B relationship rather than that of a casual punter. And undoubtedly they'd have cleared it because they're no mugs.Archery1969 wrote: ↑Sat Jul 23, 2022 8:09 pmWonder what the gambling commission will think about that.
You get to sit on your balcony in Spain smoking reefer ogling senoritas, whilst your robots take money off “normal” non price sensitive users, who get to sit inside for hours, staring at the screen clicking the buttons like a suspend monkey, which funds your lavish lifestyle.ShaunWhite wrote: ↑Sat Jul 23, 2022 8:04 pm
And there's got be some perks for paying thousands in fees every month which funds the low commission rates for "normal" users.
How many more perks do you want?!
That’s great for you, though most casual punters struggle to get past live chat, let alone build a “B2B” relationship.ShaunWhite wrote: ↑Sat Jul 23, 2022 8:27 pm
Can't see the problem, premium charge payers have proved their affordability críteria far and beyond what's expected, most cultivating a B2B relationship rather than that of a casual punter. And undoubtedly they'd have cleared it because they're no mugs.
If mugs all fail the affordability checks, then who is going to be left to click your prices?
- jamesedwards
- Posts: 2234
- Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2018 6:16 pm
For some trading styles of non-recreational accounts this makes lots of sense.
Picture an account that creates offers in every major football market, it's easily plausible for them to have, say, 5000 unmatched positions at any one time each with perhaps, £100 liability. That's £500,000 exposure, even though maybe only single digit percent of these positions ever get matched and even then by law of averages the eventual combined movement in P&L might never more than a few hundred £ a day.
Picture an account that creates offers in every major football market, it's easily plausible for them to have, say, 5000 unmatched positions at any one time each with perhaps, £100 liability. That's £500,000 exposure, even though maybe only single digit percent of these positions ever get matched and even then by law of averages the eventual combined movement in P&L might never more than a few hundred £ a day.