I just totted up the lay liability: -
£46,388,411.49
Leopardstown - 14:00 - Christmas Hurdle - Voler la vedette
Lagos wrote:we have not made a penny untill they settle it!
fingers crossed
If it's a Betfair error they will palp it. That is why they shouldn't get involved in their own markets! It's an exchange isn't it?
Last edited by Euler on Wed Dec 28, 2011 3:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
andyfuller
- Posts: 4619
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 12:23 pm
Smart trade here is too short bf shares, if it turns out they are liable it will have a big impact, if not i doubt there will be a surge in their price.
I guess they are on for a good bit from the extra commission and premium charges either way.
I guess they are on for a good bit from the extra commission and premium charges either way.
At the end of the day, if the cross matching works. They are only re distributing bets between runners. They are not "standing" any bets.
hence the 1.04 of Mourad. This was artificially short due to the exaggerated price of VDV. This was definitely XM.
The question is where did the huge number of the lay on VDV come from?
I think BF may have been up to something different to what they tell us
hence the 1.04 of Mourad. This was artificially short due to the exaggerated price of VDV. This was definitely XM.
The question is where did the huge number of the lay on VDV come from?
I think BF may have been up to something different to what they tell us
I think we all know the answer to that. So much money at stake I reckon winners should issue a class action if they are not settled. If it is a Betfair error then they will be the counter party. They can't take money from people and then wash their hands when it goes the other way. Doesn't it say in there terms they are the counter party for a number of situations?andyfuller wrote:Had it lost would they void it.....
-
spreadbetting
- Posts: 3140
- Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 8:06 pm
I think we all know the answer to that, Andyandyfuller wrote:Had it lost would they void it.....
someone on betfair forum says they were paid out at 14s on betdaq.
im not buying it was betfairs mistake
1. why are they in the market
2. they had enough time to suspend the race once the error was made
was only 1.6m matched on the horse i make that a liability of around 22.5m
im not buying it was betfairs mistake
1. why are they in the market
2. they had enough time to suspend the race once the error was made
was only 1.6m matched on the horse i make that a liability of around 22.5m
The thought had crossed my mind also.mugsgame wrote:At the end of the day, if the cross matching works. They are only re distributing bets between runners. They are not "standing" any bets.
hence the 1.04 of Mourad. This was artificially short due to the exaggerated price of VDV. This was definitely XM.
The question is where did the huge number of the lay on VDV come from?
I think BF may have been up to something different to what they tell us
I am regretting walking away from the in-play market on both now, else I'd have some real quality data on both exchanges.mcfc1981 wrote:someone on betfair forum says they were paid out at 14s on betdaq.
im not buying it was betfairs mistake
1. why are they in the market
2. they had enough time to suspend the race once the error was made
was only 1.6m matched on the horse i make that a liability of around 22.5m
I wouldn't read too much into the prices on Betdaq as there is always somebody trying to arb across both so an error on one very often leads to an error on another.