This is a fairly long winded OP but, I am going to post it anyway. Why doesn't SBR allow it's wealthy members stake the members who have good betting records.
I was on a site before I joined SBR that allowed it's members to stake members and collect 50% of their winnings plus the stake back.
It was called "Buy a Piece".
It was done on poker sites and if the staker staked someone $1000 and the member made $5000 the stakee would pay the staker $2000 (profits realized from the stake and then the stakee would repay the stake the initial stake.
If the stakee lost everything it was on the staker.
I just wonder where the legal ramifications would lie?
If someone like andywend or Opie, who apparently have a ton of cash, want to stake someone like Frisco or LT Profits because they pick winners more consistently, why can't they do this.
If you stiff someone you lose your Pro Status or become banned.
I agree that it is a risky proposition but in the end the more reputable members will fair out well in the end.
Just a drunk question I have always wanted to ask.
I was on a site before I joined SBR that allowed it's members to stake members and collect 50% of their winnings plus the stake back.
It was called "Buy a Piece".
It was done on poker sites and if the staker staked someone $1000 and the member made $5000 the stakee would pay the staker $2000 (profits realized from the stake and then the stakee would repay the stake the initial stake.
If the stakee lost everything it was on the staker.
I just wonder where the legal ramifications would lie?
If someone like andywend or Opie, who apparently have a ton of cash, want to stake someone like Frisco or LT Profits because they pick winners more consistently, why can't they do this.
If you stiff someone you lose your Pro Status or become banned.
I agree that it is a risky proposition but in the end the more reputable members will fair out well in the end.
Just a drunk question I have always wanted to ask.