Matchbook & Safety

[Hareeba!]

True, from 0.8% commission to 5%.

I don't pay anywhere near 5% and neither do most serious regulars, and there you go again talking about 5% as a comparison when it's charged only on WINNING bets .. the 0.8% equates to 1.6% at least ... that's the point I was trying to make before when I was told it was 'nonsense' but am still waiting for an explanation of why

And US sports aren't everyone's only betting habit

[Odessa]

I don't pay anywhere near 5% and neither do most serious regulars, and there you go again talking about 5% as a comparison when it's charged only on WINNING bets .. the 0.8% equates to 1.6% at least ... that's the point I was trying to make before when I was told it was 'nonsense' but am still waiting for an explanation of why

And US sports aren't everyone's only betting habit

MB pays me 0.2% on all my accepted offers. That means no mater if I lose or win my bet I get paid +0.2% commission. Understand.

[Chuck Sims]

MB pays me 0.2% on all my accepted offers. That means no mater if I lose or win my bet I get paid +0.2% commission. Understand.

Matchbook stopped paying 0.2% last year.

[Odessa]

Matchbook stopped paying 0.2% last year.

Mark Martin (to lose) 22410530 08/15/10 12:45 -3000 1,200.00 40.00
Subtotal 40.00
Commission 0.08
Commission Credit 0.00
Total 1,200.00 40.08

[SpiderMonkey]

How We Calculate the Rate
Commission rates of 1.0% or -0.2% will be applied to the lesser of your "bet" or "to win" amount. So regardless of whether you bet $1,000 to win $5,000, or $5,000 to win $1,000, your bet size is treated as only $1,000. In both cases, you pay $10 in commissions if you accept an offer, or you are paid $2 if your offer is accepted

^Non-MLB

[heyman]

Another empty claim without any justification what so ever! People with tunnel vision convince them self in something they personally believe but can't provide a single valid reason to support their claim. All they see is shiny glitter and flashy icons provided by Betfair and think this must be good! Don't judge a "book" by it's cover.

Betfair is safer then Matchbook, Pinnacle, Bookmaker, TheGreek etc.

Look, Betfair is licensed and regulated. An offshore book can fold and leave no recourse if the owners take the deposits and walk - in the UK should it go bankrupt they can't, you will have creditor rights in their bankruptcy.

RE goodwill of Betfair vs Matchbook - i agree we are faced with imperfect info. strange things happen sometimes; for example if you had money invested with some Djubuti or Burkina Faso bank you may still see that money, while someone with Lehman Bros lost it all... who'd believe this 5 years ago?
Having said all that, Betfair simply has vast credibility. It has track record, premium media advertising, profitable model and arrogance to charge all it can to squeeze max profit out.

If matchbook raised its commissions to match betfair then there would be panic in the streets. Just pointing out the contradiction.

Seriously you don't think multimillion operation would go stiff one guy for couple hundred bucks risking its goodwill? MB on the other hand, doesn't have the goodwill, but it may have a promising model, attractive for punter.

I would argue that it has built up its goodwill in the last several years by never having payout problems and offering the best odds.

I'll probably check them out for new nba / nhl season, but i remain unconvinced for now RE funds safety issue.

Tell me - in comparison to what? If you are comparing Matchbook to the safest, publicly traded or regulated UK books, OK. But if that is in comparison to the other offshores you need to show your work in order to make a valid point about their safety.

Edit: To add on this: SBR rates the financial ranking of 5Dimes, Pinnacle, TheGreek, Bookmaker as A+. When asked what goes into these ratings you get nothing. So what then is different about matchbook?

[heyman]

no argument with that Odessa but it is not what I was posting about and which hhsilver described as "nonsense"

he's failed to respond to my request to explain where I am incorrect so I am assuming he has nfi himself

anyone else care to explain where I am wrong in the response I posted?

You're not wrong it's just a very narrow example that is not real world relevant for the majority of players.

A Chevy Corvette is roughly the same speed as a Ford Taurus.
fine print: a corvette at the height of Opec vs. a limited edition SHO Taurus 20 years later.
Where am I wrong?

[Chuck Sims]

Thanks Odessa for straightening me out on that.

[heyman]

I'm reposting this from the other thread where dark_horse brought up matchbook:

http://forum.sbrforum.com/players-talk/620695-sbr-tv-interview-mickey-bookmaker-part-1-industry.html?slf=68

Ask him if Bookmaker or DSI have ever considered offering reduced juice. With Pinnacle gone from the US, and Matchbook looking shaky, wouldn't that be a huge opportunity to draw 'everybody' in?

Easy to p*ss off a MB shill. A drop from A to B- not enough for you? lol With MB falling apart at the seams, and Pinny gone, there is a need for an A book that can offer low juice and is not afraid of action.

You have no new arguments and no rebuttals to the points that asked for proof or debunked your lacking reasoning. The only thing left to do is repeat myself.

A drop from A to B- not enough for you?

No. There is nothing behind it.

Well, that's the point. The question was in regard to safety of funds. All the reasons given for matchbook's rating drop fall into two buckets:
technical problems (downtime and a few technical goofs)
complete speculation (debt or slow-paying)

With MB falling apart at the seams

What does this mean? What is different?

[Odessa]

Thanks Odessa for straightening me out on that.

And thank you for generous contribution.

[heyman]

I reposted this from:

http://forum.sbrforum.com/sportsbooks-industry/623811-sbr-whats-latest-matchbook-rumor-big-announcement-next-month.html#post6000157

Not that i trust these little "bobo" forums and their made up the sky is falling to get views
BUT
Any site that would give Lenny 500k in credit, even if it was through an agent, shows some real poor decision making
Plus a complete lack of marketing...except for Fishead's free forum posts and a tragically paid for banner
The complete secrecy in who owns them or is backing them and the fact that they have never officially distanced themselves from Jay
I just hope that SBR is on top of anything that might be floating around
and will be the first to warn us if something does go down

This is nothing different than the other offshore books.

[Hareeba!]

MB pays me 0.2% on all my accepted offers. That means no mater if I lose or win my bet I get paid +0.2% commission. Understand.

of course I understand - they pay me that too!

Betfair DOESN'T charge commission on losing bets.
Understand?

[Raleigh77]

MB is actually 0.1% for runlines and totals and 0.0% for moneylines in baseball.

[Chuck Sims]

Odessa, You mentioned Matchbook had $1,000,000 in matched bets on a Sunday MLB game. How are you able to track that?

[Hareeba!]

You're not wrong it's just a very narrow example that is not real world relevant for the majority of players.

not arguing that

My original point was that many people (just refer Odessa's recent post for an example) try to say the comparison between Betfair and Matchbook is 5% v 1%.

I pointed out that a true like with like comparison was more like 5% (max) with 2% when accepting bets because Betfair's commission is charged only only on winning bets whereas Matchbook's is charged whether you win or lose.

I was then told that this was 'nonsense'. I am still awaiting an explanation of why it is 'nonsense'

Now I am very well aware that these aren't the only relevant numbers for a comprehensive comparison between the two and that Betfair is certainly more expensive than Matchbook. But if you are comparing net odds between the two you need to be aware of the point I have been attempting to make.

[Odessa]

Odessa, You mentioned Matchbook had $1,000,000 in matched bets on a Sunday MLB game. How are you able to track that?

From 4pm I had several progressive positions one point behind best offer. This game had over 50k positions in front of me. My estimate is based on number of times I was "swallowed" (seven!) and amounts offered. It never happened before to me, and I assume that volume was high because it was only game available on Sunday, beside NFL exhibition game.

[heyman]

not arguing that

My original point was that many people (just refer Odessa's recent post for an example) try to say the comparison between Betfair and Matchbook is 5% v 1%.

I pointed out that a true like with like comparison was more like 5% (max) with 2% when accepting bets because Betfair's commission is charged only only on winning bets whereas Matchbook's is charged whether you win or lose.

I was then told that this was 'nonsense'. I am still awaiting an explanation of why it is 'nonsense'

Now I am very well aware that these aren't the only relevant numbers for a comprehensive comparison between the two and that Betfair is certainly more expensive than Matchbook. But if you are comparing net odds between the two you need to be aware of the point I have been attempting to make.

How come no one is talking about the amount used to calculate the commission. Matchbook takes the lower of to-win/risk amount. Betfair takes the to-win amount by default since they charge on the winnings.

ie:
risk $1000, win $3000
other side:
risk $3000, win $1000
If the favorite wins then the rake is $8 at matchbook vs. $20-50 at betfair, which we've already discussed.
If the underdog wins then the rake is $8 at matchbook still vs. $60-150 at betfair now.

The farther away from even odds, the .8%* vs. 2-5% difference gets even larger.


*depending on sport/type

[Hareeba!]

How come no one is talking about the amount used to calculate the commission. Matchbook takes the lower of to-win/risk amount. Betfair takes the to-win amount by default since they charge on the winnings.

ie:
risk $1000, win $3000
other side:
risk $3000, win $1000
If the favorite wins then the rake is $8 at matchbook vs. $20-50 at betfair, which we've already discussed.
If the underdog wins then the rake is $8 at matchbook still vs. $60-150 at betfair now.

The farther away from even odds, the .8%* vs. 2-5% difference gets even larger.


*depending on sport/type

good point heyman

but the point I have been arguing and was told was 'nonsense' was quite specific and this is not really relevant to it

[heyman]

good point heyman

but the point I have been arguing and was told was 'nonsense' was quite specific and this is not really relevant to it

I don't remember what the original point was, I'm taking it into a direction and expanding it into a general matchbook vs. betfair discussion to highlight matchbook's commission structure.

[Hareeba!]

I don't remember what the original point was, I'm taking it into a direction and expanding it into a general matchbook vs. betfair discussion to highlight matchbook's commission structure.

basically that to simply say the comparison of 5% v 1% is an erroneous exaggeration of the advantage at MB, particularly when accepting offers

[lukahh]

basically that to simply say the comparison of 5% v 1% is an erroneous exaggeration of the advantage at MB, particularly when accepting offers

ok. yes. it is not 5% vs 1%. and no need to worry about someone's "nonsense" rant.

but Heyman has a point - MB charging commission on lesser win/risk makes it overall much more attracitve, even for accepting offers and even if Betfair charges you 3%. and there is no premium charge looming.

Hareeba, would you also agree on estimate of 1 mio usd matched per big4 usa sport game? is there any way to know?

if MB pulls in 0.8% of lesser win/risk of 1M, that is, i guess, sustainable and they net, say, 5k per game. but if they matched amount is more like couple hundred k, it may not be enough for sustainable business.

[KC]

From 4pm I had several progressive positions one point behind best offer. This game had over 50k positions in front of me. My estimate is based on number of times I was "swallowed" (seven!) and amounts offered. It never happened before to me, and I assume that volume was high because it was only game available on Sunday, beside NFL exhibition game.

Glad to hear they are doing so well, they are a tremendous book.

[Hareeba!]

ok. yes. it is not 5% vs 1%. and no need to worry about someone's "nonsense" rant.

but Heyman has a point - MB charging commission on lesser win/risk makes it overall much more attracitve, even for accepting offers and even if Betfair charges you 3%. and there is no premium charge looming.

Hareeba, would you also agree on estimate of 1 mio usd matched per big4 usa sport game? is there any way to know?

if MB pulls in 0.8% of lesser win/risk of 1M, that is, i guess, sustainable and they net, say, 5k per game. but if they matched amount is more like couple hundred k, it may not be enough for sustainable business.

sorry, no idea on MB's turnover as (as far as I am aware) they don't disclose matched bets figures for each market like BF do

[gags]

I use Matchbook, Betfair and Pinnacle almost exclusively…(It’s great to be Canadian)
Let me discuss my thoughts on the two Betting exchanges, first…
Anybody who checks the odds out on MB and on BF can plainly see that the liquidity on Matchbook is proprietary.
Here’s an example -Watch the NFL Moneylines in Week 1. At Matchbook you will never have the ability to make money on a team that gets turned over midway through the game…if the Vikings are up 31-0 against Team X midway through the 2nd quarter, there won’t really be any betting opportunities on MB to make money from the Vikes. This is because the MB guys are accepting your bets. They have traders sitting there looking for opportunities to bet against you if they see an advantage. Just like the bookie, it’s not REAL In-play betting where you bet against others…
You will see way more opportunities at Betfair to make money in these types of situations and others. Of course some Betfair bettors have figured it out and will be waiting for you in the same way that the MB traders are waiting for you to place a bet at the wrong odds…
If a team is up by 31-0, bookies (or smart bettors) calculate a percentage of a comeback. The odds you see posted are derived from that percentage. The bookie adds their “juice” and that is the odd you see up on the board. What I’m trying to say is that most folks don’t go through all of the trouble of figuring this out and will simply place the bet at whatever odds they see on the board (within reason of course).
So “proprietary” in this sense means that you are betting against MB bookies not against other gamblers. Ffor the most part you are betting against others like you on Betfair not against sharps or bookies.
I use Pinnacle because the odds are sometimes better than the exchanges. Both Pinny and Betfair are like a bank. I think MB is based in Curacao and I heard that the owner is someplace in Vancouver – maybe he even runs it from there – not sure. Anyway, I don’t keep large sums in MB and I have bet limits at Pinny. No limits at BF, and my account will never be closed down if I win there.

[Hareeba!]

[quote=gags;6048069] the liquidity on Matchbook is proprietary.

This is because the MB guys are accepting your bets. They have traders sitting there looking for opportunities to bet against you if they see an advantage. Just like the bookie, it’s not REAL In-play betting where you bet against others…

you are betting against MB bookies not against other gamblers./quote]

If you are correct with those observations then there must be heightened risk at MB because it is not simply risk free commissions they are relying on for their earnings

[bubba]

. This is because the MB guys are accepting your bets. They have traders sitting there looking for opportunities to bet against you if they see an advantage. Just like the bookie, it’s not REAL In-play betting where you bet against others…[/COLOR][/FONT]
[



how do you know this??????

[heyman]

Anybody who checks the odds out on MB and on BF can plainly see that the liquidity on Matchbook is proprietary.

What?

Here’s an example -Watch the NFL Moneylines in Week 1. At Matchbook you will never have the ability to make money on a team that gets turned over midway through the game…if the Vikings are up 31-0 against Team X midway through the 2nd quarter, there won’t really be any betting opportunities on MB to make money from the Vikes. This is because the MB guys are accepting your bets[/B]. They have traders sitting there looking for opportunities to bet against you if they see an advantage.[B] Just like the bookie, it’s not REAL In-play betting where you bet against others…

How could you possibly know this?

You will see way more opportunities at Betfair to make money in these types of situations and others. Of course some Betfair bettors have figured it out and will be waiting for you in the same way that the MB traders are waiting for you to place a bet at the wrong odds…

So now you say its matchbook traders and betfair traders.

If a team is up by 31-0, bookies (or smart bettors) calculate a percentage of a comeback. The odds you see posted are derived from that percentage. The bookie adds their “juice” and that is the odd you see up on the board. What I’m trying to say is that most folks don’t go through all of the trouble of figuring this out and will simply place the bet at whatever odds they see on the board (within reason of course).
So “proprietary” in this sense means that you are betting against MB bookies not against other gamblers. Ffor the most part you are betting against others like you on Betfair not against sharps or bookies.

So the first paragraph is a random and obvious tangent. Then you conclude that you're betting against MB itself?

[heyman]

ok. yes. it is not 5% vs 1%. and no need to worry about someone's "nonsense" rant.

but Heyman has a point - MB charging commission on lesser win/risk makes it overall much more attracitve, even for accepting offers and even if Betfair charges you 3%. and there is no premium charge looming.

Hareeba, would you also agree on estimate of 1 mio usd matched per big4 usa sport game? is there any way to know?

if MB pulls in 0.8% of lesser win/risk of 1M, that is, i guess, sustainable and they net, say, 5k per game. but if they matched amount is more like couple hundred k, it may not be enough for sustainable business.

Why would that not be sustainable? I already postulated earlier about Matchbook's very low operating costs.

[-105]

I don't care who puts bets up just as long as they pay.

[lukahh]

RE exchanges joining the action:
could be. who knows? i have no experience with betfair multiple-bet, but this could be an instance where exchange acts at least somewhat like a bookie. but then - i guess multiples are most profitable bets for bookies, as their juice multiplies. i would say however that vast majority of betfair trades are between their funded customers.

matchbook - who knows? only safe assumption i dare make is that the percentage of trades where both sides are funded customer is lower than betfair's. don't know to what extent though. anyone making this assumption (like gags) should provide some reasoning.

[hhsilver]

good point heyman

but the point I have been arguing and was told was 'nonsense' was quite specific and this is not really relevant to it

Quite specific? It was extremely specific and nowhere near an example of results for a typical player.
100 bets all at +100 , all from accepting offers , w/l = 50/50 .

the "apples and oranges" came from the fact that betfair and matchbook have very different commission rules and you chose to try to compare them with one extremely unlikely case not taking the lesser of risk/win into account. Of course lesser of risk/win doesn't apply to your example of ALL plays at +100.

ok. yes. it is not 5% vs 1%. and no need to worry about someone's "nonsense" rant......

Please read what I wrote. It's hardly a rant.

[Hareeba!]

Quite specific? It was extremely specific and nowhere near an example of results for a typical player.
100 bets all at +100 , all from accepting offers , w/l = 50/50 .

the "apples and oranges" came from the fact that betfair and matchbook have very different commission rules and you chose to try to compare them with one extremely unlikely case not taking the lesser of risk/win into account. Of course lesser of risk/win doesn't apply to your example of ALL plays at +100.



Please read what I wrote. It's hardly a rant.

the degree of specific is irrelevant
of course the example wasn't typical of what a player would bet but for the purpose of demonstrating a point it is perfectly valid
I've already conceded several times that Befair is more expensive than Matchbook
But the difference is not in the order of 1% or 0.8% v 5% which is all I was attempting to demonstrate - it is significantly less than that

[Odessa]

the degree of specific is irrelevant
of course the example wasn't typical of what a player would bet but for the purpose of demonstrating a point it is perfectly valid
I've already conceded several times that Befair is more expensive than Matchbook
But the difference is not in the order of 1% or 0.8% v 5% which is all I was attempting to demonstrate - it is significantly less than that

Maximum commission at Matchbook is 1%, you can NEVER go above 1%! Not 1.1% not 1.001%. And that Maximum of 1% you can only reach if you ONLY accept all your wagers. In reality, you accept 50% of your bets and 50% of the time your offers get accepted.

Therefore, you are wrong! It's 0.5% vs 5% and only if you exclude baseball, but if you bet only on baseball than it's 0.4% vs 5%. YES! More than 10 times less than at Betfair.

And that also excludes the fact that Matchbook takes the lower of to-win/risk amount while Betfair takes the to-win amount by default since they charge on the winnings. I hope that I'm clear in my explanation. Thank you.

[Hareeba!]

Maximum commission at Matchbook is 1%, you can NEVER go above 1%! Not 1.1% not 1.001%. And that Maximum of 1% you can only reach if you ONLY accept all your wagers. In reality, you accept 50% of your bets and 50% of the time your offers get accepted.

Therefore, you are wrong! It's 0.5% vs 5% and only if you exclude baseball, but if you bet only on baseball than it's 0.4% vs 5%. YES! More than 10 times less than at Betfair.

And that also excludes the fact that Matchbook takes the lower of to-win/risk amount while Betfair takes the to-win amount by default since they charge on the winnings. I hope that I'm clear in my explanation. Thank you.

Yes I am fully aware that the max comm at MB is 1%
I am also aware that you have not been paying attention to what I've been saying

Betfair's commission ranges from 2% to 5% on WINS ONLY
So it is simply incorrect to say that MB's 1% on EVERY BET equates Betfair's 5%
Obviously it is not absolutely correct due to a number of variables but it would be closer to the mark to say that MB's comm (on accepting offers) is effectively closer to 2% on your wins than 1% (i.e. an apples with apples comparison.)
Or, if you prefer MB's 1% works out closer to BF's 2.5% max.

Bottom line - overall BF's comm. isn't five times MB's

[lukahh]

ok. i think everyone is right here.
if you are only making offers on MB vs being newbie at Betfair, your effective comission can theoretically be (10+)x less than at BF. and if you are low comission @ BF, you can theoretically pay way less than 10x more, perhaps less than 2x more than MB.

a thought of MB sustainability occurs... suppose they have 0.5M average matched on 100 games per month. that means effective comission, say, 0.3-0.4%, which is, say, 150-200k net per month. is that enough to cover the bottom line?