Don't Let Matchbook Die!

[vanzack]

I think with what they can earn from a rec compared to the cost of taking them it´s just not worth offering other methods just to attract this category. I mean, how many 10 dollar bets are needed to make a difference financially?

I actually can´t see it would make a big difference the liquidity either.

I have also thought this to be a possibility.

That they just have made a conscious decision to NOT welcome rec gamblers because of the cost / profit model.

But on the other hand, rec gambler make for activity, even if it is 10 dollars at a time. I wish they would offer the service of ** or ** and just pass the cost on to the consumer, and let them make the choice.

Also, it is very hard to believe that they DONT want rec gamblers to deposit, but at the same time only offer a 3k max withdrawal. How does that reconcile? On the one hand, we want big bettors, but if you are a big bettor we dont have an efficient way for you to get paid. I realize that regulations have made all of this fluid and discombobulated, but this has to be an issue that they address - either make it easier for recs to deposit, or make it easier for bigger bettors to withdraw - the current formula doesnt suit anyone.

[HedgeHog]

MB is cutting it's own throat by not allowing **/** deposits. The only way I can get $$$ there is by B2B transfers. Poorly run Book.

[vanzack]

Serious question... How much money are you looking to deposit via ** or **?

It is not for me.

But it is the #1 reason I see people NOT post up at MB. I see it all the time.

I really dont know how much someone would want to deposit via ** or **, but I do know that all (I think all) other books offer it, so it must be popular.

[vanzack]

I also think that MB needs to switch back to their old commission structure, which was 2% on all winning wagers, NET of any trading done on that market.

This alone I believe is responsible for the sharp drop in liquidity.

You can no longer trade a market and pay a commission based on your profit. If you buy a position for 1,000 and sell it for 1,010, you pay about 10 bucks in commission (which eats up your profit) instead of the old way which was you would pay 20 cents (2% of 10 bucks).

It is the single biggest thing IMO that MB could do to increase liquidity immediately.

[CrimsonQueen]

This is another major problem that contributes to the lack of liquidity at MB.

-Because of the no commission on offers, everybody wants to make an offer and nobody wants to take them.

-Nobody wants to make offers until the line is as accurate as its going to be (right before game time) because they know that their early offer is likely only going to get accepted if the line moves against them.

-Its hard to get offers in late because MB has given their API out to so many people who have developed bots to buy and fill offers the second the line has moved.

-When making offers you run the risk of not getting your offer filled or only part of it filled, so assume I am a kelly bettor and I want to get down 5% of my bankroll on a play but only half of my offer gets matched I would have had more long term growth of my bankroll by betting 5% of my roll at a higher price than betting 2.5% of my roll at the exchange price.

I like matchbook but a lot of things need to change in order for them to get the volume that betfair has.

-Change the commission structure in order to encourage egual trading.
-Offer more funding and withdrawal methods to make it easier for players to move funds.
-Eliminate situations of players taking shots (i.e. leaving an under total of 198 hanging in live betting when the total score is currently 205)

Very well put. I like Matchbook, but it has so many issues that I just can't rely on it.

[KGambler]

It is not for me.

But it is the #1 reason I see people NOT post up at MB. I see it all the time.

I really dont know how much someone would want to deposit via ** or **, but I do know that all (I think all) other books offer it, so it must be popular.

The only reason books can offer this option is because their vig is so onerous.

Matchbook could pass the costs on to the customer, but I can't see too many squares understanding that it would be to their benefit to wire $200 and only wind up with $185 in their account (is that an accurate guess of what ** would charge???). They are too dumb to realize how much money they are flushing down the toilet by betting into -110 lines.

How many of these $200 depositors would they need to make it worth their while to offer this option? I don't think they could get enough of them, because there are too many dumbasses who don't understand why MB charges fees for things like cutting a check.

[KGambler]

MB is cutting it's own throat by not allowing **/** deposits. The only way I can get $$$ there is by B2B transfers. Poorly run Book.

Very poorly run book...

But you can use electronic checks and bank wires to fund your account. You just have to plan ahead, because it take up to 2 weeks to clear.

[Ibrakadabra]

I can understand having a problem with the exchange rate if they aren't giving a fair one. Getting charged fees for that is ridiculous. They should be accomodating to their customers, not looking for another area to bang them for commissions.

Everyone in the world is forced to worry about the "change of relative value of your currency". Oh wait, everyone in the world WHO HAS MONEY has to worry about it.

If the dollar goes up against the Euro, you will have gained on that small portion of your wealth you keep on Matchbook. If it goes down, you will have lost. You should be hedged against a fall in the Euro anyway. It would actually help you to have some portion of your wealth in dollars. That way you can worry less about the "change of relative value of your currency". This is like investment 101 - diversification.

Of course, the dollar is complete garbage so you would be much better off diversifying into other currencies/commodities. But the euro is also trash, so putting a small portion of your wealth into dollars should be looked at as a positive, not a negative.

At least one major investment house has come out and said the euro will not even exist in the near future. I give it less than 10 years.

MB doesn´t charge for this, whoever does the transaction takes the currency conversion fee so there´s absolutely no way to get around it.

Since most people does most of their business in the currency used where they live the relative value of the currency has very little importance thinking short term (and I don´t plan to keep funds at bookmakers for 15 years). Prices just won´t change overnight because value change relative some other currency.

In theory you may have a point but in reality I think very few individuals with normal incomes care to spread their "wealth" in different currencies to be protected...

[vanzack]

The only reason books can offer this option is because their vig is so onerous.

Matchbook could pass the costs on to the customer, but I can't see too many squares understanding that it would be to their benefit to wire $200 and only wind up with $185 in their account (is that an accurate guess of what ** would charge???). They are too dumb to realize how much money they are flushing down the toilet by betting into -110 lines.

How many of these $200 depositors would they need to make it worth their while to offer this option? I don't think they could get enough of them, because there are too many dumbasses who don't understand why MB charges fees for things like cutting a check.

I understand, but if this is the case, I still dont understand the following.....

Also, it is very hard to believe that they DONT want rec gamblers to deposit, but at the same time only offer a 3k max withdrawal. How does that reconcile? On the one hand, we want big bettors, but if you are a big bettor we dont have an efficient way for you to get paid. I realize that regulations have made all of this fluid and discombobulated, but this has to be an issue that they address - either make it easier for recs to deposit, or make it easier for bigger bettors to withdraw - the current formula doesnt suit anyone.

[KGambler]

I also think that MB needs to switch back to their old commission structure, which was 2% on all winning wagers, NET of any trading done on that market.

This alone I believe is responsible for the sharp drop in liquidity.

You can no longer trade a market and pay a commission based on your profit. If you buy a position for 1,000 and sell it for 1,010, you pay about 10 bucks in commission (which eats up your profit) instead of the old way which was you would pay 20 cents (2% of 10 bucks).

It is the single biggest thing IMO that MB could do to increase liquidity immediately.

I agree with this completely. I really think going back to the old rules would increase liquidity.

I will also add that the old way is less complicated and more easily understood. Some people are confused by the new rules.

Also, as someone already mentioned, people don't want to be the one to ACCEPT an offer. They always want the other guy to pay the comission.

[vanzack]

I agree with this completely. I really think going back to the old rules would increase liquidity.

I will also add that the old way is less complicated and more easily understood. Some people are confused by the new rules.

Also, as someone already mentioned, people don't want to be the one to ACCEPT an offer. They always want the other guy to pay the comission.

Add to this that MB never updated their software to report to you if a matched wager was offered or accepted - in other words - if you have a bunch of wagers - you have no idea (unless you keep track yourself) if you are paying commission or not.

Other little things like not being able to offer more than your balance, and just when your balance is accepted, cancel any outstanding offers would greatly increase liquidity.

As far as the commission structure - I cant tell you how much the change to the new structure affected the way I use MB. In the old days, I had offers out all over the place because there was less risk of getting stuck. If I bought the Rangers at -137, my breakeven point was +137 on the other side. Now, my breakeven point is roughly +139, so I need a 2 point line move just to break even. Needless to tsay, the liquidity that I offered previously is not possible today. And I have yet to understand how MB comes out any worse on this deal, in fact, they should benefit from increased transactions.

[HedgeHog]

Very poorly run book...

But you can use electronic checks and bank wires to fund your account. You just have to plan ahead, because it take up to 2 weeks to clear.

Not comfortable giving MB my bank info smartass. BTW, what legit Book doesn't accept ** or **?

[KGambler]

MB doesn´t charge for this, whoever does the transaction takes the currency conversion fee so there´s absolutely no way to get around it.

Help me to understand the issue, because as an American I don't have experience depositing with books which use a "foreign" currency... They just don't allow us now

You want MB to accept deposits in euros, and offer seperate markets denominated in euros?

Or you want MB to accept the deposit in euros and put an "equivalent" amount of dollars in your account? And then when you withdraw they pay you in euros based upon the exchange rate at that time?

Or you deposit in euros and you can bet in the dollar markets, but everytime your account is credited (for example, you win a bet) you get an equivalent amount of euros?

Since most people does most of their business in the currency used where they live the relative value of the currency has very little importance thinking short term (and I don´t plan to keep funds at bookmakers for 15 years). Prices just won´t change overnight because value change relative some other currency.

In theory you may have a point but in reality I think very few individuals with normal incomes care to spread their "wealth" in different currencies to be protected...

This is mostly true, especially when currencies are relatively stable. Obviously you will see increases in the price of something like gasoline (petrol?) when your currency loses value. Every business and manufacturer will experience an associated increase in costs, but most businesses won't necesarrily pass the costs on to the consumer.

But that happens when there are major shifts in a currency's value? What happens when hyper-inflation hits? This is why many countries are forced to subsidize the price of gasoline, food, etc. And this is what will happen in the UK, Europe and the US. None of these entities has any hope whatsoever of paying their debts without degrading their currencies. When the euro really starts losing value, you will notice a significant decrease in your purchasing power and your standard of living. Filling up your car's gas tank will be a whole different experience. You will pay way more than you ever had to before.

[FourLengthsClear]

Any exchange needs market makers and a ready supply of recreational bettors.

MBs commission structure does not encourage market makers/traders.
Restrictions do not attract the recreational bettors

Putting up offers which are marginal (say -101 each side) leaves a potential market makers vulnerable to even a moderate line movement. On an exchange like Betfair it is not a major issue because you have enough action on both sides to absorb such a 'loss'.

At present the ratio of smart money to dumb money at Matchbook is too high.

[KGambler]

Not comfortable giving MB my bank info smartass. BTW, what legit Book doesn't accept ** or **?

What bank info?

For an electronic check you must give your account number, the routing number of your bank and a check number. You know, the EXACT same information which is printed on the face of every personal check you have ever given someone. What is so scary about that?

Why are people so paranoid? Have you ever bought anything with a check? With a credit card?

[d2bets]

Add to this that MB never updated their software to report to you if a matched wager was offered or accepted - in other words - if you have a bunch of wagers - you have no idea (unless you keep track yourself) if you are paying commission or not.

Other little things like not being able to offer more than your balance, and just when your balance is accepted, cancel any outstanding offers would greatly increase liquidity.

As far as the commission structure - I cant tell you how much the change to the new structure affected the way I use MB. In the old days, I had offers out all over the place because there was less risk of getting stuck. If I bought the Rangers at -137, my breakeven point was +137 on the other side. Now, my breakeven point is roughly +139, so I need a 2 point line move just to break even. Needless to tsay, the liquidity that I offered previously is not possible today. And I have yet to understand how MB comes out any worse on this deal, in fact, they should benefit from increased transactions.

I suppose they could come out worse under your suggestion. They could have people, sort of like what you're suggesting, wagering large on +137 and then coming all the way back at -135 to make a little profit. If they charge only a small % on net win, then their commission is small. However, if they charge on every trade you made back and forth on the market, then they do much much better. It's also a more certain commission for them. You could do hundreds of thousands of trades on a market, but you may end up with a breakeven either way situation....no commission. Of course, the other guy may not, but it might be hard to predict. It is certainly clearer for the player, but maybe not for MB. They could end up with a lot of trades on a market, but have a lot of near breakevens and no commission. Under their current system, they know that they make comission on every single trade, without fail.

That said, I'd like the old system back too.

[HedgeHog]

What bank info?

For an electronic check you must give your account number, the routing number of your bank and a check number. You know, the EXACT same information which is printed on the face of every personal check you have ever given someone. What is so scary about that?

Why are people so paranoid? Have you ever bought anything with a check? With a credit card?

Some of us are careful with our banking and CC info. Besides, waiting 2 weeks for a deposit to clear? Get with the 21st century, buddy!

[KGambler]

I understand, but if this is the case, I still dont understand the following.....

Also, it is very hard to believe that they DONT want rec gamblers to deposit, but at the same time only offer a 3k max withdrawal. How does that reconcile? On the one hand, we want big bettors, but if you are a big bettor we dont have an efficient way for you to get paid. I realize that regulations have made all of this fluid and discombobulated, but this has to be an issue that they address - either make it easier for recs to deposit, or make it easier for bigger bettors to withdraw - the current formula doesnt suit anyone.

For US gamblers, the max for checks is $3K per DAY. Yes, it is dumb for them to send a bunch of $3K checks, but they are morons. So you can take out $21K a week.

You can do interbook transfers for tens of thousand of dollars. I realize this is not a withdrawal though.

If you are not based in the US, you can use Neteller and **********. It looks like you can do about $20K a week through those.

[Hareeba!]

Some of us are careful with our banking and CC info. Besides, waiting 2 weeks for a deposit to clear? Get with the 21st century, buddy!

so careful that you don't even issue personal cheques for fear of someone seeing your bank account number?

the only thing they can do with that is deposit money into your account

I'm quite happy to give mine out to the whole world and see how much I can collect

[KGambler]

Some of us are careful with our banking and CC info.

So what do you do with personal check and credit cards then? Hide them in a safe so nobody will ever see your account numbers?

[vanzack]

I suppose they could come out worse under your suggestion. They could have people, sort of like what you're suggesting, wagering large on +137 and then coming all the way back at -135 to make a little profit. If they charge only a small % on net win, then their commission is small. However, if they charge on every trade you made back and forth on the market, then they do much much better. It's also a more certain commission for them. You could do hundreds of thousands of trades on a market, but you may end up with a breakeven either way situation....no commission. Of course, the other guy may not, but it might be hard to predict. It is certainly clearer for the player, but maybe not for MB. They could end up with a lot of trades on a market, but have a lot of near breakevens and no commission. Under their current system, they know that they make comission on every single trade, without fail.

That said, I'd like the old system back too.

I dont think that is right - the part about them potentially not making money on a given market.

If I bet the Rangers at -137, somebody bet the Mariners at +137. Lets say that was for 1k. Now if I end up betting the Mariners at +139 for 1k, somebody else has bet the Rangers at -137.

**So we end up with (under old commission structure):

Me: owing 2 % on about 10 bucks.
Person A or Person B: owes 2% on their 1k bet, person A if Rangers win, person B if Mariners win.

**Under current commission structure, it would look like:

Me: Owed by MB .2% of about 2370 (43 cents)
Person A: 1% of 1k (10 bucks)
Person B: 1% of 1k (10 bucks)

**End result is 19.57 under current structure, and 20.20 under old structure in commission for MB.

Am I missing something?

I just cant see how the exponential growth in liquidity that they would see by switching back would be outweighed by any negatives. But maybe I am missing something.

[Ibrakadabra]

Help me to understand the issue, because as an American I don't have experience depositing with books which use a "foreign" currency... They just don't allow us now

You want MB to accept deposits in euros, and offer seperate markets denominated in euros?

Or you want MB to accept the deposit in euros and put an "equivalent" amount of dollars in your account? And then when you withdraw they pay you in euros based upon the exchange rate at that time?

Or you deposit in euros and you can bet in the dollar markets, but everytime your account is credited (for example, you win a bet) you get an equivalent amount of euros?

Issue: The value of what I deposit will change beyond my control every day. I get involved in currency speculation which I don´t like. And again, for every deposit or withdrawal about 2% just disappears for conversion.

Solution: The way Betfair do it. Everyone bets in their on currency on the same market. Currency speculation is on their part.

This is mostly true, especially when currencies are relatively stable. Obviously you will see increases in the price of something like gasoline (petrol?) when your currency loses value. Every business and manufacturer will experience an associated increase in costs, but most businesses won't necesarrily pass the costs on to the consumer.

But that happens when there are major shifts in a currency's value? What happens when hyper-inflation hits? This is why many countries are forced to subsidize the price of gasoline, food, etc. And this is what will happen in the UK, Europe and the US. None of these entities has any hope whatsoever of paying their debts without degrading their currencies. When the euro really starts losing value, you will notice a significant decrease in your purchasing power and your standard of living. Filling up your car's gas tank will be a whole different experience. You will pay way more than you ever had to before.

I think you are moving the boundaries of the discussion to a place where it´s getting absurd, considering where it started. But sure, if you think it´s a good idea to fund bookmakers in different currencies to be protected for higher fuel costs it´s up to you. I just don´t think too many others will and I´ll leave it like that.

[vanzack]

For US gamblers, the max for checks is $3K per DAY. Yes, it is dumb for them to send a bunch of $3K checks, but they are morons. So you can take out $21K a week.

You can do interbook transfers for tens of thousand of dollars. I realize this is not a withdrawal though.

If you are not based in the US, you can use Neteller and **********. It looks like you can do about $20K a week through those.

The key word I used was "efficient".

If you are betting 10K a game, and that is who they want to attract, I doubt the above qualifies as efficient (for Amercians).

[HedgeHog]

So what do you do with personal check and credit cards then? Hide them in a safe so nobody will ever see your account numbers?

I use them with places I trust. I have never used my CC with any sportsbook. Ever hear of Identity theft? B2B and money transfer is the way I deposit, period.

[vanzack]

I use them with places I trust. I have never used my CC with any sportsbook. Ever hear of Identity theft? B2B and money transfer is the way I deposit, period.

I think instead of arguing with this mentality, it would be smarter to accept that this exact sentiment is a big part of the marketplace and figuring out a way to service it.

There are people that do **'s and **'s ONLY, and they dont bet at MB. To me, that is a problem.

[HedgeHog]

so careful that you don't even issue personal cheques for fear of someone seeing your bank account number?

the only thing they can do with that is deposit money into your account

I'm quite happy to give mine out to the whole world and see how much I can collect

I'm talking about depositing. That's where the Book "takes" money out of your account. Get the concept?

[KGambler]

I think you are moving the boundaries of the discussion to a place where it´s getting absurd, considering where it started. But sure, if you think it´s a good idea to fund bookmakers in different currencies to be protected for higher fuel costs it´s up to you. I just don´t think too many others will and I´ll leave it like that.

Most people are financially illiterate, refuse to put the least bit of effort into planning ahead and will have missed my point completely.

I'll leave it at that.

[Hareeba!]

I'm talking about depositing. That's where the Book "takes" money out of your account. Get the concept?

no, i'd never allow that and never heard of any book asking for the ability to do that

but I have several books which deposit my withdrawals from them into my account and have no fear of allowing that .. they don't have any ability to withdraw from the account

[HedgeHog]

I think instead of arguing with this mentality, it would be smarter to accept that this exact sentiment is a big part of the marketplace and figuring out a way to service it.

There are people that do **'s and **'s ONLY, and they dont bet at MB. To me, that is a problem.

Agree. I have no prob getting money in and out of MB. My point is that the average Joe can't use money transfer with MB and that's the most popular method to fund. It has to be hurting them.

[KGambler]

The key word I used was "efficient".

If you are betting 10K a game, and that is who they want to attract, I doubt the above qualifies as efficient (for Amercians).

Many books do not have an "efficient" way to withdraw large sums of money. Back when they had a popular poker room, I once withdrew $60K from Bodog. The first FedEx I received contained 9 checks for $3K a piece. Only later did I receive the balance with some larger checks (I guess they got tired of cutting checks and wised up).

So yes, they are clowns when it comes to providing withdrawals. If you want to withdraw $21K, you have to request a $3K check for 7 straight days.

How does this mean they should be taking $200 money grams though?

If those people want, they can use a $200 electronic check, which will not cost them a cent. But it will take 2 weeks.

[Sawyer]

Of course, the dollar is complete garbage so you would be much better off diversifying into other currencies/commodities. But the euro is also trash, so putting a small portion of your wealth into dollars should be looked at as a positive, not a negative.

.

Dollar is garbage? Are you serious? All my betting accounts are $.

Dollar is USA Currency.

USA = Supreme Power if you don't know.

China is a joke, lol.

[Sawyer]

Once again, I ask the question....

Why wont MB offer rec gamblers a way to deposit?

I mean true rec gamblers, not message board rec gamblers. Guys that want to deposit NOW.

If MB offered ** or ** (even charging the player for the costs), liquidity wouldnt be a problem.

Guys, there's no problem with funding Matchbook. There's too many options. Credit Card, Bank Transfer, Interbook Transfer. Simply transfer your funds from another book to Matchbook.That's it.

But withdrawls take a little bit long but still I think it's worth of it. Every rose has its torn you know. It's not important for me to receive a check in 3 days or 14 days..as long as I receive it.

[vanzack]

Many books do not have an "efficient" way to withdraw large sums of money. Back when they had a popular poker room, I once withdrew $60K from Bodog. The first FedEx I received contained 9 checks for $3K a piece. Only later did I receive the balance with some larger checks (I guess they got tired of cutting checks and wised up).

So yes, they are clowns when it comes to providing withdrawals. If you want to withdraw $21K, you have to request a $3K check for 7 straight days.

How does this mean they should be taking $200 money grams though?

If those people want, they can use a $200 electronic check, which will not cost them a cent. But it will take 2 weeks.

Books that allow larger wagers, and want to attract larger wagerers, DO have efficient ways to withdraw large sums of money. For example, Greek and Bookmaker both have bank wire withdrawal methods, both I believe are unlimited.

Look, my point is simple, and believe me it is an issue. If MB doesnt want the 200 dollar deposits, they should concentrate on offering the most efficient way to deposit and withdraw large amounts. IMO, they seem to be in the middle ground that doesnt really help anyone.

I probably dont need to explain to you the risk, cost, and longterm non-viability of receiving a 3k check every day of the week. It doesnt work.

[vanzack]

Guys, there's no problem with funding Matchbook. There's too many options. Credit Card, Bank Transfer, Interbook Transfer. Simply transfer your funds from another book to Matchbook.That's it.

But withdrawls take a little bit long but still I think it's worth of it. Every rose has its torn you know. It's not important for me to receive a check in 3 days or 14 days..as long as I receive it.

Sawyer -

In any discussion about the lack of liquidity, there are always replies (like in this thread) that MB doesnt offer the guy who wants to deposit NOW any options.

I think that you are ignoring this large section of people in favor of trying to educate them, which I dont think is working. I dont think you are going to convince the ** depositors in this thread to change course and suddenly do a bank wire or B to B transfer.

So if you are suggesting to just ignore a slice of the betting population, liquidity might suffer. IMO, it is a major reason it suffers, along with other things posted in this thread. But to try and use a blunt force object to prove that these people are somehow wrong doesnt improve liquidity at MB.

[gafl]

Exchange betting is still new to USA bettors. **/** would be a plus for depositing. Big or small bettors all add to the liquidity and the more deposit options the better. Also agree with going back to the old commission rate.