Smarkets begins closing successful accounts

Locked
Boing
Posts: 134
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 4:06 pm

James, you didn't deny you were an arber, so we can assume you are then by the look of it. So it's not really surprising to see a company who has to provide liquidity stopping people from picking off prices. There is nothing weird about that really is there?

I don't see this as a PR disaster for smarkets, you have one individual who has obviously threatened to cause a stink if he was denied a chance to pick off a counter-party, trying to create as much negative publicity as possible during a time of the year when smarkets probably don't have the ability to respond. Tis the season of goodwill.

It's a PR win for Betfair though who can do what they like and get away with it. Shame you don't have as much vigor for Betfair who have taken so much money off their customers with one shocking decision after another.

I hadn't really been interested in smarkets but signed up anyway after reading this thread. I seriously doubt they will turn away good business.
Boing
Posts: 134
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 4:06 pm

Hmm, that sounds a bit harsh, but I'm hoping people see my point? The thread title is misleading as well?
Iron
Posts: 6793
Joined: Fri Dec 11, 2009 10:51 pm

Boing -

Not at all - it's good to hear an alternative perspective.

I see your point, but it sounds like Smarkets is not a place where winners are welcome long-term (although that may change if they eventually attract enough losers into the ecosystem).

BTW, I don't blame you for opening an Smarkets account. The worst that can happen is that Smarkets show you the door in a few months' time, after you've made lots of money. :)

I agree that the thread title is misleading, given that they've only closed one successful account that we know of.

Jeff
Boing wrote:Hmm, that sounds a bit harsh, but I'm hoping people see my point? The thread title is misleading as well?
spreadbetting
Posts: 3140
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 8:06 pm

Boing wrote:James, you didn't deny you were an arber, so we can assume you are then by the look of it. So it's not really surprising to see a company who has to provide liquidity stopping people from picking off prices. There is nothing weird about that really is there?
I'd have thought even traders would ultimately be taking money off the market makers so why the continual harping on about arbers as if they're scum of the earth :)

On an exchange if that liquidity is being offered up why the problem if it's taken. Do you really assume the market makers will allow those out of line prices to remain up for 'mug' punters to take, thereby increasing smarkets userbase, do you also assume once those prices are gone that no one will be there to fill the gap and provide liquidity for that runner at the new current price? Exchanges kind of find their own levels of activity just like flutter and betfair did in the early days, how you can condone smarkets banning accounts for winning or giving overly preferential treatment to 2 or 3 players is beyond me.

Either way as far as I can see smarkets have been given written authority by James to discuss their reasons for the ban so surely it's down to them to clear things up if they feel James is being economical with the truth.
james19
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 7:30 pm

I'm not an arber. Actually the boss of Smarkets told me that he welcomes the turnover that arbers generate.

I use statistical models for the basis of my picks. The P/L snapshot I provided showed a negative fortnight, but the long term trajectory is up, although it's by no means a smooth line. I sometimes green if the market shifts from an overly pessimistic to an overly optimistic number, but this is quite rare.

I stopped greening out completely at Smarkets after management requested that I refrain from doing so, and I understood their predicament.

However from there the goalposts started to shift and management began complaining about pretty much any type of trade that could be construed as +EV. I would have happily discussed a mutually beneficial deal if one was clearly stated, but the feedback from management was very vague. They basically said in a round about way that you can stay but you can only enter the market if the odds are good for the maker, and once you enter you can't exit.

I believe that the guys behind Smarkets are smart and honest, and are probably the best entrepreneurial hope we have of mounting a challenge to Betfair's dominance in the near future. Unfortunately in this case however, their decision has resulted in me plowing tens of thousands of pounds worth of liquidity right back into the Betfair ecosystem.
haichless
Posts: 125
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 5:04 pm

James can I ask if you are placing money on statistical evidence, and basically dont green/red out much as you state, why you have not put some of the money into betdaq, you can get better prices sometimes, and if you arent really trading liquidity isnt an issue.
Number of markets cant be an issue otherwise you wouldnt have been at smarkets rather than betunfair.

Surely you can operate in a secondary supplier like daq more closely to the way you did at smarkets than at unfair.
Just curious, and confused, or maybe im just being a bit blonde.
freddy
Posts: 1132
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 8:22 pm

Boing wrote: I hadn't really been interested in smarkets but signed up anyway after reading this thread. I seriously doubt they will turn away good business.
Now I must admit i have a bit of a hangover this morning :? but even if i hadn't i'm pretty sure this would still be fairly hard for me to get my head around.

You've never been interested in Smarkets before, but now You've opened a account because of what you have read in this thread ???.

I know there is the saying that all publicity is good publicity but even so :? .

each to their own i suppose,
But at the end of the day they DO close winning accounts.

So Please if you do use them just make sure don't Green up against their market makers A.K.A lose Money :lol:
james19
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 7:30 pm

They DO indeed close winning accounts, but they have a hard time publicly admitting that, hence the 18 page thread.
james19
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 7:30 pm

I'm getting bored waiting for a pragmatic management response to the elephant in the room.

Hmmmm....

Perhaps they're content to emulate the model of Skybet, but if they hold out any hopes of a £500m+ IPO any time in the next decade then they will have to rethink their model and allow big players like myself back into the fold. :idea:
james19
Posts: 53
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 7:30 pm

Interesting to see that bookmakersreview.com have downgraded Smarkets rating as a result of this... Clearly people read these boards which is encouraging, as I had no contact with them myself.

http://www.bookmakersreview.com/bookmak ... ters/48018
Boing
Posts: 134
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 4:06 pm

james19 wrote:Interesting to see that bookmakersreview.com have downgraded Smarkets rating as a result of this... Clearly people read these boards which is encouraging, as I had no contact with them myself.

http://www.bookmakersreview.com/bookmak ... ters/48018
TBH James, I think you should quit while you are ahead. It's just looking like a cold blooded vendetta against smarkets with some loose edges.

You say you had no contact with SBR but the thread you started on their forum would seem to contradict this statement?

http://forum.sbrforum.com/sportsbooks-i ... ounts.html

Despite your many attempts to show up this company nobody else has come forward with the same complaint. So there is obviously something deeper going on here.

I'm not for or against smarkets as I only just started using them, but its obvious to me there is more to this that is being publically stated by either party
Boing
Posts: 134
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2012 4:06 pm

Here is my take on the situation.

James was doing something to exploit a flaw/loophole/characteristic in smarkets. They spotted this and told him to stop. He refused so they took the unusual step of closing his account.

He threated to trash them if they did this and cost them more money than they would lose by keeping his account open.

smarkets struggle to publically comment on the real detail because it would expose the flaw. So james is free to trash them knowing he wont get a response.

It's really no different from Betfair telling the clockbeaters to stop a few years ago. They were exploting a flaw in the model and Betfair had to move to stop it. They eventually did this by changing the way the exchange accepted bets. Betfair have probably 'banned' directly or in-directly many types of activity/accounts over the years.
Golfer
Posts: 137
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 10:45 pm

I agree with the majority in that there is more to this than meets the eye but price is price, market makers shouldn't offer a price/liquidity they are not willing to run.

James why not use a combination of Betdaq (as suggested) and Pinnacle (who frequently match/beat BF prices once comm is taken into account). You may have a smaller edge but you will be able to churn large amounts of money through.

Make a complaints to the relevant authority (if necessary) and keep us updated if anything changes but I do think you need to move on now as its becoming slightly whiny and repetitive.
spreadbetting
Posts: 3140
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 8:06 pm

If there's a flaw in your system you fix it and thank the person finding it, not ban them :D In the exchange world if one person spots a flaw it won't be long before another comes along shortly to exploit it also. Only flaw seems to be smarkets poor judgement of taking the advice of 2/3 market makers with their own agenda rather than allowing the market to find it's own level.

I'd agree with the comments for James to quit whilst ahead though, all this continual bumping of threads without anything new isn't going to change things. Smarkets should have followed the betfair PR method to start with and just said nothing as things like this always blow over. The only people interested are pretty much the only people you don't want on your exchange in the first place :?
haichless
Posts: 125
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 5:04 pm

tend to agree with boing,more to this than is being revealed especially as ive asked a number of questions (suggestions)to james in two posts and not received a reply to either.
Although I must say if betfair have been succesful in their move to beat clock beaters you could have fooled me. Trade some non uk football matches and it happens if not regularly,then more often than rarely.
Whilst their market position means they can ignore the protest of those cheated by this, other forums posts would suggest some liquidity is seeping away from betfair because of this issue.
Therefore I am not sure the betfair PR stance of say nothing is as succesful on problems as is suggested, at least smarkets responded in some way to the public as best they could which is preferable to the lousy customer service at betfair.
Locked

Return to “Alternative betting exchanges, Smarkets, Matchbook etc.”