I agree with many points from posts here. I think theres a marked difference between the casual punter and the exchange trader. They approach things differently and think differently. The casual punter is, after all, whether he likes it or not, part of the entertainment industry. Thats what, I believe, betting is.. entertainment. Thats the only reason Vegas exists and why they ban consistent winners. Punters arent supposed to win in the long run, their supposed to have a good time, and ultimately pay for the fun, thanks so much..
A trader is engaging in a transaction thats far more complex, and takes a lot more effort to be effective, its not for everyone certainly. The traders ultimate goal is not to have fun, but to eek out a profit, and perhaps even for some, a living. I have no idea how much profit Betfair make from the Exchange, I must assume its profitable or they wouldnt be doing it. I dont know exactly what would encourage a new player into this market. Betdaq have been there for years trying to take a slice of the market and seem to me to have largely struggled to make a mark on Betfairs dominance.... Maybe, as suggested, innovation is the key to success in this space, but again, I cannt see why the average Joe will ever be active on any exchange to begin with
Honest Joe betting exchange
Coming into this market from trading financial markets the solution always seemed really simple to me. Build an exchange that is based on pooling liquidity from a range of sources and focus on driving liquidity to that exchange. Liquidity would build and attract more competitive markets and punters who are traditionally excluded or better prices for your average Joe. Big punters could get on at decent prices and volume.
If punters felt they needed to bet into fractional odds on a sports book then come up with a skin to do that or support a third party that wanted to do that. Innovate, find solutions to problems.
I'm extremely disappointed that the industry isn't making the most of the opportunity, it will backfire on them you would think. Problem gambling isn't helped by driving people to high margin sportsbook and diverting them away from better products. There is a huge opportunity for somebody that wants to really attack the exchange model again. But you won't do that by mimicking existing models. You need to innovate from all angles.
I'd love to have the opportunity to really go at this space as I think the incumbents are way off track at the moment and you could easily pinch a lot of their business at little cost. I realise there are problems with the model, but all are solvable especially with a new entrant.
If punters felt they needed to bet into fractional odds on a sports book then come up with a skin to do that or support a third party that wanted to do that. Innovate, find solutions to problems.
I'm extremely disappointed that the industry isn't making the most of the opportunity, it will backfire on them you would think. Problem gambling isn't helped by driving people to high margin sportsbook and diverting them away from better products. There is a huge opportunity for somebody that wants to really attack the exchange model again. But you won't do that by mimicking existing models. You need to innovate from all angles.
I'd love to have the opportunity to really go at this space as I think the incumbents are way off track at the moment and you could easily pinch a lot of their business at little cost. I realise there are problems with the model, but all are solvable especially with a new entrant.
Problem is any entrants disruptive enough will have their edges quickly adopted.Euler wrote: ↑Sat Jun 15, 2019 1:18 pmComing into this market from trading financial markets the solution always seemed really simple to me. Build an exchange that is based on pooling liquidity from a range of sources and focus on driving liquidity to that exchange. Liquidity would build and attract more competitive markets and punters who are traditionally excluded or better prices for your average Joe. Big punters could get on at decent prices and volume.
If punters felt they needed to bet into fractional odds on a sports book then come up with a skin to do that or support a third party that wanted to do that. Innovate, find solutions to problems.
I'm extremely disappointed that the industry isn't making the most of the opportunity, it will backfire on them you would think. Problem gambling isn't helped by driving people to high margin sportsbook and diverting them away from better products. There is a huge opportunity for somebody that wants to really attack the exchange model again. But you won't do that by mimicking existing models. You need to innovate from all angles.
I'd love to have the opportunity to really go at this space as I think the incumbents are way off track at the moment and you could easily pinch a lot of their business at little cost. I realise there are problems with the model, but all are solvable especially with a new entrant.
You underestimate the malaise that afflicts established companies. I could easily come up with tactics that incumbents couldn't copy. You need a true disruptor.
Pitching an exchange by saying 'no premium charge' is pointless when so few people are on the higher rate. You appeal to a small three figure number of exchange users that need high liquidity markets. It's a pointless pitch.
Pitching an exchange by saying 'no premium charge' is pointless when so few people are on the higher rate. You appeal to a small three figure number of exchange users that need high liquidity markets. It's a pointless pitch.
Why not go for it then Peter? I'm sure you could muster up some investment. Might even be able to leverage your online presence to crowdfund. Hell, I'd definitely chip in with my 2 cents and moreEuler wrote: ↑Sat Jun 15, 2019 2:02 pmYou underestimate the malaise that afflicts established companies. I could easily come up with tactics that incumbents couldn't copy. You need a true disruptor.
Pitching an exchange by saying 'no premium charge' is pointless when so few people are on the higher rate. You appeal to a small three figure number of exchange users that need high liquidity markets. It's a pointless pitch.
That's where the contradiction comes in. If I'm involved on a daily basis the cost of me would kill a start up. I'd have to just be a non executive or advisor.
I've taken to trying to influence other exchanges, but they suffer from the same corporate malaise as Betfair. It just reminds me of working for a large corporate, a brick wall to bash your head against is definately a viable alternative.
I've taken to trying to influence other exchanges, but they suffer from the same corporate malaise as Betfair. It just reminds me of working for a large corporate, a brick wall to bash your head against is definately a viable alternative.
I agree Peter that the way forward is to be a true disrupter in the market, as it is in all markets. I work closely with a financial company that have been a disrupter in the financial futures and options market in the US. The game changer for them was to build a platform that was far easier to use than its competitors, as well as targeting new customers with education. The value they offer in commissions is important too, but mainly to bigger traders who dont make up a huge number of their customers
That comment is something that doesn't to me seem to fit your normal outlook. It is a short term view looking at what income you would miss in the short term rather than the huge wealth you could generate in the long term.
Betfair at float was valued at £1,390,000,000.
As a founding member of your new exchange you would be in line for a considerable portion of such a flotation valuation and if you were able to achieve what you think you can it is likely to be valued at much more.
I am sure you have more money now than you need so don't need to actually trade day in day out so are in a great position to take the 'risk' be it with some of your money and time or just your time. If any one could raise funding for such a venture I would think it would be you with your contacts in silicone valley you spend time nurturing with your trips to America.
Wouldn't it be an amazing legacy to leave behind, to be able to say you changed an entire industry for the better (and made a fortune in the process, much more than you could ever dream of making from trading).
Betfair's shares were offered at £13 yesterday morning, valuing Betfair at £1.39bn, but ended the day 250p higher at £15.50.
While Betfair's biggest shareholders, including founders Edward Wray and Andrew Black, who had put 10pc of their stock into the float, lost out on those gains, it makes the value of their remaining stakes far higher.
However, Betfair's owners raised £211m in yesterday's IPO. Mr Wray stands to make £18.9m and Mr Black £16.6m from the flotation, if an overallotment option is also exercised. They will then have stakes of 10.7pc and 10.2pc respectively.
-
ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
I was involved at a senior level in implementing liquidity pooling in the City in the 90's and I think you're massively underestimating the complexity and I don't mean with the technology, that's relatively easy. Even when you've overcome the cross-border contractual issues you have the problem of coordinating and funding changes to a large number of disparate 3rd party pre-existing in-house systems to enable them to interface with your new exchange. They're not going to perform surgery on their existing setups without a clear and assured benefit. We had enough problems doing that with LiquidNet let alone with a startup like you're suggesting. That said, it's a 30 year old idea so the issues I came across may well have new solutions these days.
If you're planning on drawing a big wage for being involved in your own start-up then forget it. Venture capitalists want to see you putting your hand in your own pocket not just theirs, even more so when you're already a multi-millionaire !! You've going to draw blanks if you turn up with that attitude.
Venture capital isn't hard to find for the right projects so I suggest you get your in-principlal contracts signed from your prospective liquidity providers (without whom you're nothing), and then test the temperature of the water.
Out of interest, you say came from financial trading, who was it that you worked for? I got around quite a bit so we might know some of the same people.
I've been involved or close to a number of start ups, so I aware nobody is going to pay you a wage it will all be equity based. I spent a lot of time on the VC scene during the dot com boom. I'm just not sure I would go for a package where they said if I slogged away till I was nearly 70 I'd possibly get a pay off. I'd rather be the guiding hand now as I've earned my spurs and worked my butt off already in a number of roles. I know I could do, just not sure I want to.
It would help if they had a back all and lay all button, and he could have at least got a friend to open an account and be a mini-market maker. Not sure about this though:-
If a new ‘non-runner’ is declared, all bets (matched and unmatched) are voided and refunded for the race in question (i.e. for all horses) and then betting markets for that race are reopened again.
Surely that would wipe out the majority of markets??
If a new ‘non-runner’ is declared, all bets (matched and unmatched) are voided and refunded for the race in question (i.e. for all horses) and then betting markets for that race are reopened again.
Surely that would wipe out the majority of markets??
