4 ms·

Betfair (and the other exchanges) need to have the best fraud and corruption teams to ensure the integrity of their marketplace. As it is possible to lay result

Betfair (and the other exchanges) need to have the best fraud and corruption teams to ensure the integrity of their marketplace. As it is possible to lay results on an exchange, it does present ideal opportunity for nefarious betting activity. With a traditional bookmaker, it's extremely difficult to consistently win large amounts over time and multiple events. The bookmakers just close or severely limit winning accounts. On an exchange, there's no incentive to limit these winning accounts, whether they're backing or laying. The marketplace needs liquidity. However, I still think the government(s) who issue gambling licenses may at some point take a view that betting exchanges are no longer legal business ventures, if there is too much evidence of corrupt betting, especially on the lay side. You may think that once the genie is out of the bottle, there's no way for a government to put it back again by banning or de-licensing exchanges. The exchange just moves offshore to Malta. However, I believe the current Authorised Betting Partner (ABP)[0] debacle happening in British horse racing is evidence that industry bodies could make it very difficult in the future for offshore bookmakers/exchanges to market themselves effectively. Anyway, my point is, that it's really in Betfair's own self interest to be so hot on fraud and corruption, when they provide (unlicensed) people the ability to lay bets and that the legitimacy of exchanges may be called into question at any time. A prime example of this is what happened to Intrade.[1] [0] http://www.britishhorseracing.com/press_releases/british-racing-to-establish-authorised-betting-partners/ http://www.britishhorseracing.com/press_releases/british-rac... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrade https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrade

joosters 11y ago
Oh, I get that (which is why I qualified my statement with directly affected). If a sport gains a reputation for corruption, then betting on that sport suffers. Note that Betfair is an authorised betting partner, as shown in [0]. They used to play completely fair with the BHA and the tax authorities, before the company was floated and they moved offshore to dodge taxes, but they still pay the levy (or equivalent) I thought the whole 'laying' controversy was long dead and buried, IMO. (At least, I hope so, for my own sake :) It's a non-issue in tennis betting, where laying one player is so obviously exactly the same as backing the opposing player.
- chillydawg 11y ago
  It is very much dead and anyone who says laying is a special case of betting does not understand betting. There's now been two court cases in the UK - one of which went to the court of appeals about this - and the matter is settled in law firmly. Betfair punters are 100% not bookmakers, regardless of how they behave. One of the key issues was that the betfair punter has no idea who they are trading against. For their purposes, they trade vs betfair who happen to have a perfect hedging model (eg only accepting a bet when there is an equal and opposite bet to hedge it with).
  - phillc73 11y ago
    Yes, Betfair is a BHA authorised betting partner, which is why it is important for them to be seen to tackle fraud and corruption on their platform. The BHA could conceivably decide to withdraw that status. I was very careful in my earlier post not to specifically mention the UK government, although perhaps it was too strongly intimated. Your points about laying on an exchange not being a special case in betting does absolutely hold true in the UK. The point is not so well established in other countries. Why is Betfair regulated by the Tasmanian Gaming Commission in Australia? Other States wouldn't issue them a licence at the time. Why does Betfair restrict access by residents in so many other countries? See the recent withdrawal of Betfair from the Canadian market.[0] The point being, Betfair isn't just a UK operation anymore. They need to take into account global jurisdictions and being high profile about fraud prevention can only help their image when hoping to expand to new markets. Lastly, I use Betfair, Smarkets and to a lesser extent Betdaq every day. They are really the only way to get on a decent bet in the UK today. I think it would be devastating to the punting population if exchanges were no longer available. [0] http://calvinayre.com/2015/12/24/business/betfair-goes-full-grinch-exits-canada/ http://calvinayre.com/2015/12/24/business/betfair-goes-full-...
    - joosters 11y ago
      What's your experience of Smarkets? I've been skeptical of them because it's not clear how money really gets traded there. Are the markets full of bots blindly copying Betfair or is there real activity?

joosters 11y ago

Oh, I get that (which is why I qualified my statement with directly affected). If a sport gains a reputation for corruption, then betting on that sport suffers. Note that Betfair is an authorised betting partner, as shown in [0]. They used to play completely fair with the BHA and the tax authorities, before the company was floated and they moved offshore to dodge taxes, but they still pay the levy (or equivalent) I thought the whole 'laying' controversy was long dead and buried, IMO. (At least, I hope so, for my own sake :) It's a non-issue in tennis betting, where laying one player is so obviously exactly the same as backing the opposing player.

chillydawg 11y ago
It is very much dead and anyone who says laying is a special case of betting does not understand betting. There's now been two court cases in the UK - one of which went to the court of appeals about this - and the matter is settled in law firmly. Betfair punters are 100% not bookmakers, regardless of how they behave. One of the key issues was that the betfair punter has no idea who they are trading against. For their purposes, they trade vs betfair who happen to have a perfect hedging model (eg only accepting a bet when there is an equal and opposite bet to hedge it with).
- phillc73 11y ago
  Yes, Betfair is a BHA authorised betting partner, which is why it is important for them to be seen to tackle fraud and corruption on their platform. The BHA could conceivably decide to withdraw that status. I was very careful in my earlier post not to specifically mention the UK government, although perhaps it was too strongly intimated. Your points about laying on an exchange not being a special case in betting does absolutely hold true in the UK. The point is not so well established in other countries. Why is Betfair regulated by the Tasmanian Gaming Commission in Australia? Other States wouldn't issue them a licence at the time. Why does Betfair restrict access by residents in so many other countries? See the recent withdrawal of Betfair from the Canadian market.[0] The point being, Betfair isn't just a UK operation anymore. They need to take into account global jurisdictions and being high profile about fraud prevention can only help their image when hoping to expand to new markets. Lastly, I use Betfair, Smarkets and to a lesser extent Betdaq every day. They are really the only way to get on a decent bet in the UK today. I think it would be devastating to the punting population if exchanges were no longer available. [0] http://calvinayre.com/2015/12/24/business/betfair-goes-full-grinch-exits-canada/ http://calvinayre.com/2015/12/24/business/betfair-goes-full-...
  - joosters 11y ago
    What's your experience of Smarkets? I've been skeptical of them because it's not clear how money really gets traded there. Are the markets full of bots blindly copying Betfair or is there real activity?