3 ms·
Interesting. You say: "The bookmakers don't care - you've helping get turnover up, and they know increasing turnover through the market is the best way to get
by watoc 9y ago
Interesting.
You say:
"The bookmakers don't care - you've helping get turnover up, and they know increasing turnover through the market is the best way to get balanced liabilities."
And then:
"1. Bookmakers will eventually end up closing their accounts, because winners are never welcome long-term."
Is there any rational behind bookmakers not welcoming long-term winners?
It seems like a bookie is very similar to a market maker on the stock exchange. Why would a market maker care if an investor makes money as long as he can flatten his positions every hour or so and make profit with the spread.
Isn't it accurate to say that bettors are competing against each other and the bookie is just taking a fee for making the market?
- PaulRobinson 9y agoOver the short-term people adding WoM and bringing the book into line with other bookmakers is welcome, because it means the market is becoming more efficient. At the micro level then, turnover is welcome. But as the old adage goes "turnover is vanity, profit is sanity" At the macro level somebody has to say "how do we maximise profits or at least minimise losses?" and picking off accounts that are costing you money is an easy step to take. The ideal client for a bookmaker is an idiot with a strong view. They don't want people who will consistently win, because it's taking up WoM for other customers who could be invited with those more generous odds and who _don't_ consistently win.