Marks-ups getting out of hand

[Doobs]

financial product benefits and costs are easier to quantify, a tangible product less so... With a blender or whatever, it more comes down to what price someone will pay for it... supply and demand, how much competition's in the market, etc. The benefit can be more subjective top e.g. Moonrock... no practical benefit, but peeps just want some moonrock

How much is a £10k pension per year increasing with inflation and a spouses benefit of % worth to a fireman age 55?  Rather be him than a man with £100k cash?

[sovietsong]

financial product benefits and costs are easier to quantify, a tangible product less so... With a blender or whatever, it more comes down to what price someone will pay for it... supply and demand, how much competition's in the market, etc. The benefit can be more subjective top e.g. Moonrock... no practical benefit, but peeps just want some moonrock

How much is a £10k pension per year increasing with inflation and a spouses benefit of % worth to a fireman age 55?  Rather be him than a man with £100k cash?

How's the firemans health?

[aaron1867]

This isn't anything to do with the Facebook post, it's pretty general. But all in all that Facebook post was just incredible.

People ask why ten pages? But when others are reading this, they may think twice about a high mark up.

[dwayne110]

Mr Doobs, what point are you making?

Firstly, it'd be simple enough for a pension advisor to make a fairly accurate comparison of a lump sum v annuity type income in your example, estimating inflation to a decent degree of accuracy etc... people get paid a lot of money by rich folk to make such assessments. Why £100k, why not £50k/£40k? At what figure does your decision sway to opting for the pension?
In your example, given the 'fireman's' age and job, £100k is a no brainer to opt for, he may not live long enough to realise in the longterm what £100k of value upfront today is. Which kinda backs up my whole point... we have quantifiable figures to work with, in this case assess risk/age, then make a decision?

[redsimon]

Mr Doobs, what point are you making?

Firstly, it'd be simple enough for a pension advisor to make a fairly accurate comparison of a lump sum v annuity type income in your example, estimating inflation to a decent degree of accuracy etc... people get paid a lot of money by rich folk to make such assessments. Why £100k, why not £50k/£40k? At what figure does your decision sway to opting for the pension?
In your example, given the 'fireman's' age and job, £100k is a no brainer to opt for, he may not live long enough to realise in the longterm what £100k of value upfront today is. Which kinda backs up my whole point... we have quantifiable figures to work with, in this case assess risk/age, then make a decision?

Hmmm

[Doobs]

Mr Doobs, what point are you making?

Firstly, it'd be simple enough for a pension advisor to make a fairly accurate comparison of a lump sum v annuity type income in your example, estimating inflation to a decent degree of accuracy etc... people get paid a lot of money by rich folk to make such assessments. Why £100k, why not £50k/£40k? At what figure does your decision sway to opting for the pension?
In your example, given the 'fireman's' age and job, £100k is a no brainer to opt for, he may not live long enough to realise in the longterm what £100k of value upfront today is. Which kinda backs up my whole point... we have quantifiable figures to work with, in this case assess risk/age, then make a decision?

Hmmm

Well he got the no brainer bit right.  We have financial regulation because these things aren't easier to quantify than your man's veggie slicer. 

[RickBFA]

Mr Doobs, what point are you making?

Firstly, it'd be simple enough for a pension advisor to make a fairly accurate comparison of a lump sum v annuity type income in your example, estimating inflation to a decent degree of accuracy etc... people get paid a lot of money by rich folk to make such assessments. Why £100k, why not £50k/£40k? At what figure does your decision sway to opting for the pension?
In your example, given the 'fireman's' age and job, £100k is a no brainer to opt for, he may not live long enough to realise in the longterm what £100k of value upfront today is. Which kinda backs up my whole point... we have quantifiable figures to work with, in this case assess risk/age, then make a decision?

Hmmm

Well he got the no brainer bit right.  We have financial regulation because these things aren't easier to quantify than your man's veggie slicer.  

I have the dubious pleasure of being an independent financial adviser.

I just checked the best annuity rates.

For a 55 year old non smoking male with a wife 3 years younger who are both in good health, it would take a lump sum of £470,000 to purchase an annuity of £10,000 which was RPI linked with a 50% spouses pension (a fireman's pension is index linked).

I know some might not believe that figure but its correct.

RPI linked benefits are really, really expensive to buy in the open market and no one buys them. The only people who have them in reality are people in final salary pension schemes who sometimes don't appreciate what a valuable benefit being RPI linked is.

It would be total madness for anyone to take £100k cash instead of an index linked £10,000 per annum annuity.

[sovietsong]

nobody answered my question about the fireman's health.  I think he has type 2 diabetes (hba1c is 8.2) & a family history of heart disease

where do we stand now?

[Doobs]

nobody answered my question about the fireman's health.  I think he has type 2 diabetes (hba1c is 8.2) & a family history of heart disease

where do we stand now?

Type 2 diabetes isn't so bad.  You aren't going to get him down to 100k for that pension with something like that.  I don't think it is easy for a layman to value, and even I'd struggle if you added some weird and wonderful illness to our hero's pension.  It is fairly similar to your facebook staking requests, it seems obvious to us that it isn't great value, but that doesn't mean others who aren't familiar with poker will see it.  Bit like your fireman's pension, you get trade unionists on the box telling us these aren't rich people and they are only going to earn £15k a year from their pensions.  I just sit there and think I can't imagine you'd be saying that if Fireman Sam had half a million in his back pocket.

[RickBFA]

On mark up's its refreshing to see established and respected pro's like Dubai charging 1.1, Julian 1.03 and Stuart Rutter 1.05 on Blonde's live staking thread.

If someone is daft enough to pay 1.3 or higher to others let them get on with it.

Why they would want to pay it when you see the examples above is beyond me.

[Simon Galloway]

ON an $80k package, 5% is $4k, which will go a long way towards covering a flight and lodgings.  So 1.05 "for expenses" is one thing.  If someone tried to sell that package at 1.3 "for expenses" that amounts to $24k!!  Quite clearly at that point, it isn't a premium for expenses, but a premium for the opportunity.

I personally vowed to stop buying any player at any markup a long time ago (and with the very occasional moment of weakness, have kept to it)  If that was the norm, you would eventually reach an equilibrium where the only stakes offered were the ones where the player truly needed the help of backers to play. 

I realise that approach means I regularly turn down some potentially +EV opportunities.

[MANTIS01]

What about established and respected pros who run auctions to drive the price up?

[aaron1867]

I am also curious to know people's thoughts to people who constantly mark up certain tournaments saying they have an edge in that tournament, but yet have never cashed it.

I could name the WSOP main event as one which people say they have a huge edge in and every single year they do not cash in it. Yet mark it up between 1.3-1.6.

[dwayne110]

When you take into account the WSOP Main Event cashes go up very gradually, with the difference between finishing 600th and 200th for example not huge,  I think it's bonkers for anyone to consider paying any significant markup on the ME.
To get deep enough to make the big bucks, a player has to play 6-7+ days, which no-one can say they have adequate live experience of to be considered an expert/value in that particular tourney. Random factors like fatigue, mental strength, player consistency etc are harder to evaluate given there isn't a big enough sample size of MEs to determine who is the best at 8-9 day events. As it's such a long structure, it's almost inevitable you will have to get lucky on a few occasions if you're going to FT it. More likely to encounter cooler situations and key flips than in a regular event, simply as there's far more players to get through over a longer period. Just as you have more time to get lucky, you have more time to get unlucky.
It's a brilliant event in terms of entertainment and letting us dreamers dream, but I think markup upwards of 1.1-1.2 would be crazy investments for buyers.

[MC]

I am also curious to know people's thoughts to people who constantly mark up certain tournaments saying they have an edge in that tournament, but yet have never cashed it.

Just lolz. I've never cashed in the GUKPT Goliath. Guess if I ever need to sell for that one I best sell at spot.