paddy power and Betfair to merge

[The Camel]

People like Andrew Black, Mark Davies and Mick Stone understood the change they were making to the world of betting. It was truly a revolution.

Please spare the jizz fest over betfair founders.  They are responsible for the biggest ever confiscation (8 figures) of money in online gambling.  Money being taken back directly out of peoples banks etc.  The decisions came from "the very top".  As pathetic and thief like as you can get.

I had a ton more respect for paddy power than I do betfair.  They have acted with a lot more class and thought for the punters over the years.  I agree the amounts you can get on at each of the sportsbooks are pathetic. I will say this though, at least paddy power/betfair sportsbook appear not to close accounts for being smart at sports betting.  There is quite a significant difference in being limited to very small amounts and having your account fully closed/limited to 0.00 ala stan james/coral/vc etc.

Mergers are never good for the customers and although I am reading at the moment both brands will continue to be run separately I imagine that will change a few years down the line.  Very disappointed at this news today.

I will repeat again this is not written by me.  It was copied and pasted from the betfair forum this morning.

Huge lolzzzzzzz at the bolded section of your post.  What is the difference?  I would prefer to have my account fully closed so they can't spin the pr and say 'we don't close winner's accounts' when they limit you to 43p on an odds on shot.  What do betfair and power 'close' accounts for then if it is not being smart at sports betting just out of interest?

I assume the 8 figure confiscation refers to the premium charge?

The difference is if you don't close an account the punter can still whack off a couple of grand in the casino when he's drunk

[arbboy]

I assume the 8 figure confiscation refers to the premium charge?

No, nor does it refer to the SNG bug that an update to the old pokerchamps software introduced.  It refers to the infamous happy hour.  They charged back winnings already paid and took money out of peoples bank accounts somehow.  They also just removed money from the thn UKGC licenced sportsbook accounts.  Many UK players have been successful in court sueing for the money.  This is all from people who played fair by their rules and did nothing wrong.  Betfair idiots.  I am of the opinion it was an attempt to raise the (then just floated) share price by increasing deposits hugely.

http://online_casino_news.hundredpercentgambling.com/2010/11/betfair-casino-and-fallout-from-online.html
http://www.rouletteonline.net/online-casino-scams/betfair/

Interesting.  I hadn't heard about that before.  They were definitely cooking the figures pre float in various ways.  I was given 150% rakeback for a month to help improve their poker product's figures pre float for example.  I played tens of thousands of 1 hand all in pre heads up stts against someone else who had >100% rakeback for that month as well.  Betfair were quite happy for us both to sit there and just iron them out for a month to get their rake figures up for the float. 

[SuperJez]

Interesting.  I hadn't heard about that before.  They were definitely cooking the figures pre float in various ways.  I was given 150% rakeback for a month to help improve their poker product's figures pre float for example.

Thanks yes, I read your post before about the 150% and read your opinion it was trying to fudge figures for the share price.  I did not know about the specific offer you mentioned but I am sure you are 100% right in that and I knew that when I read the other post.

I will say this I got to see internal betfair management emails querying happy hour before it ran.  Some people realised what was going to happen.  It was over-ruled from the very top to let it go ahead and they ended up having to steal £10m back.  Ridiculous.

arbboy have you ever used the DPA on a bookmaker?

[arbboy]

Interesting.  I hadn't heard about that before.  They were definitely cooking the figures pre float in various ways.  I was given 150% rakeback for a month to help improve their poker product's figures pre float for example.

Thanks yes, I read your post before about the 150% and read your opinion it was trying to fudge figures for the share price.  I did not know about the specific offer you mentioned but I am sure you are 100% right in that and I knew that when I read the other post.

I will say this I got to see internal betfair management emails querying happy hour before it ran.  Some people realised what was going to happen.  It was over-ruled from the very top to let it go ahead and they ended up having to steal £10m back.  Ridiculous.

arbboy have you ever used the DPA on a bookmaker?

No never

[SuperJez]

No never

Haha if theres anyone ive ever seen around the forums that absolutely should, its you.  Know your rights and use them.

[sonour]

SuperJez,

Why is there a massive difference to you between a bookie limiting you to small stakes and closing your account please ?

[RickBFA]

Can anyone see a new competitor in the more original betfair model, or has the market become too mature or too expensive to start-up in?

I was wondering about that too.

[Matt.NFFC.]

Coming from a complete novice.......if Betfair is not like it was, is there an alternative?

It's like anything else in life, people say "things aren't like what they were etc etc" But the masses don't seem to do something about it or start something like it used to be.

[SuperJez]

SuperJez,

Why is there a massive difference to you between a bookie limiting you to small stakes and closing your account please ?

What do you mean "why is there a massive difference".  There is quite clearly a literal massive difference. 

If you are of the opinion the difference does not matter to you in reality then that's another matter entirely.  I am not having some stupid argument if you are mad you are closed/restricted everywhere for whatever reason.

[AndrewT]

SuperJez,

Why is there a massive difference to you between a bookie limiting you to small stakes and closing your account please ?

What do you mean "why is there a massive difference".  There is quite clearly a literal massive difference. 

If you are of the opinion the difference does not matter to you in reality then that's another matter entirely.  I am not having some stupid argument if you are mad you are closed/restricted everywhere for whatever reason.

There is a difference between getting restricted/getting closed.

If both situations are, in effect, the same to you then I'd say that difference was not massive (literally or otherwise).

[Doobs]

SuperJez,

Why is there a massive difference to you between a bookie limiting you to small stakes and closing your account please ?

What do you mean "why is there a massive difference".  There is quite clearly a literal massive difference. 

If you are of the opinion the difference does not matter to you in reality then that's another matter entirely.  I am not having some stupid argument if you are mad you are closed/restricted everywhere for whatever reason.

There isn't a massive difference.  If my average get is £50 and Ladbrokes will now lay me a max of 50p then they have effectively closed me.  If you think there is a massive difference between not laying me at all and laying me to a lose a maximum of a tenner then I think it is reasonable to ask you to explain why. 

[arbboy]

SuperJez,

Why is there a massive difference to you between a bookie limiting you to small stakes and closing your account please ?

What do you mean "why is there a massive difference".  There is quite clearly a literal massive difference.  

If you are of the opinion the difference does not matter to you in reality then that's another matter entirely.  I am not having some stupid argument if you are mad you are closed/restricted everywhere for whatever reason.

Jez why do you come across as very arsey about this subject?  Pretty sure it isn't just me thinking this?  The only difference as Camel pointed out is your ability to still do your brains on casino games if the account isn't fully closed.  If you only bet sports strictly then being restricted to £2 bets is effectively having your account closed.  Maybe you could explain why you don't agree with this and explain what the 'literal massive difference' is iyo?

[TightEnd]

thoguht it was a perfectly reasonable question Jez, and not worthy of a chippy response

apart from keeping your account open for you to do your brains on casino, not much difference is practice is there?

[SuperJez]

Oh come on, seriously.

Jez why do you come across as very arsey about this subject?  Pretty sure it isn't just me thinking this?

I agree my replys have been a bit curt and limited to facts and could be interpreted as being "arsey".  I do not ever want to offend anyone but beyond that I don't really care if you listen to me or not that is up to you.  Anyone who knows me knows I am legit as a professional gambler of 20 years and I am only interested in facts.  Arbboy I respect you very much but I think it is hypocritical of you to pull me up for being arsey when you have made many valid and correct points on this board previously in an "arsey" way. 

The only difference as Camel pointed out is your ability to still do your brains on casino games if the account isn't fully closed.

You see here lies a problem (as it always does with gambling).  The post you cite as fact is in fact incorrect.  Is is not the only difference.  I am not expanding.  You can choose to believe me or not.

 If you only bet sports strictly then being restricted to £2 bets is effectively having your account closed.  Maybe you could explain why you don't agree with this and explain what the 'literal massive difference' is iyo?

It is not effectively having your account closed. For one the difference is a factor of infinity in terms of bet size allowed.  For two being banned from somewhere and being allowed in somewhere is about as big a difference literally as you can get.  The "literal" thing is an argument over the definition of the word and I stand by my statement.

[TightEnd]

Oh come on, seriously.

Jez why do you come across as very arsey about this subject?  Pretty sure it isn't just me thinking this?

I agree my replys have been a bit curt and limited to facts and could be interpreted as being "arsey".  I do not ever want to offend anyone but beyond that I don't really care if you listen to me or not that is up to you.  Anyone who knows me knows I am legit as a professional gambler of 20 years and I am only interested in facts.  Arbboy I respect you very much but I think it is hypocritical of you to pull me up for being arsey when you have made many valid and correct points on this board previously in an "arsey" way. 

The only difference as Camel pointed out is your ability to still do your brains on casino games if the account isn't fully closed.

You see here lies a problem (as it always does with gambling).  The post you cite as fact is in fact incorrect.  Is is not the only difference.  I am not expanding.  You can choose to believe me or not.

If you only bet sports strictly then being restricted to £2 bets is effectively having your account closed.  Maybe you could explain why you don't agree with this and explain what the 'literal massive difference' is iyo?

It is not effectively having your account closed. For one the difference is a factor of infinity in terms of bet size allowed.  For two being banned from somewhere and being allowed in somewhere is about as big a difference literally as you can get.  The "literal" thing is an argument over the definition of the word and I stand by my statement.

please expand. genuinely interested and i might learn something