blonde poker forum

How should someone work out their markup if they are to use a 'fair' and unbiased calculation or estimate?

We've all seen comments about some markup's being a contentious issue.



tips
ideas
ways to stagger/ explain how your markup moves through tournament buyin levels

??

A good way would be to look at the price other people are selling at for the same tournament and think how much better/worse value you are than them and adjust accordingly.

UKIPT Cork? 0.7 sounds perfect

Fair is what the market will pay?

Sell at 1.0 unless you have evidence to back up being able to sell for more.

And don't assume ROI = markup. E.g. if your ROI is 120% then selling at 1.2 is not good for a backer as you are offering them an even money proposition.

True story... unfortunately.

+1

What constitutes as evidence...?
and what's enough?


I know you need 'proof' for staking, thats kinda the idea of the thread. :)

Records of results at the level you wish to play showing that you are a profitable player. What records you need will depend on what you want staking for...

So the only thing appropriate at all to attest to your poker skill/ likely ROI vs a field/ profitability is previous experiences in the same tournaments at the same levels?

What I guess I mean, is what if the following were looking for staking for an event:
- a proven tournament crusher, but never played that 'level' before?
- a cash game player, playing tournaments for the first time... would cash 'level' make a difference?
- a live player with few examples of that level on THM but someone you respect would vouch for them being a 'good bet' at X markup?

Do one of those auction thingy's, people will pay what they want to pay then.

Not really. Look at Daniel Morgan and his ridic Vegas ME mark up & many more.

Lots of people overprice mark up, that's how it is.

 ;popcorn;

If it sells out, it's not overpriced, obv.

just because something sells out doesn't mean it's not overpriced.


as cf has said if you have 120% roi and sell at 1.2 you're selling  a chunk of variance to the backer.


so defining a good deal is very hard and objective.

It might be, but if supply of good stakes is less than demand for good stakes, it will sell at a premium to fair value (and of course anything over selling at spot is a subjective fair value)

Personally believe a lot if people but shares just for the fact they know each other or just more money than sense. I think it was one stake request that I can remember not even close to selling out, so shows it was overpriced.

Disagree completely. Nobody have enough sample size to "prove" their value in anything live.

auction /end thread

Worst example you could have given, I don't know what it was but if Dan sold at 1.6 for the main it wouldn't be ridiculous.

If you sold at 0.9 for the ME though, that would be ridiculous.


^ Auctions are the 'fairest' way though

Markup doesnt have to be exactly what a persons value in the tourney is, its also what the seller thinks its worthwhile to them to sell it at, which can often be more than their true value in the tournament.

Aaron might have thought Dan Morgans ME markup was overpriced but maybe it wasnt worth it to Dan to sell for any less

This, is kinda my point..

I don't understand how you would 'calculate it' rather than just say "well xxxx is selling at x.x and I think im x better so I'll sell at x"
Seems unprofessional in the least to be honest....


??

Auctions wouldn't work for someone who doesnt have enough liquidity in the market though. For example I'd possibly fail to reach 1;2 in a DTD deepstack despite being convinced I'm worth at least that. I like my approach of saying, I', playing this, I'm charging this, if you want it have a piece, if not LEGGGGGGGGGGGGGGO

let the market decide imo

auctions

Agree. I didn't need to have cashed or have a "record" in EPTs to know I was worth >1.0 in them.

I always go with the same approach as Adam. "I think I'm value at this price, if you do too, have a piece, if you don't, no problem, don't buy"

I didn't say proof was needed - just evidence. So e.g. in the EPT then for a lot of people they won't have played in that comp before. But acceptable evidence might be a good tournament result elsewhere such as maybe cashing in some GUKPTs or something.

So as you say you can just say "i'm selling at 1.5 - buy or don't buy, up to you." You're making that request with something to back it up. You've got your diary on here detailing games you've played, thoughts, etc. You've got previous results. So a staking request by you will automatically have those things backing it for most people in your case.

If someone completely unknown came on here and tried to sell at 1.5 then we'd quite rightly be asking for something to justify that price. If nothing was provided then no-one would buy.

I understand and appreciate that I could sell some action for x comp at x rate and expect a sellout.

But I would also think I would be a 'good punt' at x price considering the field.


What I was wondering is whether anyone has any other methods than the finger in the air one?

what do u think is fair mark up for you in whatever tournament you are talking about, Cork?

Of what I understand of markups...

In comparing myself to the average field in 'said event' i understand the UKIPT to be a heavily qualified online tournament, these tend to be 'softer'.  Couple that with it being in Ireland, where, I've been told, they love the game a lot but dont have as high a proportion of pros: recs as the UK.  (unconfirmed)

I would say I think I am somewhere between 1.1-1.2. But I am an overly confident ego-maniac who has little true statistical appreciation of my ROI in MTT poker.
Read - I think I know a lot, I dont.


For those that know me, what do they think of my 'finger in the air' guess?

yeh i think the .1-.2 bit is about right ;nana;

wtf colour is that CF. ridic horrible

Yeah but instead of asking him to justify don't buy imo. Always comes across as negative.

Auctions have there place but need a degree of market efficiency- which won't always exist.

JB I'd definitely consider 1.1-1.15 but much more and it becomes and I'll take 1% for the hero sweat but not what I might at 1.1

Thanks, part of this is I don't want the "hero sweat" charity vote.

I am a poker player, working on his game to try and get to a good level.  I want to have 'earned' my markup, but also don't want to sell myself short because I travel with my job and therefore don't play every dtd500 for THM.

With all due respect you are a breakeveb/marginal winner at micrO stakes playing in a buy in that you have no experience Of and you don't ever play tournaments,'online or live. On paper you would probably be -ev at 1.0.

Reality is a little different, if you think youre higher (judging on market value) then change yOur price to wte you think you stand compared to other recent requests. For example forthwhistle wte he sold at you probably should sell at a similar amount. If randomly somebody posts a thread with a similar track record/experience as you then you can change your price a little bit. No matter if you sell at 1.0 to 1.3 you will sell out because people always buy.

Appreciate the honesty...

I have played 5 or 6 £500+ tourny's so far... which is clearly not a lot.  When it comes to the 'on paper' bit... that's the part I don't know how to quantify myself.  It's all opinions and guesses.

Like I said. Wte you sell at you'll sell out its not worth even thinking about. Youre asking for around 140/300 pound and have a v popular blog and some fans. You're not trying to shift 5k of me action

Do an auction for sure, I'd be surprised if you don't hit 1.43/1.44 - somewhere around there - gl

I know mate, I'm not worried about selling.. I was more realising I have a lack of 'skill' in this area of my professionalism and wanted some advice/ details/ tips as to how other players and professionals go about it all....

So far, I've gathered....


We stick our favorite finger into our favourite hole, then hold up to the wind and see where it takes us.  :D :D :D



Also, I'll be expecting you to lock up some %! :D

Want the truth?

If i'm not worth it, i dont want it.


I am working as hard as I can at crushing both my job and the pokers.... and I want what I earn, nothing more and nothing less.  I have had a really good and in some cases 'humbling' year, as part of that and the work I'm putting in... I just want to earn a few $$......


so much to ask?

I nearly wrote at Pleno's last post

"lol, I think you misunderstand the man, I think JB needs to believe he's genuinely worth 1.25"

Wish I had :-)

one less woosh and 'wins' is good for you is good for the game me thinks.

be cool if someone who cba, was to work out the total ROI of the whole live staking board

Ha, I might give this a go later in the week if I'm bored.only 11 pages, shouldn't take that long.

guess keys's bink gonna sway numbers a bit but i guess there have been heaps of near misses

can we also see claypole's staking ROI ;)

I hear you can see the top of the graph with some binoculars

What would you ask for yourself in same comp to give some balance?

this and why do you do it? Just to tilt people? lol

Seems toolish

you only sing when you're winning
You only sing when your winning
Sing when you're winning

Lol herbie,  Ahrt

I've thought about doing this Trigg, half out of curiosity and half as a nice little ego boost. Not sure if I would share the results though, knowledge is power etc

A genuine question from an old fart who has never sold or bought at mark up.

"how do you arrive at the figure you are prepared to pay or charge?"

Are you results driven? I've seen players selling themselves at 1.2-1.3 who I wouldn't say are any value at premium - (of course all blonde members are :)) but some seem to have a higher opinion of their game than the results suggest.

Then I see really good consistent players at the same "price" - hard to understand to me.

Do you evaluate somebody by their style of play, ie. out early or massive chipstack or do you go for somebody like yours truely who will "allegedly" sits there all day waiting for aces but may have a high cash to entry ratio ?

Somebody has great online scores but hasn't as yet delivered live. How do you arrive at a price?

I like the idea of auctions, demand deciding price.

Just interested to hear from those that do



Btw I'm selling......:)

This is exactly the point of the thread, sir.

congrats on your advent entry!


@Keys - I understand youre in charge of the staking board (or a mod of some kind)
Can you help here?

I don't use a precise formula but basically if im selling for a live tournament it's gonna be between 1.2 and 1.5 in most cases and where in that region depends mainly on my (or others') opinion of the field strength and then on forecasted field size.

There is no 'magic bullet' for determining markup, any staking board be it blonde, 2+2, wherever, is controlled by the features of the market itself - by supply and demand.

On blonde for example, there is a relatively low volume of staking requests, this tends to mean that higher markups are possible due to this clear discrepancy between supply and demand, coupled with the stronger community feel here which means that often the people buying and selling action will know each other personally and therefore not view the transaction purely from the perspective of whether it truly represents 'value'.

A couple of years ago on 2p2 the big Russian staking funds were buying virtually all the big live tournament action with a seeming lack of discretion, this meant that markups were high across the board. After this influx of money declined, the markups have now settled back down to a lower level as buyers are generally more selective, is either more reflective of the 'true' position? I would argue that both simply reflected sellers understanding the conditions of the market at the time, and setting markups accordingly.

When we set markups, what are we trying to achieve? A fair deal for investors? A good deal for ourselves? Both? - I have always taken the view that the markups I set should represent value for both myself and investors, but other people quite clearly take the view that they should charge as high a markup as people will be willing to pay, I do not think you can say that either approach is 'right' or 'wrong'. In the end the market will decide whether your markup is 'fair' or not, in that you will either sell your action or you wont.

    

Ok let me make this a little more basic...

Can people put their opinion of what would be reasonable for the following markups?


1.0-1.2  = ?

1.2-1.4  = ?

1.4-1.6  = ?

1.8+  = ?

And how should this change, adjust, move between types of mtt - £100fo/ £dtd500/ £GUKPT/ EPT/ WSOP ME???

I've noticed a lot of players put it to 'round numbers' to make life easy.. so instead of 1.1 its 1.134 or similar...

Sorry to seem like an idiot here, but I just can't get my head around the 'finger in air' guesswork....

What do you mean?

JB, just ask Tommy Langley (I'm guessing he's someone who has observed you play live a fair bit and he has a deep understanding of the game) what he thinks you're worth in, say a DTD 300 Deepstack and a UKIPT.

That's about the right answer and then you can add a bit for whatever goodwill you might get from different target buyers. It's not something to wrangle with in a faux scientific or mathematical way as you won't get any answer above 1.0, mathematically speaking.

I know what I think I'm worth... and ofc Tom is one of the people I'm close to in poker and would definitely ask his opinion... also because he's taken action in the past and he's on the 'list' of first choicers.

But also, trying to 'prove' my opinion vs what people think of me, or what people (and most of the time more 'qualified' people) suggest to me is a tough one.

I know a very good mtt player who I think would be value at 1.4-1.5 in the UKIPT Cork I'm considering said to me he'd put it up at 1.15-1.2 at most, because xxxx are putting theirs at 1.25 and he doesn't think he's better than them.  This thinking just seems strange in some ways.

It really isn't me wanting to stretch the most out of my tiny corner of the market, its more me trying to understand how to go about a 'business transaction' in a world I know so little about.

I would like to considering playing some big events this year (to me £500+ is - big) and as I'm not currently rolled for this but I'm having a lot of work abroad then I have to take the few small shots I can get and selling to play 'higher' seems the best option.

Thanks for all the comments and advice so far, hopefully more are to follow..

for now I'm just going for a live cash session lets get some more $$ for Cork!

I don't think I'd ever buy action in anyone at more than 1.3. And in fact I would only stretch to 1.3 with a very good reason. (I mean within reason obviously... if Ivey offered me some of his action in the WSOP ME at 1.5 and promised me he would genuinely be trying his best then I would obviously snap it up.)

I personally think it is a piss take that (almost) anyone would ever try to sell action at 1.6 or more. Regardless of how 'soft the field is'. Others will likely disagree, but that's my opinion.

In all honesty JB... if you are selling action in a live tournament it should be at no mark up (at least for the first few times). You might well be able to sell with mark up due to people following your diary wanting to have a goodwill 'fun punt' on you... but this does not mean you should sell at mark up for the first few times.

Very much this.

Yeah ofc it's right.

I don't get it. So many people think 'the market can set itself' even though the bulk of the buyers may have no awareness of true variance/roi etc.


so why 'should' he set it at no markup IF people will buy at 1.2 or w/e.



I fwiw am massively on the side that people overcharge and provide little value very often and rather just pass on their variance and a potentially -Ev proposition. I'm trying to see why he shouldn't mark it up given it will sell.


is it ethical or for some actual strategic reason.


what markup would people pay for rastafish at the next dtd 300 ? and at what point is it just a breakeven stake?

Think you should sell at spot personally until you have some results behind you.

Dont believe in mark up personally but do understand why people do it without neccessarily agreeing with people about what they think they are worth.

I'm more of a 10% of my mates kinda guy and thats all. I do it for the sweat.

Not sure what you are actually saying here Beanie, cos you appear to be contradicting yourself. You seem to be saying that you believe people are over-charging/offering bad deals to potential investors, but then you go on to say that you see no reason why JB should not sell at mark-up if he would be able to sell.

Are you basically saying "since everyone else is doing it, JB might as well do it too"?

I don't see the contradiction. He's saying it's not unethical to charge people as much as you can for something. He's also saying that he thinks that buyers are generally paying too high a price.

Analogously you might feel that...
If I'm trying to sell my old car you there is nothing wrong with trying to sell it for as much money as possible. I might think that the eventual buyer has paid too much for my car- I wouldn't buy my car for that amount of money- but it's still not unethical to sell if for that much if that's what the buyer is willing to pay.

Ya the current status quo is the contradiction imo not me.


I sold at 1.25 for the WSOP ME last year because I HAD To sell to play and it's a 10k and it's a one off tournament, + I have no specific record to show live, I wanted TO PROVIDE VALUE to people backing me not just spread the variance and pay 7.2% of the buyin myself.



Many threads I see on here AND on 2+2 I just look at the markup and think you'll be alreeet pet.



Many market place buyers can be punters etc and don't necessarily have to have any idea about roi/variance/the maths of goddam donkathons!  Just because someone sells out doesn't mean it was good value or even fair value. It just sold out. That cant last.



There is also lots of other factors going into the fact of sending money to random people, I would pay a higher markup for someone that I know in person and know that I can trust than I would for someone who is most likely a better ROI proposition but who I don't know if they will actually pay out. Obviously most of the time you expect to lose with backing so it's not normally a problem that matters, But it's definitely something that should be taken into consideration.

Aren't we just talking round in circles here - it's supply and demand?  There are lots of products and services that are priced at a point that seems unreasonable to many, but others are happy to pay it.  Who determines what's fair, other than the buyer and the seller?

Over time markets change, and it might be that buyers become more savvy (or have smaller budgets) and so the markups drop. But that's still being driven by supply and demand.

ya but if it's the blind leading the blind lol it's good to have the discussion.

I'm not having a pop Andrew, but

"I sold at 1.25 for the WSOP ME last year because I HAD To sell to play and it's a 10k and it's a one off tournament, + I have no specific record to show live, I wanted TO PROVIDE VALUE to people backing me not just spread the variance and pay 7.2% of the buyin myself."

1.25 (ie a substantial premium) doesn't really provide value does it? Yes I know the main is "soft" but there's a heck of a lot of "soft" roadhumps to get to over several days to even min-cash right

In my (observers) terms, value for an event however "soft" is at spot for someone without a long and successful record in the type of event they are seeking staking for, which you state you yourself had no specific record for

Of course we know the motivations of people staking can be not merely for "value"..people stake people who are mates, or who they respect, or because they want a punt when they can't play themselves

For John B, I feel much of the above is also a consideration.

So just to confirm Beanie... what markup do you think JB should charge, if any?

It won't be until the long term staking tide goes out that you discover which people seeking staking aren't wearing any swimming trunks

1.25 (ie a substantial premium) doesn't really provide value does it?



I disagree so much.


Relative to the rest of the 'WSOP ME pieces market' it was excellent value. Relative to how well I can play in a deepstacked slow live tournament I think it is and was excellent value.



I have no clue about JB or his skill set, so no reason to ask me what I think his roi is. bit like lodden thinks.

FYP

As far as I've noticed nobody had pointed out that this was wrong.

Yes compared to comparable stake requests, 1.25 looked good

I am referring to 1.25 as an absolute, really

Leaving aside stakers motivations, what other people are asking, the field soft or otherwise, 1.25 is still a big premium, I think, and this is not a criticism of you merely I think a lot of the staking market has got blase about the levels of premiums being requested

and yes, lots of others sell out higher (supply and demand etc)

Incred that there are 5 pages saying:

JB is worth zero mark up but could probably sell at a mark up because people are nice/dumb/gamblers whatever

I think JB needs to really know he's worth say 1.23 so I have prepared a template which probably doesn't need much tampering


Baseline                                                           1.0:
Crush $10NL online (regularly for $30+ scores)        1.03
Insane hedge at live bowl comps                          1.11
Sort of listened to poker coach                             1.13
Posted HH's, very few totes spewy                       1.16
Played a few deepstacks at DTD, went 'deep'         1.18
Friend of Eurekans                                             1.20
Learning blog up and running                                1.23

Think that's about right - 2% please at 1.23

I think its important to realise that the WSOP Main Event is a very different proposition than pretty much any other tournament, this is due to both the field size (and hence the huge prizes available at the FT) and the fact that there are significantly higher % of weaker players (thanks to the large amounts of satellite winners/people taking shots) than you would get in any tournament of equivalent size. Therefore any competent online tournament player is going to be able to justify a markup much higher than 1.25, markups of 1.4-1.6 are far from ridiculous for this specific tournament, and not taking this into account is a pretty big mistake.

Like anything else in poker, you have to consider the notional long run when you determine the value of markup and given the specific factors of the WSOP ME much higher markups can be justified IMO.

  

Possibly because he'd written it in a ridiculous colour and no one read it?

Yeah, thought I'd got that wrong lol. If someone was 120% then I'd more than happily buy at 1.2!

exactly it's not necessarily helpful to talk specifically about ME because it's so unusual, I just referenced myself because I didn't want to seem to be calling other people out. Could quite easily go into live board/2+2 and see people selling at higher than what I sold for ME for random live comps ...... valueeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee


There have been some great discussions on 2+2 a while back and another one recently about all of this, and about marketplace liquidity and just how ridic some people price themselves up at.

It always irks me when someone wants to sell at a decent markup whilst also selling 50%+ of themselves, if you're selling a 10% sweat for a tournament you are rolled for then an over the top markup is alot more acceptable, rather than people just picking numbers out of the air and comparing them to other peoples threads and getting themselves as close to a freeroll as possible.




yeh what kinboshi said silly colours get scrolled past.

Let the market decide.

FWIW John, if I was selling right now I would be selling for UKIPT Cork @ 1.2. Take from that what you will.

how much value to the staker do you think you are providing?   or should I say at what point do you think you become a breakeven stake assuming everyone knows you can be trusted implicitly.

I think my roi in a UKIPT would be >40% if I could play enough games to get a true ROI, but that is the problem. You can never find your true ROI in a specific tournament.

obv I do know that, i'm just trying to quantify what value people think they are providing. :)up

There was a decent amount of discussion on 2p2 about similar issues this summer caused by Galen Hall's very high markups for various WSOP/Venetian events http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/184/staking-selling-shares-live/galen-hall-2012-summer-selling-1204267/

A good read if people can be bothered reading through a 200+ post thread

This again? Really?,!

ha Galen hall and his 1.6 for the toughest 6max 10k you can find. Hilarious levelling banter....... and he claims to be 'really intelligent'.

Such brutal, yet informed damage.

You win sir, nh, wp.

And from such a nice guy... makes it all the more cutting.

I've got a feeling you had a missed calling as a surgeon, sir.

Sorry to hi jack your thread JB but I'm too shy to start my own :)

Tbh it looks like 1.2 is ok and anything higher needs defending. The ME comments are interesting though. Does nobody take into account exs or is that not the done thing?

I'm such a novice. Like I say never thought of selling or buying outside of mates but thx for feedback

Almost there ;)

#gettingreadyforonedrop2013

I am not sure if it is sometimes supply and demand? I am sure there are a few members on here that have took a % in someone as just a punt rather than considering the mark up they have advertised at.

You can go back pages in this thread and someone mentioned about Daniel Morgan being able to sell his package at 1.6, because it's a 'soft' field and full of businessmen, etc. But everyone else who I can remember was selling at max 1.3 & are far better players. I think some people actually keep on adding to their mark up as they think about it even more, by thinking "I think I am 1.15, but I'll round it upto 1.2"

There isn't many people in the staking boards who are anywhere near the mark up they are selling at. The only who is perhaps close is Alex & fair play to him.

As for John Black, I try to keep up with most diaries on here, but everytime I read his diary it is a HH from a live cash game, no mark up needed imo.

I sell now and again and always at a very decent rate.

Feels like a dig at me  ;D

What is that, if not supply and demand?

No one has mentioned expenses.

When you are sat on your fat arse in Blighty having a punt on a Blonde in Prague/Vegas or wherever surely you would expect to pay some mark up for expenses the player is gonna pay.

So really 1.12 is kinda break even? It's gotta be minus EV for anyone to sell at spot, or am I wrong?

:D

You're right, but nobody will agree with you here

Do you play with Dan a lot so you know how good he is?

Pretty ridic post all round really.  I opened up the 7 other Main Event staking threads from blonde this year and the markups were 1.56, 1.4, 1.5, 1.4, 1.5, 1.5, 1.2 and without going onto 2p2 to check Im pretty sure I remeber from the time not many people selling for less than 1.3 so i dunno where you got all these players selling at max 1.3 that are better than Dan Morgan thing from.

The closest person to good value ont he staking board is one of the people that auctions most of their action ensuring they sell for the absolute maximum people will pay at?

And lol @ deciding John should sell at spot purely from reading his diary

PS- wp if you're just a serial troll

I have only ever bought action infrequently and for very minor amounts relative to the more serious stakers like yourself, but I always thought  from the perspective that the markup I paid was for their playing ability and they wouldn't be factoring their expenses into it.

I rarely sold action here either, I think only twice that I can remember and only once at markup when there were still plenty of fish. I sold the action to cover expenses in the first instance, but the markup was only because I felt I was worth it and not to ensure all expenses were covered.

Given what's transpired since then and how much has come to light with regards to staking, I most likely wasn't worth the markup even back then and definitely wouldn't be now even though I think I'm a +ev investment in an average live comp.

When I put my staking thread up for Vegas last year, again I was pretty sure that I'd be worth 1.2  in the expected field at Binions, but for the sake of the extra $100 or so bucks I would make from selling at that I decided to just sell at spot. Also that way avoiding any possible aggro with asking for markup and also try to get it through without being told I should lower it to 0.8  :P

All I mean is that I wouldn't dream of marking up anything I sold, so that I could cover expenses when I'm off on a trip to Vegas and be able to eat more fillet steaks instead of Denny's while I'm away. It just seems wrong to me, but I'm obviously looking at it as someone who is now a recreational player and not doing it for 'work' anymore. Would you factor in expenses to your markup because for you it's work and therefore any costs associated with the trip come as part of the package?

Just trying to get my head around it and I'm quite sure that once explained I'll realise that I've always been thinking about it wrong.
 

What happens when a tournament/ game is a long way away?  e.g. someone going just for the ME, or maybe even the Aussie???

Can't factor in expenses to markup. That's ridic. It's the players choice to the tourney so they should incur the expenses. Next online players will be adding electricity and Internet costs to their markup

Just remember if in doubt you could always take advantage of the good natured community spirit on here and run an auction, fuck the rest take as much money as you can....

How do you know how good dan is and what makes you the guy to judge? Because e doesn't have a big hendon mob? There's people I speak to every day that have 0 hendon mov scores that I would pay 1.5 in the main

Agree with this. There is also time and effort to consider. As an extreme example, I sure am going to grind the WSOP main event at 1.0 when it takes 2 weeks to make the final table whilst, as you say, the other person has to do absolutely nothing.

But if you want to sell at a mark up, technically, you should be selling because you have an ROI above that figure, and not purely because you have to invest time and expense.
If someone charges a mark up, and quotes 'expenses', it would feel like I'm freerolling a holiday for them, if I buy.

Given that pretty much 100% of staking proposals include the 'juice' there's already an implied mark up if ROI comparisons are being made.
Selling 10% of a DTD £300 at £33.60 is selling the prize pool at 1.12

I've sold a few pieces of myself for DTD events in the past 6 months and pitched it at 1.16 generally to round off the numbers for calculating the stake.
I sold the CPP package at $30 for 1% but the entry cost was $2700+$300 so that was 1.11 effective.

Back to the thread's purpose.

John, I don't know if you're worth a mark up of 1.2, 1.3 or whatever, but if I can sell 30% at 1.16 then for sure you can.

This is a good point and one I'd considered myself. I think in general though we all accept the reg fee to be part of the tournament buyin.

Personally I think charging for expenses is ok in certain situations. I generally don't bother due to arguments it'd cause but say I decide to go play the DTD £300. I can either drive home and not get much sleep or book a hotel and get a decent nights sleep. It's in my interest and the backer's interest for me to get the hotel. Let's say the hotel is £50 then the overal cost is:

£300 entry
£36 juice
£50 hotel
= £386

So 10% here would be £38.60 - a markup of 1.286. Given any backers are going to get an equal share with me of any prize money then I think it fair this expense is included in the package - otherwise the tournament is more profitable for the backer than it is for me, and that's not even including the effort required by the player.

The difference for me comes down to "would that expense be incurred anyway?". So food/drink etc I'd never dream of including. But in my case I wouldn't play the tournament if I didn't get the staking. So it's not like i'd be paying the £50 regardless. So in that sense I think it's fair to include it in the cost of the tournament.

One final point is my staking requests are few and far between and are generally one offs. If I ask for staking it's because I want to play a tournament and am seeking financial help to do so. In this instance I'm more inclined to write off the expense as the staking is allowing me to play a tournament I'd otherwise not get to play.

if you had not lost your debit card again :)

fyp

So if you sold action in the Aussie Million would you add the cost of airfare?

It depends.

If some comes up and says to me: "I want you to go and play the Aussie Millions and I'll stake you" then yes I would expect to have air fare/hotel covered in the price.

If whilst over there I decide to play a side event then I would not include the expenses as I am there anyway and besides they've been paid for elsewhere.

Dan (at the time) was one of the biggest contributors to the PHA board and really active in improving blonde, I think, in a community like blonde that should be taken into account as well, Dan had put a lot of time into improving and helping people on Blonde and as a result can justify a bit of a premium on his packages, imo.

1.6 Really wasn't that ridic at all (as it happened other people were selling lower which meant SLIGHTLY better value was available prolly) but that doesn't make the proposition a "losing one" by any stretch. In fact i could prolly come up with at least 5 way worse offers than that in the last 12 months but obviously im not going to.

did he get the 1.6? I definatly think contribution to blonde is far more important than roi. If people where prepared to 1.6 then that's upto them.

John why are you asking about markup? Do you want an honest assessment of what people think you are worth or what you could honestly charge and sell out.

VWP

i have good credit!

Neither tbh.. If I wanted a truthful answer of what im worth there are at least 5 people ITT I trust to give me their best opinions, each is a better player and all are more experienced.

This thread is because I dont understand how to calculate  markup.. For anyone in any tournament/ game.

I am at the same time considering my 'year' this year and what where and how I can play some events/ stops.  I have a lot of leave and want to structure it all better.

Thanks David, I agree Bobba, and nh flushy..

you've been told alot of times, you should sell at 1.0, but you can sell at 1.2.

Is this a level?

Dan is a very good player, with a very good poker "brain" who I have played with quite a few times. If he sold for 1.6 then FairPlay to him if he got it.

Your comment "I sell now and again at a very decent rate" . Who gets the decent rate, you or the buyer?

Just my 2penneth for JB

I have probably in terms of number of live MTT's sold the most over the past year and have tended to package them together and class myself as a slightly above average rec player who has built up an element of trust on here over the past couple of years and have never found it an issue selling but when I have sold have always sold at spot. The past few months have sold for 23 tournaments across 3 packages totalling £7545 and returned £12420 to investors but if and when I sold again would sell a spot.

You have aspirations to be a "pro" and are young enough with not many commitments and hopefully an ever improving skillset that will enable you at some point to do that, so in the meantime if I were you and obv only imho I would sell at spot and if and when you have had a decent bink then maybe you can justify a markup.

For me I always appreciate the backing and as they are always events grouped together that I want to play and could never justify playing circa £2500 of live tournies over a 5-6weeks period am happy to swallow the ex's myself.

Pads is 100% right you could sell at 1.2 but should at 1%

I bought in dan Morgan because I really like him. As a one off punt I couldn't care about analysing his exact value.

He has helped me several times in the past and given his time and advice freely

As it happens I also like his game and thought he had a reasonable shot at a return. I should also point out, I didn't care if he didn't return, and would loved it if he did

I'm not a pro poker player, I don't live my life by EV decisions (because you can't measure it).

I was delighted to invest in dan, did I think he ripped me off? Obv not, otherwise I wouldn't invest

Surely people make up their own minds and why and who they buy and at what premium

If jb is trading in an open and free maket and COULD sell at 1.2, why SHOULD he sell at 1.0?

Not many economists would agree with you there

<3 flushy.

Thin.....and all of what the Eso man says.  I sold at spot for an age, still do if I feel I need it to play but want to and it's just variance reducing. I will sometimes sell at a mark up of 1.1-1.2 max - it's tourne and staker dependant. 

Let's say jb takes the advice of lots of respected posters and sells at 1.0, and everyone who said he should sell at 1.0 then buys a piece?

Have they not just manipulated the market in their favour?

Put a thread up at 1.2 and see if it's sells, that's fine and JBs choice.  I think it's just solid advice about building a reputation, part of community and demonstrating some results. No disrespect to jb, I don't know him - however as one of the most active stakers here I wouldn't buy at 1.2, I might do at spot in a £1000 plus buy in - well probably would at spot to give him a spin. That's just my opinion, like you say Guy if others bought at 1.2 their prerogative.

if i think someone is a 1.0 shot i wont buy unless its 0.8, im looking for a decent discrepancy from my own tissue mark up. Thats why im a very rare staker on the boards. Im usually hunting around my skype group chat in case anyone is taking a shot on their own dime and having some of a package at ~1.1

Honoured and very humbled - you bought a piece of me at spot once, I must be good.

(second thoughts it was a swop for some %age of a dodgy bet you were having ;))

One of us got a return (whistle)

eventually...

Tap in


My Mrs still goes on about a bloke shouting across a Dublin hotel lobby "you owe me...." lol

you would have won aswelll if it hadn't been for those pesky kids

"leaks"

Sorry but thats pretty ridic thinking you could add the charge of a hotel room or any other expenses.  If you're not prepared to eat the cost of the expenses to play a tournament then dont play it, you cant pass that onto backers.  Backers are buying a share in the tournament that you are deciding you want to play and should only have to buy a piece of the tournament only.  Where would it end?  What if the  only hotel you could get for the night was a £200 per night hotel?  just flick it in and charge the backers?  Room service? go for it and charge the backers, massage during the tournament will help you relax and play better, cool lets go for an hour and charge the backers.  Are you gonna add costs of flghts, taxi to the airport, cost of a new suitcase, some sunglasses for the table so you dont give off any tells, dinner at the dinner break, taxi to the casino etc

And for anyone thinking that expenses are just a natural cost of playing live poker and can be added when selling pieces, do you realise there are thousands of tournaments available 24/7 online and you dont have to leave the house?

cf not only is it TL;DR but its FPC;DR

Aaron is such a wombat its untrue.

Bit harsh on wombats, especially the really cute baby albino ones:

YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFyfhZidQ7Y

Your where would it end argument doesn't really hold because if someone decided to add an expense for room service then you can clearly tell them to gtfo. But if a proposal was to clearly point out what expense was included then I don't see a problem with that.

I think it applies more to longer term staking deals. If I was suddenly rich and wanted to stake someone to fly around the world playing EPTs/WSOP/etc then I think it more than fair that the prices of travel/accommodation be included as part of the deal.

If you were to offer to stake me 50% in a bit of a round the world trip, but I had to pay all the travel/accomodation myself then i'd be likely saying no. By the time I got around to spending all that money the tournaments would suddenly be -EV for me and +EV for the backer. By factoring the expenses into the deal you can end up with a situation that is +EV for both backer and player.

As I say, for a one off trip down the DTD I'm happy to swallow the expense myself and accept it's probably -EV for me to play in the tournament. My reason for staking/playing isn't neccesarily to make a profit.

You can also argue it back the other way. Only £300 goes into the prizepool. Why should the backer have to pay their share of the £36? That's an expense of running/being in the tournament.

agree with keeping expenses off the mark up. If you dont want to pay them, play online

Because the registration fee is part of the buyin. When people talk about ROI the registration fee is included in the buyin when ROI is calculated. So if the buyin was £300+36 a break even player would be cashing for £336 on average. A player with an ROI of 10% would be cashing for £369.6 on average.

Expenses shouldn't be the reason you charge a markup. Say if you thought the fairest price for you to sell for would be 1.1 based on results / ability you might decide with the expenses its not worth you playing and selling unless you sell for >1.3, in that case you should either not play or charge 1.1 and accept that it might be a -EV punt for you.

It shows how ridic the mark up was when it didn't get even close to selling out. Better players sold their Vegas packages for a lot lower price & sold out.

also, putting expenses into packages are lol, nobody asked you to go to Prague to play poker. Free holiday just about then?

I reckon the exes are kinda in there but not really talked about openly. Selling at spot is 100% bad business for any player who can pick 2 cards up off the felt and can fold top pair sometimes.

There was a funny thread a couple of years ago about a player who charged his backers for massages at the table before they all kicked off. Hehe. Anyone remember that?

That was wazz and the thread ran and ran...

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/184/staking-selling-shares-live/ept-san-remo-package-742434/

Don't agree.

Given that the average return in most comps is 0.9, and in any £100+ comp almost all the field think they can play a bit, it's often v. good business.
Most players rate themselves as better than they actually are.

It doesn't matter what the markup is for.  If you have added up the cost of your breakfast and massage and decided that comes to 1.6 then ask for 1.6.  If someone decides to pay 1.6 thinking you are worth that for your mad skillz, then it doesn't matter if you are using the money to compensate your breakfast or your time in the tourny.

Obv you can't charge expenses back after the event, the price you sold at is the price you sold at and there ends the backer's liability.

I don't usually have much of an opinion on pricing.. if I don't like the price of the proposition, I pass.  However, I do remember a couple of people trying to sell action in an event whilst in Vegas and asking for markup to help with exes.  That did mildly irritate as if they didn't play the event and stayed in their room, they still have the same expenses anyway.  Silly really, as if they'd just charged the markup 'for skillz' rather than 'for exes' it may well have been the same price, but I wouldn't have batted an eyelid.

One other point (I think MC raised, not often I disagree) along the lines of "sure am putting all that effort in for 1.0 whilst the backer does nothing.  Well, the backer didn't do anything, but his money was put to work?  The backer allowed you to reduce your exposure in that tourny or possibly allowed you the only route available to you to actually play it at all.  

Otherwise, I agree with the general sentiment that most players could ask 1.2 yet should ask 1.0  The reasoning obviously goes beyond economics.  For the minority that really are a good spot at higher markups, no problem with them charging what they want and people deciding to pay it or not.

That's my point, I already know this.  I'm not asking about that!

I'm asking how do 'we' (the community) think its fair to calculate and sell/ buy at what % markup and WHY?


I KNOW I will be a good favorite to sell out 50% at 1.2 if I put it up.

I KNOW 100% I will sell out at 1.0.

I also believe I am good value at both, but clearly haven't got enough live results to prove it.



How about a new question -
What price would someone as good as Merson, Ivey, Openheim and other long term 'cash game winning players' be fair at in a normal $1k fo in Vegas?

AND WHYYYY???





I appreciate both comments, and I think you're both right.  What I'm trying to get across is it doesn't mean to me that I'm trying to say
"I'm better than Eso because I'm putting my thread up at 1.2 and he's up at 1.0"

What I am trying to say, is that I've worked on my game a lot in the last 12 months.. AND I have improved a LOT.  There are some well thought of members of blonde I'm close with in poker terms and I know they would back me up on this.  So what I'm trying to work out, is how does anyone justify x.x markup as a result of
- live results
- online results
- game improvement
- other categories?

If I understand you all correctly, few, if anyone on blonde has enough live tournaments to truly justify any markup on live events alone - statistically.
Alex G has won £xx in x events at y buyin... However, he will be the first to tell you he knows he's run way above 'EV' in live mtt terms, really.

Everyones guessing obv and many are attempting to squeeze as much from the market as possible.

who is this even aimed at now?

Yeah, now that we've got everything squared away from the initial debate legoooooooooo

Oh no wait...

Its all done to jb anyway. Go for a new approach, you offer at 1.0 and anyone who wants to pay more can. Easy game. No ego from you then too

Lol, Marky the initial debate has ended in an answer of ... The poker community which is full of a wide range of people from all walks of life and often has a lean toward the mathematically gifted, with regular economics, maths, stats and other broker like-minded people saying that they work out how to sell pieces of themselves and buy pieces of others by...



Wasn't really what I expected tbh.  

So the additional question is trying to gather and gauge the ideas and thoughts behind some well respected cash game players, and clearly gifted poker players... playing a type of poker they have little/ no results in (ignore iveys actual mtt history obv) and to work out why and how those players would be able to charge what %?

It's fine to charge to come back over the bridge ??

We would pay for you all to go back.... :)

Hmm sorted my %% out nice 1

doing my best to take my ego out of it completely anyways atm.  I'm getting there with the personality supression/ adjustment... but I have a 'big' personality to deal with.  (notice didnt say a good one, just an inflated one)

I am wondering whether I go with my 'feeling' or 'brain' on the 1.0 for the heart; or 1.2 for the clear value to me as a player.

Seems a strange and interesting divide in the community to me.

Charge what you want .If people fancy a spin they will

Better hurry up and decide either way JB, the comp is in a month ;)

with all due respect Aaron, you're arguing a point about a player you know nothing about with people who know a LOT more about poker than you and know the player in question very very well.

I fail to see why you continue to insist that was a bad value package when you have literally nothing to back it with

Blimey. What a royal cock up that was!

he's got a great moustache tho

but who is the prague free holiday aimed at.

People are stuck on this saying "it's a soft field" and loads more silly sayings. You are playing the WSOP if you go deep, then you ae up against the very best players in the world & not to mention previous to that, you still need the massive amount of luck to get deep in that tournament. If you are saying that Daniel Morgan is a 1.6 player in any tournament, then Chris Brammer, Alex, Trigg and numerous more will be selling a package at 2.5.

You say I have nothing to back it up with, but everything speaks for itself. The package did not even come close to selling out & it's the only BAP I can remember that has never sold on Blonde. Furthermore you say I continue to insist it's a bad value package, but I have already mentioned that a lot of better players was already selling Vegas action for a lot lower, why would I buy in a player who is selling at a higher rate who I believe is not a better player than someone else who is selling a lot cheaper?

I can sit here and think I'm being harsh on Dan, but then I am of the opinion that he was genuinely trying to get pretty much a free meal ticket out of the stake.

Like I also said earlier, people are definitely rounding up there figures to suit. Players will sit there and get to the assumption that they are worth 1.12, then finally arrive at the figure of 1.2.

It was an example Patrick as I knew there was a bunch of you that went to Prague.

If expenses are going to put into stakes, then why stop there? backers might as well pay for the whole thing.

Adding expenses to a stake is ridic. You are playing poker & still enjoying a break.

Doubt I would sell for a anything less than 3.0 in WSOP main, in reality prob 4.0+ but that's a very unique tournament.

The way I see it is sell it at a price you would pay yourself. If I'm going to sell at 1.4 for something it's because if my mythical duplicate was selling at 1.4 I would buy. Now if someone came up to me and said 'hey I want to put you in the one drop at 2.0' then obv I would snap it, there is no way in hell though that I am going to try and sell to my friends and this community at that price.

This shows how little you know. Did you consider the volume of action on blonde at this time? Just because 100ks worth of action went and it was sold @ 1.45 on average say, doesn't mean the guy priced higher at 1.6 isn't value, its just what the market has finite capital. I have a hard time believing Alex thinks his roi is 2x Dan Morgans. Never mind 2.5x. Please don't talk about people you know nothing about in such an insulting manner.

The highlighted text just says everything. YOU BELIEVE that a player who is better than Dan is selling at lower value. YOU BELIEVE. Maybe you aren't correct? I mean no one has the statistical data to present a solid argument proving Alex has a better roi due to sample size, so I find your rather ill informed opinion to be extremely incorrect. (sorry to pick on you guys here, just don't want to bring Brammer who is clearly an MTT monster into it)

Wow just read every page, what a mess.

You make a point here, but from what I can gather I would guess Alex has a better ROI than Dan as you see him cash pretty often. So I am pretty sure backing Alex would be far more value than a ridic 1.6 mark up.

Is it not a bit of a joke that he sees the average mark up and decides to market this a lot higher?

i thought you meant this thread and was just gonna type  +1
just going round in circles.


/end thread (please)

Yes but tournament variance dictates that if Alex and Dan both played 24 live tournaments a year for the next 100 years they wouldn't have a very strong sample size.

How can you call it ridiculous when you know literally nothing about Dan? It is for investors to decide, and if I had the right amount of capital DM would be an investment at 1.6markup in the main event. The average markup for the main event was probably ~1.45, so its hardly that out of whack Dan Morgan was so out of line. This is the guy that sold action for the 10k HU event if i recall correctly, so please don't talk about players abilities when you know absolutely nothing about them. This is the key here. The blonde market is a free market, people should post @ whatever they want. If someone was seen to abuse naive investors or see the start of a scam they would obviously be right to say something, but just because one person doesn't perceive an offer as value then it doesn't mean it isn't so. It is quite obvious someone like Rupert Elder uses the marketplace to make money, hunting around in those pesky auctions. I might take 5% in JB, that I'd class as a punt. Just because its not value for Rupert wouldn't mean it isn't value for me. This is what people evaluating marketplace packages need to understand, people have a varying ideas when it comes to staking, and as such a package that looks good to you might be horrific for me, because we have different goals/ideas/perceptions. You have no idea about Dan's background and you really should understand that as a pro he could easily find this extremely offensive. I find it best not to speak/argue about things I know nothing about. I might try to contribute, but if someone with more experience tells me I'm wrong, then I at least listen. I've been around 2+2/blonde staking boards for ages now, and generally choose to stay away from buying any action at all, because it is still a sellers marketplace, but that doesn't mean I feel I can go around telling Keys his markup is too high, I just don't buy. I don't understand why you would call Dan out knowing absolutely nothing about his poker background, and using a sample size that is probably less than 0.1% of what is truly needed to gain an idea of actual rois in these tournaments is equally ludicrous.

I always fought arguments with people who said Aaron was a troll, I always insisted he was just clueless, but this thread has proved me wrong, so apologies to everybody.

"People are stuck on this saying "it's a soft field" and loads more silly sayings."

" I would guess Alex has a better ROI than Dan as you see him cash pretty often. So I am pretty sure backing Alex would be far more value than a ridic 1.6 mark up"

Amongst many others, just constantly in every thread being completely clueless and spoiling discussions and making the same people saying the same thing again and again and again.

REST

Lol.

Just can see better value for money,

why is saying it a soft field a "stupid saying"

Pleno you've got it all wrong, you've forgotten how he sticks to his guns! Remember!? He sticks to his guns and takes the abuse" well.

Maybe if you stuck to your guns a but more you'd have made the advent calendar :D

Never live that one down.

Eeeeek, bitter bitter!

Dan Morgan is a fantastic poker player imo.

Aaron is a fantastic troll.

But very tiresome now.

I just don't................



I can't even............





oh dear lord ..............

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2JzbyZV8p3I/TbmeqSCm0WI/AAAAAAAAAHM/7OriuuGKjPk/s640/maximum_trolling.jpg)

I got in the 2011 "premier" one met, so no reason to be bitter :P

Thats completely different, if sommeone wanted to put you specifically into a tournament in a location where you would have expenses then they should pay/share in the expenses.  If its absolutely your choice that you want to go to the tournament then I dont see how you can charge anyone else for expenses.

Its 1 of the downsides to live poker, expenses can mount up if you go regularly and you need to be decently +ev in the tournament to make a profit after expenses.

Do you not think you have said way too much on the advent calendar already?

LOL, brilliant

Oh dear flushy. For one, auctions find the equilibrium price not the highest possible price. Second, this is very rich coming from the person who sold at the highest markup ever on blonde, 2.0 in a tournament with 18% rake iirc, which you then royally punted :D. Also the person who got a horse to sell at 1.5 for a 10k and then endorsed that by claiming to buy a huge piece which you weren't paying that much for. If either of us has taken advantage of the blonde community spirit, it isn't me.

Sniping itt

What I mean is, like gouty says, for a player, selling at 1.0 is actually selling at a discount and is usually a bad idea. People are irrational when it comes to big tournaments, they want to play at any cost, but if you're incurring extra expense to play a tournament, selling a piece at 1.0 just raises your expense:buyin ratio further. A professional player shouldn't really be concerned with the glitz of a big tournament and should go where the value is. Long story short, if you can't sell at a markup, you would probably be (economically) better off playing a smaller tournament closer to home. This doesn't apply if you win a non-transferrable satellite seat to something, then you could rationally sell at 1.0.

However, for a staker, what the markup is spent on and what expense is involved in playing a tournament is not important. Like Simon G says, a horse can't use expenses to 'justify' a markup and therefore it doesn't belong in any staking request.

Hmmm I may not have said it very well.

First of all, the ridiculous. Clearly a player can't come back and say "oh by the way, lunches came to $1k so you all owe me another $100 each"  It seems pretty obvious I would have thought, but it did get a mention, so  unless the staking thread says "when I come back I will also send out a bill for my lunch" (gl selling out on that) then clearly this would be not down to the backer.

Back into the realms of conventional stake requests.  I guess what I meant was, in a stake thread, you can ask and 'justify' whatever you like.  From a personal view, it seems more unpalatable to be covering someone's hotel than it does to be covering their time/effort/skill.  But it really doesn't matter - you could ask for 1.2 with the intention of going to the tourny whether you sell or not, but if you collect the 1.2s in your mind you are having the backers cover your lunch whilst in the minds of the backers they are paying 1.2 for your skillset.  In other words, the equilibrium value of 1.2 might be arrived at from different variables, but it matters not.. the price is agreeable to both and where the .2 gets spent doesn't matter.

Lastly, as it also got a mention, the satellite qualifiers are often the most irritating.  Someone that is a recreational player or micro grinder or whatever suddenly binks a $10k non-transferrable seat.  To sell off 20% at 1.0 to cover the flight and hotel seems reasonable (and perhaps a logic flaw for me that it seems to be far more reasonable than ^^)  This is a player that spun up $20 into a $10k seat though, so it really seems unnecessary to sell at 1.2, bordering on greed.

Aaron, you need a massive amount of luck to go deep in ANY tournament that is a totally moot point.

I'm not saying, and have never said that Dan Morgan is 1.6 mark-up value in any tournament - Phil Ivey is NOT 1.6 mark up value in ANY tournament, no-one in the world is, so another moot point.

Do you know ANYTHING about Dan's game? Do you know ANYTHING about his background? You know plenty about Alex because he has a diary here, we know plenty about Trigg because of his very public results, and we know about Brammer because of his success - I'd hazard a guess that you actually know nothing about any of there poker games. There is certain things I'd back brammer in over Dan, Dan in over Alex and Alex in over Bram, but I can make these statements with authority because I know the three of them and their poker games very well.

Incidently, Brammer would have sold in the main event at a higher price than 1.6 if he had put a package up im sure of that.



Like Adam said (and I said earlier) there were actually better value propositions out there probably (not by a lot I hasten to add) so if you had $1000 to spend on main event action you'd prolly have got a little more "bang for your buck" buying something else, however if you had $50,000 to spend on Mai Event action you'd have made at least a good buy.


You're not being harsh, you're just calling someone you don't out in public over a situation you don't know anything about - you know how people I know get 50/50 freerolls in the main event - it's that type of tournament.

me too. But to be honest I never got half the shit Aaron is getting.

Dan Morgan won the Oxford Cup Aaron. He also played goaltender for Sheffields ice hockey team Arron. He is double hard stands 6'5" and had a spiders web tattoo on his face

You been smoking in the morning

Well done, you once again manage to be a complete ass over something you know nothing about

james, flushy had nothing to do with my ridic package. He left his account on and i put 15% on or w/e the figure was mainly because he wouldnt buy lol