Arbitration required regarding staking

[Rupert]

I bought 25% of a friend (at 1.2) in a tournament. He wins the tournament which includes a £550 seat to another tournament. I offer him his action for the subsequent tournament back at 1.4. He accepts it but thinks it should be his for 1.0.

His argument is that I am entitled to 25% of his prize and the prize is essentially the winnings + £550.

"the added prize is really just money in my pocket after the buyin
i'm £550 richer after playing than i would have been if i hadn't come 2nd in notts
you're entitled to 25% of that £550 but not more
otherwise i'm being punished
just to be clear, from my point of view if i have to pay 1.4 the buyin costs me £550 plus an extra £55
which is a bummer if i was gonna play anyway
which is kind of irrelevant but it helps make my point i think
so i'm penalised for winning the seat"

My thoughts are that the action follows through and i'm entitled to 25% in the subsequent tournament since he was paid in a seat rather than cash.

Anyway thoughts appreciated!

[thetank]

If the deal was for one tourney, and if he doesn't want the action to follow through on the seat he won, then it clearly doesn't.

So long as he gives you £137.50 for 25% of the seat, he is doing no wrong.
Doesn't matter if you bought the initial 25% at 1.0 or 1.8.

[boldie]

This is exactly the sort of thing you should have sorted before hand.

No arbitration necessary as none can be given. This has been discussed in the past..some people would give it and some wouldn't (he atleast owes you the 25% of 550 though)

[thetank]

I've honestly never seen a more contrived attempt to squeeze £55 out of a mate.

[gatso]

If the deal was for one tourney, and if he doesn't want the action to follow through on the seat he won, then it clearly doesn't.

So long as he gives you £137.50 for 25% of the seat, he is doing no wrong.
Doesn't matter if you bought the initial 25% at 1.0 or 1.8.

this

[Rupert]

Well part of the prize he won was the equity which has value >25% of £550.

And neither of us are trying to squeeze a few quid out of a mate, we just want to come to a fair answer in case it ever happens in a far bigger tournament.

[gatso]

Well part of the prize he won was the equity which has value >25% of £550.

you can't argue that. he could just as well say that he's -ev to the field in the other tourney so your share should <25% of £550

if you want a % of the 2nd tourney you need to agree that beforehand. otherwise you need to work it out at it's face value and figure out any staking deal on the 2nd one seperately

[thetank]

Well part of the prize he won was the equity which has value >25% of £550.

And neither of us are trying to squeeze a few quid out of a mate, we just want to come to a fair answer in case it ever happens in a far bigger tournament.

Fair play, I maybe shouldn't have said that. Sorry.



Here's the gig though, as I see it.

When you bought 25% of him in the original tournament you paid a premium of 0.2
This was to pay for his labour and expertise in playing the tournaments.

The prize he won was 1st place money + a buy-in to another comp. You are entitled to 25% of this.

The prize was not 1st place money + a buy-in to another comp + the labour and expertise of someone to play this comp for you.

ergo, you are not entitled to anything greater than 25% of the cash value of the buy-in.

[LeKnave]

quite a tough one, and one that me and claimer nearly had to come to terms with, i think either you should get 25% of the cash (if a cash is scooped) in the 550f or he should buy the 25% back @ 1.2.

[skalie]

Man how is this difficult.
You bought 25% which means you get 25% of the seat won. Why do people move the goal posts after they win summut. Forget trying to sell back the share just have 25% of the next event, you both must have known this seat was added before the event began and if not who cares.

[MC]

quite a tough one, and one that me and claimer nearly had to come to terms with, i think either you should get 25% of the cash (if a cash is scooped) in the 550f or he should buy the 25% back @ 1.2.

^^Agree with this...

[Hairydude]

Man how is this difficult.
You bought 25% which means you get 25% of the seat won. Why do people move the goal posts after they win summut. Forget trying to sell back the share just have 25% of the next event, you both must have known this seat was added before the event began and if not who cares.

I agree with this- you still own 25% of total prize as you paid @ 1.2 for total prizes given- i.e £xxxx + £550 seat so you should effectively still have 25% in new tourney

[thetank]

lol @ all this

Having to pay a premium on your own action is absolute tez imo

That's like a taxi driver wanting to drive himself to the 24hr shop on his day off, but waiting till 6am so he won't have to charge himself as much of a fare.

[AlexMartin]

Man how is this difficult.
You bought 25% which means you get 25% of the seat won. Why do people move the goal posts after they win summut. Forget trying to sell back the share just have 25% of the next event, you both must have known this seat was added before the event began and if not who cares.

this is deffo right

[ChipRich]

Man how is this difficult.
You bought 25% which means you get 25% of the seat won. Why do people move the goal posts after they win summut. Forget trying to sell back the share just have 25% of the next event, you both must have known this seat was added before the event began and if not who cares.

this is deffo right

I agree, when the % was bought, you both obviously knew that a seat was added if you won the thing. So you get 25% of any cash/seat imo.