Issues Arising from Staking

[titaniumbean]

Lil'dave is a winnar ofc and I can't wait for him to start breeding and bringing more, sensible, insightful, funny and clever people into the world.

Doobs sir, that is a fantastic post. Moarrrr pls

The rest of the stuff about auctions is interesting, I think Alex is a decent player but I wonder what his true expected ROI would be at £1k events over a decent sample.. Tough to make solid guesses tho.

I genuinely feel that I am good value at 1.2 but its so hard to prove it without significant online volume as keys mentioned in my first staking ideas thread.  I absolutely dont want to Grimm or have someone feel grimmed but im putting literally every hour sent into playing, talking to people and learning how to play this most amazing of games.

Apologies if I have offended anyone with my thread.

I just don't get it, you cant explain why you're likely a ~50% ROI player but you are? or at least you yourself honestly believe you are. Just because YOU believe you are a massive winner due to your insane hedges doesn't mean you are or that you should charge markup. Think alot of people that get backed should be looking at whether they have any markup not what is the right amount and look to why they are selling in the first place. Auctions are just an awful idea which go against alot of the reasons why people should/do get staked imo.

Not quite sure what Bobbys getting at, just dont like Goulder?

[Skippy]

As requested by Alex.

'Perhaps discussion should be moved to the new "staking discussion" thread rather than this one?'

I think "discussion" meant discussion of whether auctions were a good idea, the 300 post rule, the perception that blonde has high prices, whether the staking board needs moderating differently etc.

I think complaining that Alex's proposal is "one of the worst request's" belongs in his thread.

[neeko]

If buyers are all over paying then new stakees are making the mistake by not coming on and selling at over value prices.

It would be rational for great players eg Jake Cody to appear and try and sell at a price higher than he thinks he is worth - maybe 25% of all his EPT's this year at 2.3.

[titaniumbean]

If buyers are all over paying then new stakees are making the mistake by not coming on and selling at over value prices.

It would be rational for great players eg Jake Cody to appear and try and sell at a price higher than he thinks he is worth - maybe 25% of all his EPT's this year at 2.3.

you're assuming that on a friendly community the ethos should be to try and screw everyone for as much as possible, given that many people need backing/staking to help them play the bigger events I think they should have to provide a good value offer not just charge as much as they think is feasible to sell out.

Similarly the more of the players own action they have I think the more rightful they can be to charge high markup for the small bits they are selling.

[pleno1]

yeh it almost makes it not as much as a community.

I think this'll be a really fun sweat and it'd be good to get lots of blondes on board having a little slice.

vs the auction mentality just doesn't add up because auctions aren't really community driven.

selling at say 1.2 (before the 20%) and doing max 1% and getting people involved would be more community driven.

[jakally]

You are a clued up guy Neil, would you buy any part of that package at the prices?

imo we have gone past the point of buyer beware now and its only going to go one way in the future.

I've not even looked at the prices, as I know I'm not going to be interested when I see them, so I suppose that answers your question.

I' m notoriously nitty when it comes to paying mark ups, and think that almost everyone overestimates their value, so me not buying in this instance is no reflection on Alex, or his proposal (which I happen to think is a particularly good one).

Buyers are driving the market currently, and until they change their approach, prices are going to remain inflated.
I can't blame people for wanting to have a punt / sweat though, even if it's -EV - I do enough -EV gambling, to the point that I'm not in a position to criticise.

[DMorgan]

Is it down to the people affected to 'out' the guy with all that entails or is there a responsibility to clamp down on this by the site providing the facility?

Absolutely IMO. I think that there is a correct place for this sort of stuff to be aired, i.e. you don't PM the backers of the new stake and tell them then and you don't put it on the thread for the stake. It should go in the thread for the stake that went bad, or create a new thread about the situation for full disclosure to Blonde buyers. If someone does something shady on a stake in which I am an investor (or any financial transaction for that matter) then I am absolutely going to tell people that are likely to do business with this person in the future about what happened and the potential risks that they are taking on. I have done this before, will continue to do so and absolutely would expect others to do the same to me if I was to try and do something unscrupulous.

With regards to Alex's Columbia stake I think he just had a bit of a mare and shot himself in the foot with some of the stuff in there. The whole thing about a reserve price thing just conjours up images of Alex refusing to sell if his price doesn't go high enough which actually isn't actually what he was doing at all. He just said that if the price was right he would sell more. Given how tetchy some people have become of late about auctions etc I think it was a bit of a misstep to post that when he could have just said 'I'm selling 10%' and if the price went high enough he could have just opened a further 10%.

I can completely see why Alex put it out there, he just wanted full disclosure but given the flack that he was likely to get for it (easier to predict in hindsight obv but given the current climate I think its reasonable to have assumed that this would be picked apart) he probably should have just left it at 10% and revised it upwards if he wanted to.

As for his conduct with the tax etc. I don't see anything else that he could have done. I think you're kinda clutching at straws with that. He cancelled the original auction, the price was reset and everyone now knows about taxes in South America and will do more research in the future. Cut people some slack, we're all still learning on the job when it comes to staking for tournaments in far flung places. There are going to be teething problems but that isn't a reason to stop the whole process.

[bobby1]

To Neil,

I am in no way doubting his ability or reliability either, just the way staking threads are going.

someone again mentioned I have a problem with him, it's just not true, iirc the only thing we have ever disagreed about are staking issues.

I can like the guy but disagree with his ideas on staking just the same as he could think I am a cock but agree with me on other subjects.

 

[titaniumbean]

To Neil,

I am in no way doubting his ability or reliability either, just the way staking threads are going.

someone again mentioned I have a problem with him, it's just not true, iirc the only thing we have ever disagreed about are staking issues.

I can like the guy but disagree with his ideas on staking just the same as he could think I am a cock but agree with me on other subjects.

 

furry muff I'm a big hater of the auction system but i'm being reserved and not insulting Alex directly 

it just seemed like you were just having a go at him.

furry muffs.

[DMorgan]

@Bobby

When you parade around telling everyone how terrible the value is on these staking threads you have to accept that you put yourself in the firing line. You seem intent on forcing this down peoples throats so a negative reaction is hardly surprising.

Protecting buyers from stakes that could go sour is an important topic and I agree that some sort of feedback system would be a great idea, but trying to preach to people about what is good value and what isn't in your opinion (however informed or otherwise that might be) and presenting them as facts is just out of order imo. Let adults make their own decisions on what is value and what isn't.

[cambridgealex]

Hi Neil,

The post was put up without knowing there was a 20% deduction from the prize money. When it was pointed out the auction rules didn't change. It was just added to the front page of the request.

If it is bad value before the 20% is taken out and you then leave it when you realise the 20% will go then that is in bad taste imo. It just makes a mockery of the request and is clearly badly thought out if the biggest deal breaker isn't included initially.

It is also an auction with a fixed reserve that isn't divulged, the board is being used by people to get thu what they can, not offer genuine value staking opportunities.

If you were offered a stake and took it and then found out there would be 20% less prize money and then told the price was the same would you think that was fair?

Wow really? I think the only thing I've done wrong like Neil said is not research the tax issue beforehand and I haven't found anyone but you to disagree. I wouldn't have entered the satellite had I known about the tax issue, it wasn't exactly in large red letters on the pokerstars lobby, I just flicked it in, won a package and sold some action. Pretty easy and forgivable oversight surely?

And the way I reacted I think was fine - I consulted others about what was fair/best as I wanted to get it right and be fair to those who had already bid - it was obvious that cancelling and starting a new thread making sure everyone knew about the tax was the right thing to do. I did that and restarted the whole process.

The reserve price was settled with tight end beforehand and very clear in the op. As to whether reserve prices should be in auctions - that's a different issue, but I think you and Rupert have a point and are probably right.

As for whether its good value, blaming me for that is frankly laughable since it's an auction, I start the price at 1.0 and people bid for what they want. Just because 20% has sold at 1.55 isn't my fault, and like Neil said is a reflection on the honest and clear op, and dare I say it, my ability and results.

[titaniumbean]

you don't start the price at 1.0 though as there is a reserve?

think reserves are naff. but w/e auctions are pants.


do what you feel.

[cambridgealex]

No no I was selling 10pc, with an additional 10, if the reserve was met. Keys did the same for his wsop auction, that's why I thought I was safe

[Cf]

The price should have started at 0.8. The 20% tax essentially means 1.0 is a markup.

[cambridgealex]

Perhaps yes. I didn't consider that in the short space of time I had to make a decision.