Staking Resolution - The Bank Of Timex (w-interview)

[SuuPRlim]

ha, yh I get that.

Economics is pretty subjective and almost any data can be manipulated into the bandwidth of one person's opinion. Staking markets a pretty easy example.

Several informed people say "mark-ups too high, this will change" however mark-ups are still rising and at the very least showing little signs of reducing person A says "markets are just operating in "short-term" inefficiency, person b says "No, this is a clear demonstration that we are still behind equilibrium, prices will rise further" Person C says "Looks like we're finally reaching a happy equilibrium here, prices have risen and only now are there echoes of them being too high so we must be somewhere near"

A, B, or C, with enough fancy words and the same piece of evidence could make a pretty compelling argument for each of their points I shouldn't wonder.

Everyone has their opinions and as long as you don't use personal interjections "he's just being a tosser" etc or facts that incorrect or un-true then it's quite hard to REALLY disagree with anyone.

[outragous76]

"So sellers were recently faced with what was an attempt to undercut the market place (very aggressively). Not only has this failed (spectacularly), but there is nothing to suggest it will affect either supply or demand in the market place.

Ergo, supply is short (they sell out), demand is there , so the prices will at the minimum remain constant, but should continue to rise and possibly (as a reaction to Timex) rise faster, as people will now wish to maximise profits (if this was a true market place)"

But none of this changes the fact that if Timex's scheme went ahead he is, via his derivatives, effectively flooding the market with sellers which would result in a lower price.

When you say "there is nothing to suggest it will affect either supply or demand in the market place" in my opinion it's factually incorrect.

Did he? Don't think so

[skolsuper]

I don't agree with the assertion that he/this has failed spectacularly Guy.  The reason he has knocked it on the head is a legal problem in relation to taking 'bets' from American punters; if he were only accepting Europeans' money, or perhaps if he had kept a lower profile, it would have been fine.

As for how it was going to affect the marketplace, I could just quote my earlier post with my thoughts, in summary I think that, without something like this, the long term future of the board is a slow decline in activity due to buyers losing money, which doesn't sound to me like a desirable outcome for blonde as a community.

If Timex had a little more PR-savvy about him, he would have said something like "Bank of Timex provides investors with a choice", rather than going on about "scammers" and "high markups not being good for the mtt community".  By providing more volume to buy in threads that sell out, and by offering prices on players that aren't selling, he introduces more competition for punters' money that sellers will have to compete with, thus lowering prices.  Without it, supply is limited to what players want to sell, which drives prices up.  For example when there was a brief fad for auctions Alex took full advantage of by auctioning 15% of himself for GUKPT Luton iirc.  Imagine if there had been someone to say "there is another 50% available with me if people want it", what would the price have been then?

[DungBeetle]

"The simple fact is, he has had and will have no impact on the market place. However generation of fear in the supply chain of it doing so could easily make sellers inflate prices now to get it whilst they still can.  This is fairly obvious.

I not going to spend hours debating simple economic principles. "

You contradict yourself in this post.  If you think a supply chain will panic and raise prices in the short term, then it is because they know that if the Timex operation if successful would deflate prices as supply is increased.   So the behaviour you predict merely shows that a Timex operation WOULD reduce prices if it was run correctly.

[DungBeetle]

"Did he? Don't think so"

He didn't fail because he didn't think he'd make money.  He failed, I think, because he realised that he needed far too much collateral to underwrite the venture sufficiently, and that collateral can be better deployed elsewhere (if he even has enough in the first place).

The fact remains that, this issue aside, if someone decided to do it then they would increase supply significantly, which would reduce price.

[outragous76]

"Did he? Don't think so"

He didn't fail because he didn't think he'd make money.  He failed, I think, because he realised that he needed far too much collateral to underwrite the venture sufficiently, and that collateral can be better deployed elsewhere (if he even has enough in the first place).

The fact remains that, this issue aside, if someone decided to do it then they would increase supply significantly, which would reduce price.

If you press the "quote" button it quotes the post you are copying (genuinely trying to help)

As for your point see my theory vs reality post above

The simple reality is Billy big bollocks came in and failed, failed for lots of reasons im sure, but definitely failed. He did succeed in raising awareness though, so maybe he is due that credit

[SuuPRlim]

Guy! How did he fail? It would be a step too far to suggest that he "succeeded" but there really is nothing to suggest he failed.

Everyone has their opinions and as long as you don't use personal interjections "he's just being a tosser" etc or facts that incorrect or un-true then it's quite hard to REALLY disagree with anyone.

[outragous76]

Guy! How did he fail? It would be a step too far to suggest that he "succeeded" but there really is nothing to suggest he failed.

Everyone has their opinions and as long as you don't use personal interjections "he's just being a tosser" etc or facts that incorrect or un-true then it's quite hard to REALLY disagree with anyone.

Well what has his goal? To adjust the market downwards, to what HE believed was a fair price, and ALSO to make money in the process

His venture hasn't taken off, and he hasn't adjusted the market (or isn't likely to).

Therefore, if they were his 2 goals, then he didn't achieve them. Whether you consider that failure I guess could be opinion

[titaniumbean]

aaron on guys account though?

[Simon Galloway]

Pretty tough to believe that a smart guy would set this all up and then realise his liabiliites might be quite high and call it off.

I have to at least give him enough credit to be able to work out in advance what laying longshots to large stakes feels like as a portfolio.

I'm guessing that he took tax advice as indicated and decided on a U-turn.

[MANTIS01]

Keys says "If Timex had a little more PR-savvy about him" he would have achieved better results in this project or at least people would have been more receptive to his proposal. So superior skills in areas such as PR have value cos they get you better results. Let's say a horse is a mofo PR master and produces a staking proposal which attracts punters who just like the way he rolls. My question is why shouldn't he ask for a higher mark-up to reward him for that skill set in order to get better results in his own project? To say that his mark-up should purely reflect OPR is to put no value on such attributes. And not putting value on such attributes is the reason Timex made a faux pas. 

[SuuPRlim]

Keys says "If Timex had a little more PR-savvy about him" he would have achieved better results in this project or at least people would have been more receptive to his proposal. So superior skills in areas such as PR have value cos they get you better results. Let's say a horse is a mofo PR master and produces a staking proposal which attracts punters who just like the way he rolls. My question is why shouldn't he ask for a higher mark-up to reward him for that skill set in order to get better results in his own project? To say that his mark-up should purely reflect OPR is to put no value on such attributes. And not putting value on such attributes is the reason Timex made a faux pas. 

This isn't a faux pas on Timex's behalf at all.

A person's PR ability has no reflection on his value in a staking package.

It does however affect his ability to OVER-SELL himself.

[titaniumbean]

lildave tho

[MANTIS01]

Keys says "If Timex had a little more PR-savvy about him" he would have achieved better results in this project or at least people would have been more receptive to his proposal. So superior skills in areas such as PR have value cos they get you better results. Let's say a horse is a mofo PR master and produces a staking proposal which attracts punters who just like the way he rolls. My question is why shouldn't he ask for a higher mark-up to reward him for that skill set in order to get better results in his own project? To say that his mark-up should purely reflect OPR is to put no value on such attributes. And not putting value on such attributes is the reason Timex made a faux pas.  

This isn't a faux pas on Timex's behalf at all.

A person's PR ability has no reflection on his value in a staking package.

It does however affect his ability to OVER-SELL himself.

Yo, calling everyone scammers is not a faux pas? Think you just did a faux pas

ok yea to clarify, PR adds value to the horse not the package. But why shouldn't he be allowed to over-sell and add that value to himself? because he has a skill set advantage over rivals with equal ROI so it gives him greater selling power. You think that is worth nothing in business? And you shouldn't exploit your strengths/advantages in business to max returns?

The only reason I bought cadbury's caramel was because of that sexy bunny in the advert..."why you rushing around...oooo....relax and have a cadbury's caramel". There was prob better value chocs in the shop tho.

[Marky147]

Keys says "If Timex had a little more PR-savvy about him" he would have achieved better results in this project or at least people would have been more receptive to his proposal. So superior skills in areas such as PR have value cos they get you better results. Let's say a horse is a mofo PR master and produces a staking proposal which attracts punters who just like the way he rolls. My question is why shouldn't he ask for a higher mark-up to reward him for that skill set in order to get better results in his own project? To say that his mark-up should purely reflect OPR is to put no value on such attributes. And not putting value on such attributes is the reason Timex made a faux pas. 

On my phone so bit short..but can anyone remember Lotgrinders MU...and if he referenced himself (obv opr not an option for us based yanks).

But a great example of pr post selling out

He sold 70% at spot, but could have probably got 1.2 for his attire alone