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

[GreekStein]

titbeam has been using titty language for aaages, dont make the turd change!

[dreenie]

it quite clearly is a form of scamming/douschebaggery

I reckon it almost always isn't on here

Sometimes your langauge is really un-necessarily inflammatory Andrew.

wait what


is bankoftimex specifically aimed at blonde?

it's not right, yet we have had tonnes of threads on here discussing markups, and at no point have I been negative towards people of character who are brassic and selling at a higher rate than they would normally if they weren't so short of cash.

yet there are still some utterly ridiculous markups going about, both on 2+2 here and that prolific buyer facebook.


just because someone didn't specifically go out to scam people, if through their own ignorance of a topic (of which they claim to know lots) they sell a highly unprofitable set of stakes then there is clearly something amiss. and it needs to be pointed out. especially when very often the buyer may have little or no clue what's happening.


I don't understand why on a more community based board people wouldn't be more determined to get towards fairer markups rather than constantly saying lolz buyer beware.

So why don't some of the people who know so much about staking, say who these people that are selling too high are? Rather than pussy foot around all the time.

Every time I log on here, I see people write - The staking boards are getting ridiculous, the mark ups are too high, players are ripping investors off blah blah. Get to the point and say it out loud so the people in question might change there mark ups, or stop selling therefore no one gets 'scammed' or 'ripped off' as it were.

Lot's of people on here won't say specific names, don't get the problem with it if people feel so strongly about it?

[skolsuper]

IMO he's doing to it to humiliate the sellers.

Keys is sending my thread to him to do exactly the same I think.

No idea why Keys would do that, but he can please himself if it helps him to get his rocks off.

Don't see what's humiliating about it. You sold $2500 worth of action for $3750, meaning people were willing to pay a $1250 premium for you to play poker with their money for 1-8 days. Unless Timex offers your action at <1.0, which I sincerely doubt he will do, he is going to admit a substantial skill edge on your part in a $10000 buyin poker tournament. If he sells any action, it means even more people agree that yes, you are skilled enough to warrant a substantial premium.

Also, he offered a 0.5% of profit finders fee.

[Fish]

Lot's of people on here won't say specific names, don't get the problem with it if people feel so strongly about it?


Probably because , like most forum boards people are careful not to upset the 'clique' which is always the case,the majority may think something but depending who it involves will stay quiet

[TightEnd]

Andrew

Someone might be unsophisticated in the pricing they use

Someone might be over-optimistic

Someone might be going for the max

but to use the words "a form of scamming/douschebaggery"

is really unhelpful in my opinion

Its just hyperbole and lazy language rather than choosing something more appropriate.

I am not a words person. apologies.

would say first two lines ignorant, 3rd unethical?  better?

Are auctions unethical? I don't know

I know you are a fan of calling out people you think are looking for too high a mark up, and I agree that this is sometimes appropriate but generally I do think that markets find their own levels...just classic/supply and demand.

Should we or a group of opinionated users of the board look to accelerate that process by whether implicitly or explicitly saying these guys are scammers or douschebags, or even that they are ignorant?

I'd suggest not, this is a community forum and staking board not a Moroccan bazaar where we'll get there by at best barter and at worst by browbeating other members of the market, and that in simple terms that group of opinionated users (who are the main liquidity in the market) will see the market adjust of its own accord if they don't participate in the prices being offered and these don't sell

Which is happening currently. No one has had to call out too many people in terms that you use in this thread to see it happen either.

 

[TightEnd]

Also, he offered a 0.5% of profit finders fee.

do you think its appropriate to pass on stuff from the blonde staking board, a non-profit facilitation service, and take a profit from it?

I'm not sure I am that happy about it (though I can't stop it)

[skolsuper]

Without wanting to put words in Timex's mouth, I think he thinks there has been a tectonic shift in the ROIs of players in the years since these markups were hammered out and generally accepted. At the same time, the actual markups have drifted the other way (upwards) because of the nature of tournament variance and selection/survivorship bias among other things. Because of that he thinks he's spotted a money making opportunity and is willing back his opinion with his money, and fair play to him imo.

Re: tighty's point about his possibly taking advantage of blonde, he has already had his "bank of timex" rejected from the 2p2 marketplace but is running the whole thing from twitter so I don't see that there's much that you can do tbh. Besides, I don't see how it is going to have a net-negative affect on blonde, if it affects it at all. Some people selling will lose out a little, but those that would've bought will be winners, net effect >=0 for the community imo.

[titaniumbean]

Dreenie if fish A is selling at 1.2 for a comp AND punters are buying it,  world renowned reg B is now going to sell pieces, he's twice the player A is so 1.4 is now the minimum he will consider to charge. and then people want to have a sweat of world renowned reg C whos just won a bunch of stuff so now what does he charge.

2.0 on facebook?
lolz we haven't even yet considered anyones actual roi, the likely variance involved in the event/stake, any (if any) risk invovled in the transaction or the reasons for the player selling.

people have this idea that because they heard that markets regulate themselves, and that buyers can just not buy that everything will even out to being set perfectly, yet when there are people with a lesser knowledge of the system buying and a bunch of people with massive egos and little care for ethics or the people around them the system wont work.

when people are encouraged not to be negative it just lets everyone live in a little bubble.

take for instance, when keys started 'policing ops', ie he just posted if a OP had enough information in it, suddenly less utterly cack threads went up, people questioned themselves, went to some effort zomg, and yet he got a tonne of hassle, who are you, why should you have the right to do this, who says my op isn't good enough etc etc.  wtf is this bullying for etc.

it's in really good regs (and just popular/runhot regs) interests to not change this status quo because they can sell at joke joke high markups.


it's an open forum you cant stop people passing on links etc. although ofc soon posting a link will be illegal :p

[Tal]

Have listened to it all now. Very interesting and good interviewing skills, pleno; you made the other chap do all the talking by asking probing, open questions.

To the matter in-hand, to me, it is a political stunt for precisely the reasons Doobs has outlined. It isn't for commercial profit, aside from a little here and there because he'll need to waste a fair amount of time researching players whom he later decides are priced up closely enough to a fair price as not to make laying worthwhile.

Running a book at 110% or whatever it will be (I'm figuring 110 is generous) isn't a guaranteed winner over a small sample size. Bookies have horrible days like when the Irish favourite wins the Gold Cup. This will be a small sample market unless he invests a huge amount of time into the Research and Development. By the time he gets to 5,000 lays, he might have made a few quid but - if his main goal of reintroducing "nobility" to the market is realised - he'll have to call it a day because prices will be better. Equally, he might have done his stones due to MTT variance and still have to cut his losses.

Ethically, I don't have a huge problem in it, but then I'm not going to be the subject of a bet. It is currently a seller's market, so this is a catalyst to rebalancing that. I think Pleno's point about waiting for the player's market to sell out first is crucial to the integrity of the model, but only if he is doing it for commercial reasons. If not, he should simply post on the staking thread that he doesn't agree with the price and state his reasons. He might contact the seller directly first if he wants to play Florence Nightingale and not cause embarrassment.

Be interesting to see what shape this is in in a year's time.

[titaniumbean]

titbeam has been using titty language for aaages, dont make the turd change!

turd is grateful.

sorrys I is bad with dem words.

[dreenie]

Without wanting to put words in Timex's mouth, I think he thinks there has been a tectonic shift in the ROIs of players in the years since these markups were hammered out and generally accepted. At the same time, the actual markups have drifted the other way (upwards) because of the nature of tournament variance and selection/survivorship bias among other things. Because of that he thinks he's spotted a money making opportunity and is willing back his opinion with his money, and fair play to him imo.

Re: tighty's point about his possibly taking advantage of blonde, he has already had his "bank of timex" rejected from the 2p2 marketplace but is running the whole thing from twitter so I don't see that there's much that you can do tbh. Besides, I don't see how it is going to have a net-negative affect on blonde, if it affects it at all. Some people selling will lose out a little, but those that would've bought will be winners, net effect >=0 for the community imo.

Do you whole heartily buy pieces in players who you think justify there mark up, or at times is it because you like them as a person?

If X player was awesome and had good results to back it up and were selling at a reasonable price, but u didn't like them would you buy?

What if player Y was not as good, hadn't had nearly as many results as player X, and mark up was a bit over-priced, but you liked them a lot, would u buy then?

Think the Blonde staking boards stands for a much more 'community spirit' than 2+2 etc, and I think a lot of people buy for the sake of trying to help out fellow players rather than 'great investment'.

The reasons why I ask about the liking or non liking of certain players, is because I feel so many people on here won't name names, as to 'keep in with the crowd'. They don't want to upset the wrong person, because in poker you never know when it's your time to fall and how much u might need them people in the future, so best not to burn those bridges with your outspoken opinions.

But that's just my opinion.

[skolsuper]

Also, he offered a 0.5% of profit finders fee.

do you think its appropriate to pass on stuff from the blonde staking board, a non-profit facilitation service, and take a profit from it?

I'm not sure I am that happy about it (though I can't stop it)

Hmm, perhaps not. Any finders fee I do get (it seems like a long shot anyway, only really added that line in jest) will go to a charity of blonde's choice.

However, you have just defended people who profit from this free service unwittingly or just because they can due to market forces, what's the difference?

[dreenie]

Dreenie if fish A is selling at 1.2 for a comp AND punters are buying it,  world renowned reg B is now going to sell pieces, he's twice the player A is so 1.4 is now the minimum he will consider to charge. and then people want to have a sweat of world renowned reg C whos just won a bunch of stuff so now what does he charge.

2.0 on facebook?
lolz we haven't even yet considered anyones actual roi, the likely variance involved in the event/stake, any (if any) risk invovled in the transaction or the reasons for the player selling.

people have this idea that because they heard that markets regulate themselves, and that buyers can just not buy that everything will even out to being set perfectly, yet when there are people with a lesser knowledge of the system buying and a bunch of people with massive egos and little care for ethics or the people around them the system wont work.

when people are encouraged not to be negative it just lets everyone live in a little bubble.

take for instance, when keys started 'policing ops', ie he just posted if a OP had enough information in it, suddenly less utterly cack threads went up, people questioned themselves, went to some effort zomg, and yet he got a tonne of hassle, who are you, why should you have the right to do this, who says my op isn't good enough etc etc.  wtf is this bullying for etc.

it's in really good regs (and just popular/runhot regs) interests to not change this status quo because they can sell at joke joke high markups.


it's an open forum you cant stop people passing on links etc. although ofc soon posting a link will be illegal :p

I think the highlighted part is a good idea. Also agree about people's ego's. Poker is very egotistical.

However - my personal opinion, I would rather someone come into my thread and say the staking proposal is bad and explain why, than have a bunch of people talking about it behind my back with there mates on Skype, but that's just me I guess.

Buying & selling within the poker market is a massive learning curve, same like studying the game, it takes different players longer to master the whole thing than others, so as a community I feel it is our duty to speak up and give advice to players who have a bad proposal.

[TightEnd]

Also, he offered a 0.5% of profit finders fee.

do you think its appropriate to pass on stuff from the blonde staking board, a non-profit facilitation service, and take a profit from it?

I'm not sure I am that happy about it (though I can't stop it)

Hmm, perhaps not. Any finders fee I do get (it seems like a long shot anyway, only really added that line in jest) will go to a charity of blonde's choice.

However, you have just defended people who profit from this free service unwittingly or just because they can due to market forces, what's the difference?

No difference in principle.

I can wear two hats though, one that wants to see a thriving community based staking area that doesn't discourage recreational players from putting action up for fear of being made to look bad (as people call them out)

the other that says "look we could have set this up to make a turn, but true to the type of forum we have we set it up to host it only, now why is a third party/parties not involved in the stakes going to take the profit off our staking threads?"

I suspect 2p2 had many of the same notions when it came to BankofT's proposals

[The Camel]

IMO he's doing to it to humiliate the sellers.

Keys is sending my thread to him to do exactly the same I think.

No idea why Keys would do that, but he can please himself if it helps him to get his rocks off.

Don't see what's humiliating about it. You sold $2500 worth of action for $3750, meaning people were willing to pay a $1250 premium for you to play poker with their money for 1-8 days. Unless Timex offers your action at <1.0, which I sincerely doubt he will do, he is going to admit a substantial skill edge on your part in a $10000 buyin poker tournament. If he sells any action, it means even more people agree that yes, you are skilled enough to warrant a substantial premium.

Also, he offered a 0.5% of profit finders fee.

Why would it upset me?

Because if Timex says I am worth 1.2 or whatever according to Andrew I am a "scammer" and a "douchbag"

Maybe I'm wrong, but I doubt James Dempsey would buy $1750 of my action at 1.5 and say "1.5 is low imo" for purely altruistic reasons.