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

[outragous76]

I just don't get why people have taken such personal insult to his attempts. From my perception of it he said "I think the market's WRONG, and I'm going to prove it" he then proposehow he was going to prove it, by making money from the gap between current price and market equilibrium. If he CAN profit from that, then market's wrong and there isn't much room to dispute that, as a perfect market has no room for a middle man.

AFAIK he will be breaking american gambling laws - as you may or may not know the "wire act" makes it illegal for people to gamble "in proxy" in america.  So he's had to abandon his plans, not like this was a company he was gonna launch on the stock market or anything it was a practical exercise designed to make a point. If anything I thought he deserved a bit of credit for stumping up his own money to try prove a point he's made publically on numerous occasions. I've made the some point (albeit less vocally) but you won't find me putting my cash behind the opinion (for a couple of reasons)

Why is it for Timex to decide if the market is over priced?

Who's job is it? Surely it's the task of whoever operates within the market, and he falls into that category.

I just don't understand what he did to cause such controversy.

If I put up a staking thread at 1.4 and Key's comes along and said "this is bad value at 1.4 you have done nothing to justify this markup" I came back and reeled off a huge list of reasons why I'm worth 1.4, and have a 100% ROI and he replied with "OK. Buy 20% of yourself of me 1.25" and I refused what does that tell you about my confidence in that mark-up?

The "scraping up my ROI" quote did it for me.

So we're annoyed at his choice of phrase. No problem with the point he was making?

its the markets job, not his

is it ethical if he forces down prices then starts buying at increased frequency?

[SuuPRlim]

"the market" = the people who trade within it. If he tries to push the market in an in-correct direction then he'll either do his bollocks or get VERY lucky and make a ton of money. Markets are driven by their most influential participants, Microsoft and Apple hold huge influence of the computer market, I'm sure they use their market influence to drive the markets in the direction they think will be ultimately beneficial to them, and no-one would say "who are apple to be saying what the computer market should do"

[The Camel]

I just don't get why people have taken such personal insult to his attempts. From my perception of it he said "I think the market's WRONG, and I'm going to prove it" he then proposehow he was going to prove it, by making money from the gap between current price and market equilibrium. If he CAN profit from that, then market's wrong and there isn't much room to dispute that, as a perfect market has no room for a middle man.

AFAIK he will be breaking american gambling laws - as you may or may not know the "wire act" makes it illegal for people to gamble "in proxy" in america.  So he's had to abandon his plans, not like this was a company he was gonna launch on the stock market or anything it was a practical exercise designed to make a point. If anything I thought he deserved a bit of credit for stumping up his own money to try prove a point he's made publically on numerous occasions. I've made the some point (albeit less vocally) but you won't find me putting my cash behind the opinion (for a couple of reasons)

Why is it for Timex to decide if the market is over priced?

Who's job is it? Surely it's the task of whoever operates within the market, and he falls into that category.

I just don't understand what he did to cause such controversy.

If I put up a staking thread at 1.4 and Key's comes along and said "this is bad value at 1.4 you have done nothing to justify this markup" I came back and reeled off a huge list of reasons why I'm worth 1.4, and have a 100% ROI and he replied with "OK. Buy 20% of yourself of me 1.25" and I refused what does that tell you about my confidence in that mark-up?

The "scraping up my ROI" quote did it for me.

So we're annoyed at his choice of phrase. No problem with the point he was making?

No problem with the point in general.

Big problem with "outing" individual players as it looks very much like bullying to me.

[titaniumbean]

we're only specifically talking about you keith, and your 1.5 :p

[SuuPRlim]

I just don't get why people have taken such personal insult to his attempts. From my perception of it he said "I think the market's WRONG, and I'm going to prove it" he then proposehow he was going to prove it, by making money from the gap between current price and market equilibrium. If he CAN profit from that, then market's wrong and there isn't much room to dispute that, as a perfect market has no room for a middle man.

AFAIK he will be breaking american gambling laws - as you may or may not know the "wire act" makes it illegal for people to gamble "in proxy" in america.  So he's had to abandon his plans, not like this was a company he was gonna launch on the stock market or anything it was a practical exercise designed to make a point. If anything I thought he deserved a bit of credit for stumping up his own money to try prove a point he's made publically on numerous occasions. I've made the some point (albeit less vocally) but you won't find me putting my cash behind the opinion (for a couple of reasons)

Why is it for Timex to decide if the market is over priced?

Who's job is it? Surely it's the task of whoever operates within the market, and he falls into that category.

I just don't understand what he did to cause such controversy.

If I put up a staking thread at 1.4 and Key's comes along and said "this is bad value at 1.4 you have done nothing to justify this markup" I came back and reeled off a huge list of reasons why I'm worth 1.4, and have a 100% ROI and he replied with "OK. Buy 20% of yourself of me 1.25" and I refused what does that tell you about my confidence in that mark-up?

The "scraping up my ROI" quote did it for me.

So we're annoyed at his choice of phrase. No problem with the point he was making?

No problem with the point in general.

Big problem with "outing" individual players as it looks very much like bullying to me.

That's not his point though...

[The Camel]

I just don't get why people have taken such personal insult to his attempts. From my perception of it he said "I think the market's WRONG, and I'm going to prove it" he then proposehow he was going to prove it, by making money from the gap between current price and market equilibrium. If he CAN profit from that, then market's wrong and there isn't much room to dispute that, as a perfect market has no room for a middle man.

AFAIK he will be breaking american gambling laws - as you may or may not know the "wire act" makes it illegal for people to gamble "in proxy" in america.  So he's had to abandon his plans, not like this was a company he was gonna launch on the stock market or anything it was a practical exercise designed to make a point. If anything I thought he deserved a bit of credit for stumping up his own money to try prove a point he's made publically on numerous occasions. I've made the some point (albeit less vocally) but you won't find me putting my cash behind the opinion (for a couple of reasons)

Why is it for Timex to decide if the market is over priced?

Who's job is it? Surely it's the task of whoever operates within the market, and he falls into that category.

I just don't understand what he did to cause such controversy.

If I put up a staking thread at 1.4 and Key's comes along and said "this is bad value at 1.4 you have done nothing to justify this markup" I came back and reeled off a huge list of reasons why I'm worth 1.4, and have a 100% ROI and he replied with "OK. Buy 20% of yourself of me 1.25" and I refused what does that tell you about my confidence in that mark-up?

The "scraping up my ROI" quote did it for me.

So we're annoyed at his choice of phrase. No problem with the point he was making?

No problem with the point in general.

Big problem with "outing" individual players as it looks very much like bullying to me.

That's not his point though...

But it's the way he proved his point.

To sell JJ Lui's action at 0.9 is just plain mean. Especially as she has never sold action (afaik)

[titaniumbean]

if shes never sold action then deffo that's a bit untoward, but I honestly don't think he's trying to be mean or pick on anyone specifically, he's just trying to point out the hubris in alot of sellers.


dave makes a v good point of if you are charging 1.4 markup and you get offered  to buy yourself at 1.2 and you don't want to max out on it then you don't understand what's going on and don't deserve to be charging markup.

[The Camel]

if shes never sold action then deffo that's a bit untoward, but I honestly don't think he's trying to be mean or pick on anyone specifically, he's just trying to point out the hubris in alot of sellers.


dave makes a v good point of if you are charging 1.4 markup and you get offered  to buy yourself at 1.2 and you don't want to max out on it then you don't understand what's going on and don't deserve to be charging markup.

Basically it's like showing his Pokerstars notes on players in public.

[SuuPRlim]

I just don't get why people have taken such personal insult to his attempts. From my perception of it he said "I think the market's WRONG, and I'm going to prove it" he then proposehow he was going to prove it, by making money from the gap between current price and market equilibrium. If he CAN profit from that, then market's wrong and there isn't much room to dispute that, as a perfect market has no room for a middle man.

AFAIK he will be breaking american gambling laws - as you may or may not know the "wire act" makes it illegal for people to gamble "in proxy" in america.  So he's had to abandon his plans, not like this was a company he was gonna launch on the stock market or anything it was a practical exercise designed to make a point. If anything I thought he deserved a bit of credit for stumping up his own money to try prove a point he's made publically on numerous occasions. I've made the some point (albeit less vocally) but you won't find me putting my cash behind the opinion (for a couple of reasons)

Why is it for Timex to decide if the market is over priced?

Who's job is it? Surely it's the task of whoever operates within the market, and he falls into that category.

I just don't understand what he did to cause such controversy.

If I put up a staking thread at 1.4 and Key's comes along and said "this is bad value at 1.4 you have done nothing to justify this markup" I came back and reeled off a huge list of reasons why I'm worth 1.4, and have a 100% ROI and he replied with "OK. Buy 20% of yourself of me 1.25" and I refused what does that tell you about my confidence in that mark-up?

The "scraping up my ROI" quote did it for me.

So we're annoyed at his choice of phrase. No problem with the point he was making?

No problem with the point in general.

Big problem with "outing" individual players as it looks very much like bullying to me.

That's not his point though...

But it's the way he proved his point.

To sell JJ Lui's action at 0.9 is just plain mean. Especially as she has never sold action (afaik)

It really really wasn't though. The way he attempted to prove his point was to demonstrate a gap in the market between optimal buying prices and selling prices buy exploiting that gap profitably.

[SuuPRlim]

if shes never sold action then deffo that's a bit untoward, but I honestly don't think he's trying to be mean or pick on anyone specifically, he's just trying to point out the hubris in alot of sellers.


dave makes a v good point of if you are charging 1.4 markup and you get offered  to buy yourself at 1.2 and you don't want to max out on it then you don't understand what's going on and don't deserve to be charging markup.

Basically it's like showing his Pokerstars notes on players in public.

It's really not like that (maybe the JJ Lui example is him being a bit of a dick) but saying "this package isn't good value" "this package is over priced" is completely different to saying FlushEntity 3b/folds of 18bb stacks in strong spots, or w/e note you might have.

People really have gone completely bonkers ITT.

[titaniumbean]

as if flushentity ever folds rofl.

[The Camel]

if shes never sold action then deffo that's a bit untoward, but I honestly don't think he's trying to be mean or pick on anyone specifically, he's just trying to point out the hubris in alot of sellers.


dave makes a v good point of if you are charging 1.4 markup and you get offered  to buy yourself at 1.2 and you don't want to max out on it then you don't understand what's going on and don't deserve to be charging markup.

Basically it's like showing his Pokerstars notes on players in public.

It's really not like that (maybe the JJ Lui example is him being a bit of a dick) but saying "this package isn't good value" "this package is over priced" is completely different to saying FlushEntity 3b/folds of 18bb stacks in strong spots, or w/e note you might have.

People really have gone completely bonkers ITT.

No, I'm sorry, you are wrong.

Picking someone out and basically saying "you are not as good as poker as you think you are" and hundreds of fan boys laughing along and pointing definitely is bullying.

The problem with so many young players is they have no empathy.

Put yourself in the shoes of the player outed by his peers.

I felt extremely angry at Keys yesterday, he had no interest in buying any of my action, he purely asked for Timex's price so he could humiliate me.

The whole thing is fine in theory, but it's real peoples feelings he would be hurting.

[MANTIS01]

it's very obvious why his proposal was unpopular. Fundamental free market principles dictate that one individual shouldn't be trying to 'fix' the market, so in the first place a universally unpopular notion. And who will really be pumped about the revelations? The horse trying to make hay while the sun shines? The buyer who now feels like a mug? No, only really a very small % of internet scientists. It works on paper but not in the real world so overall it is a fail just like communism (but let's not start another concurrent argument.)

What you think somebody's worth is prob overall an opinion to keep to yourself, like if you're at a party and don't like the host's dress.

[EvilPie]

Just from reading this page I think I get what he's doing.

Basically if someone is selling themselves at 1.3 and he thinks they're bad value at that he'll sell that same person at 1.2 or whatever he thinks appropriate?

If that person wins something he pays out whatever %% you've bought.

In theory if he has the money he can sell over 100% of someone as long as he can afford to pay out.

Pretty sure Trigg did something very similar a couple of years ago. In fact I'm 100% sure as I bought some of myself in GUKPT Blackpool.

So for example if Keith is selling at 1.5 for something can I contact Timex and he'll sell me some of the Camel at whatever he thinks he's worth effectively ruining Keith's chances of selling at anything higher than Timex thinks he should sell at?

EDIT: Typed this out before seeing Keith's post above. Assume this has already been done. No rubbing/humiliating intended here, was just using Keith as an example because he's posting ITT.

[SuuPRlim]

No, I'm sorry, you are wrong.

Picking someone out and basically saying "you are not as good as poker as you think you are" and hundreds of fan boys laughing along and pointing definitely is bullying.

The problem with so many young players is they have no empathy.

Put yourself in the shoes of the player outed by his peers.

I felt extremely angry at Keys yesterday, he had no interest in buying any of my action, he purely asked for Timex's price so he could humiliate me.

The whole thing is fine in theory, but it's real peoples feelings he would be hurting.

I mean I agree with you, except I don't think that was what was happening, and I think if you put up a public thread, selling yourself and someone doesn't think your product is good value then you should be willing to accept that critism, as long as it is proper and tastefully constructed. If it's personal and nasty like you suggest "You're shit haha" then I agree that's bullying and out of order.

As far as I'm aware he handled it all pretty politely no?