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

[EvilPie]

Surely this shouldn't affect sellers at all assuming they 100% 'HAVE' to sell in order to play?

If they sell at 1.5 but Timex offers 1.1 then nobody's going to buy off the actual horse.

If Timex has an unlimited bankroll he can offer as much action on that person as stakers want. If the horse can't sell they can't play so Timex doesn't get his action anyway.

If he doesn't have an unlimited roll then at some point people are forced to go to the horse and pay whatever the horse wants. If they aren't prepared to pay more then the horse doesn't sell so doesn't play.

All seems great in theory but ultimately kind of pointless.

[SuuPRlim]

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.

Couldn't be a more irrelevant analogy imo

[The Camel]

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?

He might have handled it ok - apart from the JJ Lui quote and the scraping ROI thing - but it wouldn't take someone to possess a triple digit IQ to guess the reaction of the poker playing masses, would it?

[MANTIS01]

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.

Couldn't be a more irrelevant analogy imo

Wrong on two counts lildave!

First it is not a real analogy it is a classic mantic, in both examples 'it's real people's feelings you would be hurting'.

Second the cadbury's caramel bunny was more irrelevant

[gouty]

Fascinating thread this one.

His idea simply cannot happen due to law and taxes. All your swaps/stakes/backing arrangements are personal deals like an online handshake and that is all. Nothing more.

He popped that up on twitter and shit his pants with the response, got some tax advice and soon took it down.

I was thinking yesterday he is either the dumbest bloke ever or he was trying to make a point. Or a humongous grim would of been funny.

[Boba Fett]

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.

Isnt this exactly what you did to me last year in my main event thread?  Im pretty sure we also hadnt even played a hand against each other online or live at the time or met in person yet you came in and said I wasnt worth 1.5 and was maybe worth 1.1

This was also very quickly after I had started the thread and hadnt sold out yet, which probably put a lot off blondes off buying afterwards, especially considering you bought in a 1.6 thread, bid 1.55 in an auction and didnt comment at all on the 3 other players selling at 1.5 at the time.

So were you trying to bully and humiliate me?  Or is it completely different one year later?

[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.

Isnt this exactly what you did to me last year in my main event thread?  Im pretty sure we also hadnt even played a hand against each other online or live at the time or met in person yet you came in and said I wasnt worth 1.5 and was maybe worth 1.1

This was also very quickly after I had started the thread and hadnt sold out yet, which probably put a lot off blondes off buying afterwards, especially considering you bought in a 1.6 thread, bid 1.55 in an auction and didnt comment at all on the 3 other players selling at 1.5 at the time.

So were you trying to bully and humiliate me?  Or is it completely different one year later?

I was wrong.

I believe I apologised but if I didn't then I do now.

I'm sorry

[SuuPRlim]

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.

Couldn't be a more irrelevant analogy imo

Wrong on two counts lildave!

First it is not a real analogy it is a classic mantic, in both examples 'it's real people's feelings you would be hurting'.

Second the cadbury's caramel bunny was more irrelevant

You're right, I coined the phrase "A MANTIS" as well so should have been sharper my bad!

Disagree the cadbury's bunny was irrelevant though, felt the thread was desperately in need of some sex in the midst of some extremely geeky economics discussions! Expertly judged I thought

[EvilPie]

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.

Isnt this exactly what you did to me last year in my main event thread?  Im pretty sure we also hadnt even played a hand against each other online or live at the time or met in person yet you came in and said I wasnt worth 1.5 and was maybe worth 1.1

This was also very quickly after I had started the thread and hadnt sold out yet, which probably put a lot off blondes off buying afterwards, especially considering you bought in a 1.6 thread, bid 1.55 in an auction and didnt comment at all on the 3 other players selling at 1.5 at the time.

So were you trying to bully and humiliate me?  Or is it completely different one year later?

You are pretty chit though to be fair.

[titaniumbean]

this is why I happily buy a piece of evilpie if I get the chance, hero <3

[Tal]

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.

Couldn't be a more irrelevant analogy imo

Wrong on two counts lildave!

First it is not a real analogy it is a classic mantic, in both examples 'it's real people's feelings you would be hurting'.

Second the cadbury's caramel bunny was more irrelevant

You're right, I coined the phrase "A MANTIS" as well so should have been sharper my bad!

Disagree the cadbury's bunny was irrelevant though, felt the thread was desperately in need of some sex in the midst of some extremely geeky economics discussions! Expertly judged I thought

Arguably the moment I peaked as a blonde poster.



 

Pretty annoyed that I'm unable to think of a suitable way to crowbar "flip your shit" into one of my posts...

Please can you ensure that you credit the right poster for the term 'flip your shit'. A new reader may think it's a MANTIC when it's clearly an Skolsuperism.

No need to get bogged down in some mantics.

top punning.

All the tantrums, fights, sulks, abuse and threats of violence that came out of the advent calendar were worth it for Tal's post.

[gouty]

As a UK player we have tax free gambling ,as in theory,the gam com registered layer pays the punters tax in the form of gross profits tax. In poker the same happens with rake, it's taxed. Too much live and not enough online but that's another matter.

The very moment you ever charge more than 1.0 you have stopped gambling and are charging for a service. I would all stop now if I were you. Easy targets for the taxman. And it's all here in black and white.

[Doobs]

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)

This has been taken a bit out of context.  He was asked to quote for her, it isn't like he just chose her as an example.  I'd say it would be correct to point the finger at the person who asked for a quote, but not at Timex.

[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)

This has been taken a bit out of context.  He was asked to quote for her, it isn't like he just chose her as an example.  I'd say it would be correct to point the finger at the person who asked for a quote, but not at Timex.

Just ignore the request then?

[kano]

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)

This has been taken a bit out of context.  He was asked to quote for her, it isn't like he just chose her as an example.  I'd say it would be correct to point the finger at the person who asked for a quote, but not at Timex.

True, someone asked for himself & her.  He replied with 1.45 for the guy and 0.93 for JJ, no malice whatsoever.