Marks-ups getting out of hand

[theprawnidentity]

If you're offering a service anywhere people have the right to question the price and know what it is that they are buying regardless of where it happens.

[buzzharvey22]

one thing that tilts me, and it really shouldnt because its worth like a few cents

is when people charge mark up and then they round it up to a round figure "because it makes it easier".

so they spend all this time working out exactly what they should be charging, then they just add a few quid on to make it an even number for the crack.

Ive even done this myself, and makes no difference whatsoever.

[mulhuzz]

one thing that tilts me, and it really shouldnt because its worth like a few cents

is when people charge mark up and then they round it up to a round figure "because it makes it easier".

so they spend all this time working out exactly what they should be charging, then they just add a few quid on to make it an even number for the crack.

Ive even done this myself, and makes no difference whatsoever.

i'm not buying that you've sat down and worked out what you're worth mind

[KarmaDope]

Do people think there's a difference between selling on a forum, in a section dedicated to selling action, and selling on Facebook?

Could be mistaken about the etiquette of each, but i tend to feel that on a forum you open yourself up to scrutiny from entire marketplace. Buyers and sellers have a right (an obligation?) to address offers with an unjustified mark up.

If your selling on Facebook youre supposedly selling to friends. Now friends might by your action at inflated MU for any number of reasons. Being subjected to interrogation by a lot of pros who have an understanding of true ROI's might be unreasonable.

Don't know what people think. But i defo don't post negative comments on peoples Facebook walls when they sell. I might do on the forum.

This post makes a lot of sense.

But, with well known players like the parties involved here, a lot of people are friends with each other on Facebook. Some of them could be just trying to look out for their mutual friends if they believe this is a bad deal. They would speak up on the forum, and feel they need to speak up on FB.

In this particular case, even after skim reading 300+ comments, reading the OP, working out the "bonus" tournaments and the cost of the original comps, I still couldn't be sure what the total markup is, and I assume that is what is setting the alarm bells ringing.

[lucky_scrote]

Point being there's pub near me that has poker after hours, occasionally pop in on way home when drunk and donate- a youngish girl was in game, she had spun £40 case money into £250 and I obv stacked her. She was devastated and nearly in tears, she got young kid etc. So I gave her the money back. Now of that was a bloke id probably be more along the lines "shouldn't be playing with last money etc"

You're too nice. My initial reaction would be the same but I can think of a few reasons why you shouldn't give her the money back.

[arbboy]

What happens if you sat in?  What happens if there are really only 2 big plo8 comps all year worldwide?  I can see a lot more justification for selling at 1, than just charging mark ups because it is the usual thing.  

I was seriously thinking of playing the $2k plo8, but am not really rolled for it.  Next step down is 200. It would be a bit silly to charge 1.1/1.15 when 2k is very much above my average buy in.   Having said that at least I am familiar with the game, which I am not convinced everyone who charges a mark up for omaha is.  Similar to Tikay, he has played a lot of hands but isn't entirely happy with the 3k cost.  These things balance though and he us happy charging 1, we are happy paying 1.  

Course if both sides are happy that's cool.  Your example is different because of the sheer lack of events like that.  I was talking about selling 60/70% at face in a monthly dtd 500 deepstack.  Keeping £150 or £200 for urself.  Just play the next £150 for 100% of yourself and play against a lower standard field and your roi increases.

[buzzharvey22]

one thing that tilts me, and it really shouldnt because its worth like a few cents

is when people charge mark up and then they round it up to a round figure "because it makes it easier".

so they spend all this time working out exactly what they should be charging, then they just add a few quid on to make it an even number for the crack.

Ive even done this myself, and makes no difference whatsoever.

i'm not buying that you've sat down and worked out what you're worth mind

about £8.59 if i look at my bank statement

[RED-DOG]

I don't think anyone should sell over 30% of themselves at face value, they may as well play a smaller buy in at a higher ROI

I def agree with this although if they choose to it's fine it just doesn't make any sense at all from a financial angle other than just to be seen playing the event (there is nothing wrong with this if that's their reason).   I always find it amazing when people want to sell 50/60/70% of themselves in a high buy in comp at face.  So effectively in a £1k event you are personally playing a £300 event but have to face all the pros you wouldn't have to face in a £300 plus usually have to spend more hours playing the event as it's a deeper structure.

An rare exception could be made for a huge £1k comp like the last one at dtd where there are hundreds of online qual's etc but in general it doesnt make sense to me.

I would sell 50% of myself so that I can play a £500 structure for £250.

I don't see the problem.

[david3103]

What happens if you sat in?  What happens if there are really only 2 big plo8 comps all year worldwide?  I can see a lot more justification for selling at 1, than just charging mark ups because it is the usual thing.  

I was seriously thinking of playing the $2k plo8, but am not really rolled for it.  Next step down is 200. It would be a bit silly to charge 1.1/1.15 when 2k is very much above my average buy in.   Having said that at least I am familiar with the game, which I am not convinced everyone who charges a mark up for omaha is.  Similar to Tikay, he has played a lot of hands but isn't entirely happy with the 3k cost.  These things balance though and he us happy charging 1, we are happy paying 1.  

Course if both sides are happy that's cool.  Your example is different because of the sheer lack of events like that.  I was talking about selling 60/70% at face in a monthly dtd 500 deepstack.  Keeping £150 or £200 for urself.  Just play the next £150 for 100% of yourself and play against a lower standard field and your roi increases.

Play the bigger buy in cos they respect your raises there...

[tight4better]

you just love it dont you Aaron

[strak33]

Why do people get so hung up on mark up's being offered?  If i am selling my car 2nd hand on auto trader i will put a price up roughly what i think it is worth plus £500.  If someone comes on and likes the car and offers me the full asking price i would be really annoyed if someone who had no business getting involved in the transaction from either side got involved and told the buyer i was over charging by £500 and potentially stopped the sale.

Are you looking for an argument?

The point is about mark ups being too high, not mark ups in general.

Would you may pay £10 for a pint?

Would you pay 1.3 for a average player in x tournament?

It really is the same point in paying over the odds for something.

Good one

[Rexas]

I don't think anyone should sell over 30% of themselves at face value, they may as well play a smaller buy in at a higher ROI

I def agree with this although if they choose to it's fine it just doesn't make any sense at all from a financial angle other than just to be seen playing the event (there is nothing wrong with this if that's their reason).   I always find it amazing when people want to sell 50/60/70% of themselves in a high buy in comp at face.  So effectively in a £1k event you are personally playing a £300 event but have to face all the pros you wouldn't have to face in a £300 plus usually have to spend more hours playing the event as it's a deeper structure.

An rare exception could be made for a huge £1k comp like the last one at dtd where there are hundreds of online qual's etc but in general it doesnt make sense to me.

I would sell 50% of myself so that I can play a £500 structure for £250.

I don't see the problem.

[arbboy]

I don't think anyone should sell over 30% of themselves at face value, they may as well play a smaller buy in at a higher ROI

I def agree with this although if they choose to it's fine it just doesn't make any sense at all from a financial angle other than just to be seen playing the event (there is nothing wrong with this if that's their reason).   I always find it amazing when people want to sell 50/60/70% of themselves in a high buy in comp at face.  So effectively in a £1k event you are personally playing a £300 event but have to face all the pros you wouldn't have to face in a £300 plus usually have to spend more hours playing the event as it's a deeper structure.

An rare exception could be made for a huge £1k comp like the last one at dtd where there are hundreds of online qual's etc but in general it doesnt make sense to me.

I would sell 50% of myself so that I can play a £500 structure for £250.

I don't see the problem.

Not all decisions are made on a financial angle though as this proves.  Which is why people should be allowed to buy and sell at whatever rate they choose and let the market decide.

[Junior Senior]

This debate again?!
Been talked to death before.
Dont like the mark up, dont buy the package. Simple.

[Rupert]

Is it unethical to knowingly sell at a higher markup than ones ROI? I don't think I've ever done it but occasionally see threads here (and very often see threads on 2+2) where people are either deluding themselves or taking advantage of the fact that they're popular. I'm all for market decides price and all that but not sure that entirely sits well with me.