>One thing I have to wonder about is "editing" of reality shows in this context. Again, fundamentals, but could be worth thinking about.
I think these shows do aim for shock value, so very little is "random." I don't think this editing/shock-value effect would make that mini-model I made less useful.
I so remember that last season they bunched contestants together and, I believe, two/three of the contestants were safe. So if they bunched someone initially trading at 40% with someone initially trading at 20% and another trading at 2%, you could do a quick back-of-envelope calculation and figure the new mkts should be around 66%, 34% 0%.
I don't remember how many contestants they eliminated per show, but I do remember getting valuable info from groupings in at least a few of the shows.
>general, favorites are priced reasonably well and underdogs are under priced.
This is probably a more likely scenario in parimutuel pools, like for horse racing. TS clearly displays the sum of the bids and the sum of the offers. People do pay attention to this, although the mid market is almost always greater than 100.
It's common to see the bids add up to 100 and the offers to 120. In this case you may be better off selling the dogs than buying the favs (if you think the dogs are trading too high relatively). If the bids add up to 90 and the offers add up to 102 (which is pretty rare), you'd probably be better off buying the favs than selling the dogs (assuming you think thte dogs are trading too high relatively).
The new fees format is gonna make the market bids even higher than before. You need to buy the field for less than 99.0 to make a profit, but you need to sell the field (assuming 10 contestants) for 109 or more to make a profit (b/c you pay the extra dime 9 times if you're a seller, only once if you're a buyer). If there are 30 contestants, the fees are totally cost-prohibitive.
|