[3SCATTERS]

Removing £52,000 from someones betting account - http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/Bet...149259148.html

And refusing shareholders who are journalists access to their AGM (something to hide betfair?)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...annual-meeting

Surely not an A rated book anymore, I dont trust them any more than the majority of rogue agencys out there

[durito]

But they always pay Hareeba!

[taxer]

But they always pay Hareeba!

[sharpcircle]

SBR grade?

[Toit]

Good thing he plans to start legal action.
Let's see what happens....

[chance]

I hope he takes legal action and does not settle. We need to get rid that premium charge and this man may just have the balls to do it.

[bigboydan]

This is a bit alarming to say the least.

[lukahh]

BetFair shooting intself into their leg here. Squeezing customers in all possible ways.

Nevertheless, you still get near to best prices on BF - cant deny that.

[chance]

Their share price dropped 10% one day leading up to AGM.

[Hareeba!]

But they always pay Hareeba!

Indeed they do

[brettels]

hareeba shillington

[Hareeba!]

hareeba shillington

ROFL ... just look at all the shit this bloke posts about that piss weak Sportsbet mob

[Monte]

Yep betFAIR is disgusting to say the least

[Hareeba!]

Yep betFAIR is disgusting to say the least

well don't play there if that's the way you feel about them

those who know better will continue to reap the rewards of the best betting site on this planet

[yokspot]

Removing £52,000 from someones betting account - http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/Bet...149259148.html

Presumably skillful multi-accounting can be used to avoid the premium charge. Trouble is, a book can (in my opinion) never fully prove this. This is probably something that will never go away. Since books CAN'T prove multi-accounting, they're left with vague accusations, which on many occasions WILL be founded.

Multi-accounters will always be able to fleece gambling ops with relative impunity, but the risk is always there for getting caught out, and innocent victims into the bargain. Whether or not THIS one is an innocent victim, we will never know - including Betfair.

One big leap forward in fraud detection would be if books / casinos were given much more access to customer ewallet details, since multi-accounters shovel money between client accounts thuswise. Currently, NT / MB will only confirm a book's suspicion, and anything else would almost certainly breach privacy laws. With greater access, they could nail the problem almost completely.

[Hareeba!]

Presumably skillful multi-accounting can be used to avoid the premium charge. Trouble is, a book can (in my opinion) never fully prove this. This is probably something that will never go away. Since books CAN'T prove multi-accounting, they're left with vague accusations, which on many occasions WILL be founded.

Multi-accounters will always be able to fleece gambling ops with relative impunity, but the risk is always there for getting caught out, and innocent victims into the bargain. Whether or not THIS one is an innocent victim, we will never know - including Betfair.

One big leap forward in fraud detection would be if books / casinos were given much more access to customer ewallet details, since multi-accounters shovel money between client accounts thuswise. Currently, NT / MB will only confirm a book's suspicion, and anything else would almost certainly breach privacy laws. With greater access, they could nail the problem almost completely.

Betfair have long been leaders in detecting players who think they are smart enough to fool them. I know of a few who were betting on live events thinking they had managed to get around the ban on Australians but they got caught and their accounts closed.

You don't need multi accounts yourself to do what it seems Betfair is accusing this bloke of which appears to be collusion with other players to beat the premium charge. From the wording of their response it sounds as though they have convincing evidence against him.

In no way am I defending the premium charge. I think it is the biggest mistake Betfair's ever made.

[yokspot]

Multi-accounting, from my (and pretty much all others) casino perspective, is working with other people, clients of a sort, who avail themselves to have accounts set up in their name, so enabling the operator to gain multiple bonuses, for which the clients are paid a percentage. They could use the same modus operandi to spread winnings over a number of accounts at Betfair to avoid the charge.

I've no idea if in the SB business players opereate their OWN multiple accounts, but this isn't what I have in mind.

As to "convincing evidence", the wording doesn't exactly suggest it:

On September 20 he received an email from Betfair's "pricing team" stating his account shared a similar betting strategy with four others, all of which would be taken into consideration for the charges.

But again, multi-accounting (or "colluding" if you prefer) happens, and it's almost impossible to detct with 100% certainty. So the book makes an educated guess.

It sucks for innocent players who get caught up in it, which I know for a fact happens. But then, a portion of players cheat, so the collective player body ends up paying. If some players didn't cheat, books wouldn't have to take these measures.

[Hareeba!]

Multi-accounting, from my (and pretty much all others) casino perspective, is working with other people, clients of a sort, who avail themselves to have accounts set up in their name, so enabling the operator to gain multiple bonuses, for which the clients are paid a percentage. They could use the same modus operandi to spread winnings over a number of accounts at Betfair to avoid the charge.

I've no idea if in the SB business players opereate their OWN multiple accounts, but this isn't what I have in mind.

As to "convincing evidence", the wording doesn't exactly suggest it:



But again, multi-accounting (or "colluding" if you prefer) happens, and it's almost impossible to detct with 100% certainty. So the book makes an educated guess.

It sucks for innocent players who get caught up in it, which I know for a fact happens. But then, a portion of players cheat, so the collective player body ends up paying. If some players didn't cheat, books wouldn't have to take these measures.

The statement I was referring to was reported thus:
A Betfair spokesman said: "We thoroughly investigated this matter and we determined that the customer was evading payment of the required fees." He added that Betfair's legal department was happy to "discuss it with him further".

True that conclusive proof may be difficult but if suddenly two or more players make out of character wagers by value/sport/odds based on their prior history matching each other at off market odds it's going to be pretty damning evidence.

[acw]

And refusing shareholders who are journalists access to their AGM (something to hide betfair?)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...annual-meeting

I think this is perfectly ok! In Asia many companies do the same:
http://cgmalaysia.blogspot.com/2011/...alists-at.html

[lukahh]

Betfair is a market leader with no close second in sight.
This means they can afford exorbitant charges (including premium charge) with little more consequence than being hated by customers, who still continue to play there.

we'll see if arrogant mistakes (like last year's casino dispute) cost them anything.

[Optional]

Seems a little strange that Betfair levied the entire extra premium charge onto just one of 5 accounts they say was involved don't you think?

[Hareeba!]

Seems a little strange that Betfair levied the entire extra premium charge onto just one of 5 accounts they say was involved don't you think?

Not really.
The other accounts may have not been in historical profit.

[acw]

Not really.
The other accounts may have not been in historical profit.

How about your account? Still in profit? And if so, how much commission have you paid?
I have not used BetFair for more than 5 years now, but in the past all this was easy to calculate.

[Hareeba!]

How about your account? Still in profit? And if so, how much commission have you paid?
I have not used BetFair for more than 5 years now, but in the past all this was easy to calculate.

yes still in profit but as I've posted before I pay well in excess of 20% of my net winnings every year and thus don't expect to fall into premium charge territory unless I dramatically change my way of betting

why on earth would you not have used your account for 5 years if not subject to the PC?
where can you regularly expect to get better odds than BF even if paying 5% commission, unless you are only into US sports?

[Optional]

Not really.
The other accounts may have not been in historical profit.

That suggests the other accounts were only being used to take the 'wrong' side of these colluded bets. Guy would have to be a damn good capper to keep it that way for hundreds of thousands of dollars in bets no?

And the suggestion was multiple accounts were used to avoid fees... so how on earth does pouring all the profit into one account avoid fees?


It's VERY strange they have attacked one person if they are not lieing about the claim that 5 people were involved.... 5 accounts involved equals 1/5th of the charges each.

There has to be more to this story.

I sincerely hope Betfair is not going to be exposed for acting like cowboys, but just based on slamming 1 individual I suspect they might have been here.

Would be good to see a court of law examine their system and decisions so we and they know they better not **** with people unless they are very very very certain of their position though.

[Hareeba!]

That suggests the other accounts were only being used to take the 'wrong' side of these colluded bets. Guy would have to be a damn good capper to keep it that way for hundreds of thousands of dollars in bets no?

And the suggestion was multiple accounts were used to avoid fees... so how on earth does pouring all the profit into one account avoid fees?


It's VERY strange they have attacked one person if they are not lieing about the claim that 5 people were involved.... 5 accounts involved equals 1/5th of the charges each.

There has to be more to this story.

I sincerely hope Betfair is not going to be exposed for acting like cowboys, but just based on slamming 1 individual I suspect they might have been here.

Would be good to see a court of law examine their system and decisions so we and they know they better not **** with people unless they are very very very certain of their position though.

I'm sure I could find 5 mug punters who'd like to earn a bit by making sizeable deposits and then matching bets which I post for them on obscure markets.

But I have a higher regard than that for Betfair's intelligence to think I'd be able to get away with it.

[Optional]

That still doesn't address why Betfair might have levied the entire charge to one account.

And in that scenario each account would have profit, which goes against your initial suggestion of why not.

It appears to me the entire mess would not have even been mentioned in the media had they charged each account 10k each... so why they have gone the other way remains a pertinent question in my mind.

[Hareeba!]

That still doesn't address why Betfair might have levied the entire charge to one account.

And in that scenario each account would have profit, which goes against your initial suggestion of why not.

It appears to me the entire mess would not have even been mentioned in the media had they charged each account 10k each... so why they have gone the other way remains a pertinent question in my mind.

Not necessary that the mugs' accounts would be in profit or have bet in the required number of markets to generate the PC.

[Optional]

Betafair accuse 5 registered accounts. 5 different IDed individuals. Who the hell do they think they are chosing one to take the charges?

On that point alone, I suspect they are on shaky legal ground. No matter which account has money in it, which profited, or which is easiest to collect from.

[shari91]

Betafair accuse 5 registered accounts. 5 different IDed individuals. Who the hell do they think they are chosing one to take the charges? On that point alone, I suspect they are on shaky legal ground. No matter which account has money in it, which profited, or which is easiest to collect from.

How do you know they didn't wipe out the other accounts as well? The article is only saying that this person is choosing to take legal action. For all we know the others also had their balances seized and may or not choose to take legal action for whatever reason. Presuming they're innocent of course.

[Optional]

How do you know they didn't wipe out the other accounts as well? The article is only saying that this person is choosing to take legal action. For all we know the others also had their balances seized and may or not choose to take legal action for whatever reason. Presuming they're innocent of course.

Oh dear, you're right.

I misread "Betfair deducted all £52,352.85 in his account." as saying "Betfair deducted all £52,352.85 from his account."

[acw]

And the fun continues:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/n...ost-16000.html

[yokspot]

Oh dear, you're right.

I misread "Betfair deducted all £52,352.85 in his account." as saying "Betfair deducted all £52,352.85 from his account."

"Collusion" can surely only equate to multi-accounting. That being the case, then they'd have taken down the operator account, and presumably closed down his "clients", or conspiritors.

BTW, please don't take my tone here as generally condoning anything Betfair does. This last year they've made Costa Rican ratholes look reputable. However, I'm not going to condone fraudulent players any less than disreputable books.

[acw]

yes still in profit but as I've posted before I pay well in excess of 20% of my net winnings every year and thus don't expect to fall into premium charge territory unless I dramatically change my way of betting

Surely well done, as I also read that you are not afraid to put up orders and falling asleep. Generally this is a recipe for disaster.

why on earth would you not have used your account for 5 years if not subject to the PC?
where can you regularly expect to get better odds than BF even if paying 5% commission, unless you are only into US sports?

I paid 2% commission. In one single year I had gross winnings of 400k British Pounds and paid 300k in commissions, so was left with 100k for myself. I told them that if they wanted to keep my (non-trading) business, I wanted to see some of the money that I won for them back. Discussions all went from bad to worse. Truth is that markets have become much smarter on BetFair, so if I were to continue, then question is if I would still be winning to begin with left alone the "premium charge" that I would effectively be paying. I cannot imagine it being less than the 75% that I paid.

BetFair has been totally fvcked by the traders and the only thing BetFair needs to do is the same thing as Matchbook did which is charging for every trade and not the market result, but I have been telling BetFair this now for some 6 years and they refuse to listen.

[Hareeba!]

Surely well done, as I also read that you are not afraid to put up orders and falling asleep. Generally this is a recipe for disaster.

people keep saying stuff like that but it makes no sense
where I am most sport happens during the night and early morning
if I want say 2.50 to get what I assess as fair value for a bet and the best on offer anywhere is 2.40 late at night why not ask for what I need? seems to make loads of sense to me and I'm yet to suffer a disaster

I paid 2% commission. In one single year I had gross winnings of 400k British Pounds and paid 300k in commissions, so was left with 100k for myself. I told them that if they wanted to keep my (non-trading) business, I wanted to see some of the money that I won for them back. Discussions all went from bad to worse. Truth is that markets have become much smarter on BetFair, so if I were to continue, then question is if I would still be winning to begin with left alone the "premium charge" that I would effectively be paying. I cannot imagine it being less than the 75% that I paid.

The problem I think is that people actually get to see how much commission they've paid at Betfair. They don't at bookies and most seem incapable of doing the maths to find out.

The fact that every day I can find best odds after commission at Betfair (and I'm not down to 2%) proves that bookies are taking out just as much at Betfair is.

BetFair has been totally fvcked by the traders and the only thing BetFair needs to do is the same thing as Matchbook did which is charging for every trade and not the market result, but I have been telling BetFair this now for some 6 years and they refuse to listen.

I totally disagree with this.
The premium charge, rather than the net market result commission, is the problem as it is driving away the traders and big players who provide the liquidity.
Matchbook no longer has viable inplay markets due to the change in commission which you are advocating for Betfair.