Skip to main content

Betfair to screw biggest winners for more cash

Once upon a time, Betfair's best marketing line was 'Winners Are Welcome'. Not any more. In a desperate move to show the shaer market they have more options to increase their revenues, Betfair's biggest winners will be hit with an even higher Premium Charge rate.

For full details, read here - Betfair Premium Charge Hike details

Realistically, how many people will it affect? A very small number. You've got to have done very well to win £250k after commission over the years. But what will it do to liquidity? Well, the people it will hurt are the elite level traders such as Mr Bet Angel. Peter Webb and the best of his genre. Traders lose infrequently, so thus are destined to pay less commission than your average winning punter. The big liquidity providers who market-make across the board will be hit - 40% commission on your gross profits is a stiff ask, you'd need some heavy losses mixed in there to sweeten them up.

This comes on top of their less-publicised efforts to squeeze huge fees out of bookmakers using their commercial API service - over £1m/yr for the bigger firms!

Will 99.95% of us punters ever get near paying that level of Premium Charge? No. But at a time when their PR can't get much worse, is it really a great time to come out with this? Perhaps it is - Wimbledon's almost over, there's no major football tournament for European nations this year, Royal Ascot is done and dusted so maybe it was the best time to sneak it in. They'll be hoping it disappears into the dust by the time their next big football season campaign comes along....

Company figures are published next week I hear - profits are obviously stagnating so they are desperate to show the stock market they have other options to raise revenue.

The stock market liked the announcement today, climbing back towards 800p, or was that just a positive reaction to the news David Yu is finally on the way out?

Comments

  1. Why Betdaq and WBX do not have premium charges and are still alive? Does 20% premium charges have a financial reason or it is just greed of Betfair? To compare with the financial markets where the commission for 1000 pounds is 7 pounds, even 50 pounds (5%) commission Betfair is too high.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for the comment Neru. It's not quite that simple - nobody is sure Betdaq and WBX have ever turned a profit, and they certainly don't have the customer base to justify such an unpopular move. It's also very hard to believe anyone could sustain themselves purely on either site - there simply isn't the liquidity there.

    Re comparison with financial markets - aren't you ignoring the transaction charges involved with each trade?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Thanks for your comments, but if you're a spammer, you've just wasted your time - it won't get posted.

Popular posts from this blog

It's all gone Pete Tong at Betfair!

The Christmas Hurdle from Leopardstown, a good Grade 2 race during the holiday period. But now it will go into history as the race which brought Betfair down. Over £21m at odds of 29 available on Voler La Vedette in-running - that's a potential liability of over £500m. You might think that's a bit suspicious, something's fishy, especially with the horse starting at a Betfair SP of 2.96. Well, this wasn't a horse being stopped by a jockey either - the bloody horse won! Look at what was matched at 29. Split that in half and multiply by 28 for the actual liability for the layer(s). (Matched amounts always shown as double the backers' stake, never counts the layers' risk). There's no way a Betfair client would have £600m+ in their account. Maybe £20 or even £50m from the massive syndicates who regard(ed) Betfair as safer than any bank, but not £600m. So the error has to be something technical. However, rumour has it, a helpdesk reply (not gospel, natur

What shits me about match-fixing 'journalism'.

The anti-wagering media bandwagon has dozens of new members this week, all weighing in an industry they have absolutely no idea about. I'm all for getting the betting industry into the mainstream but it shits me no end when they roll out reports and celebrities who simply don't have a clue what they are talking about and don't bother to check basic facts which key arguments in their story. If this was the financial industry, making errors like this would have them in all sorts of trouble, but the same level of regulation doesn't apply because finance stock markets are supposedly all legitimate and serious, whereas sports betting is just a bit of fun for people who can never win in the long-term... according to the media. This week we have seen the sting by the Telegraph which, on the face of it, looks to be a tremendous piece of investigative work into fixing in English football. But the headlines around it are over-sensationalised yet again. Delroy Facey, a former pla

The Cup review

James McDonald feels the emotion of winning the Melbourne Cup on Verry Elleegant. (photo credit Darrian Traynor/Getty Images) With every man and his dog doing Cup previews these days, perhaps a postmortem of the race provides more value - at least for these more serious about the game or want something to refer back to in 363 days' time. It was great to see Flemington basking in the warm spring sun, with no threat of rain which buggers up the confidence you have in the state of the track, an integral part of betting on horses. The crowd was back, at least about 10% of the normal Cup day crowd, but 10,000 more than were allowed last year. Let us never have to deal with these restrictions again in our lifetimes. The TV coverage - well, um, ugh. On Derby Day, I was able to watch the racing.com stream in the UK while Sky Sports Racing kept to their normal NSW-controlled Sky Racing Aus coverage which denies that Victoria and South Australia exist. For Cup Day, they switched to the Chann