Bank on it

CharlieMaxwell · Feb 15, 2004

What must be done, if we are to have true security in the sports betting offshore industry, is to separate the money/transfer function from the sports books.

Get the entire story by reading Wild Bill's latest article, which can be found on the RX home page at www.theprescription.com

Charlie

Jazz · Feb 15, 2004

Interesting, worthy of discussion.

But I submit that I'd much prefer to see steps taken now on a book-by-book basis, if necessary, to offer more security - 'baby' steps first.

Let's start with all new books who wish to advertise at a forum, and have (as discussed a lot in other topics) verified escrow of whatever form to protect the account balances of players who sign up through a forum at that book. As I stated elsewhere, I will no longer even think about putting a penny in a new book (less than 1 year old and advertising here or elsewhere) unless that security is present. This is something a forum could/should be able to work out without waiting for a global solution - far easier than asking this industry, scattered around different countries, to accept financial controls as suggested in Wildbill's article.

I guess I'm voting with my electronic wallet.

wilheim · Feb 15, 2004

My first question is how much, and where, will participating books post their part of the money that changes hands on a daily basis? Obviously players can only bet up to whatever is in their account. What is to stop a not so well off book to offer highly opinionated numbers, and capture all the action on certain games? While the concept of a "clearing house" for wagers with a stable of financially well off, and hopefully honest books, sounds like a solution to the problem of books going belly up, and stiffing players, it still depends on the books remaining solvent. Of course if matching funds is somehow worked out for every bet, then this idea could have serious merit.

wil.

JohnnyDeMarco · Feb 15, 2004

you guys know the books have financial problems too.

Western Union reps that dont pay
Secure Buxx
Credit card comapnies that run off with millions
just to name a few

HerzvanRentle · Feb 15, 2004

You could take the idea one step further and actually combine the entity that brokers the financial trust together with the entities that lay the bets and call it ... well, a betting exchange.

NickDouglas · Feb 15, 2004

"...it would force consolidation in the industry. And that should only be good for the players."

I strongly disagree with this statement. Consolidation means less competition, which makes collusion easier.

More importantly, doesn't Neteller essentially do this already? If you keep your Neteller account funded, you can move money to any book instantly, get down on your game and withdrawl your stake and winnings for $15 bucks the next day. How is that different from the idea being offered here?

Fishhead · Feb 16, 2004

Thanks for the read WB

Rogthedodger · Feb 17, 2004

A major drawback to the system proposed is that the #'s will get exponentially tighter than they already are. Most of the time players already have to go off the screen to find an off #.....WAY off in some cases. The system proposed would make the lines even more cloned than they already are. I, for one, am totally against any move that tightens the market even further.

I look at it this way: I am consistently rewarded for having many outs that each offer me the best line on something. I am the one that must fund each of these outs and shop the off screen lines to find the little jewels on a regular basis. Why in the world would I want to give up my advantage to a player that funds an e-wallet with $200 and can pick which of 100 books has the best line and bet in to it???

TheGeneral+ · Feb 18, 2004

Thanks Bill. Need to think about this one a bit. Any further opinions?

vinividivinci · Feb 18, 2004

Just read the article. Makes way too much sense to ever become reality.

I have never been comfortable putting my money up front without knowing for sure whether the other guy even has any.

How about a system where the player puts up his money and the house has to put up theirs. The third party grades the game and gives all the money to the winner.

VVV

Phaedrus · Feb 18, 2004

I hate to be cutesy, but I can only tell half of this story. The half I can tell is that there is in fact a sportsbook being set up right now that will address this very issue and that works on a model similar to the "betting wallet" WildBill envisions. It will kick ass imho because it will take the real power of e-currencies -- non-repudiable p2p transfers -- and put it to work for players' advantages.

Imagine never wondering if your balance is safe with a book again, because you have *no* balance with them -- you make a bet, you spend the money to them, if it wins you get paid -- if not, try again sometime. You'll never have any funds at any risk beyond whatever currently outstanding plays you have, because no other money will be in the hands of the book.

Hopefully be up in time for MLB; definately by summer.

Phaedrus