Poker Forum > Staker Exchange
APAT Staking Exchange - Discussion
Sef:
--- Quote from: mal666 on June 15, 2012, 18:44:01 PM ---
--- Quote from: Sef on June 15, 2012, 15:34:02 PM ---
--- Quote from: deanp27 on June 14, 2012, 18:25:56 PM ---
Current threads are stating in terms of 100% staking but with60/40 return etc. personally think the board should have a universal way of stating the premium (I would use decimal method).
I mean 60/40 on a 100% stake is a HUGE markup (about 1.67) and established pros would struggle to sell at that rate and I think stakers should know this before this board gets established.
--- End quote ---
I disagree. Need to try word this right, too many terms. lol. Using this example it"s sold without a premium.. it"s sold as a percentage return so for every 1% you pay for you get 0.6% of winnings. On a premium sold at same rate you would pay for 1.67% and recieve 1%. So I think as long as the stakee has laid out the plan for which way he is selling then it"s up to stakers to decide how acceptable it is. If you don"t like it, don"t buy! ;)
I think thats right anyway!?!??! lol :D
--- End quote ---
Of course there"s a premium, it"s just worded a different way.
As this is new here I"d expect quite a few people don"t really know much about staking. APAT is pretty broad in its membership so that obv includes plenty of newbies. It"s only fair to point out what is the norm.
Using Wayne"s op for eg, states 10% = $107.50. But you"e not getting 10% you"re getting 6%.
6% x 1.67 = $107.50
He even admitted himself he didn"t really know what was standard and Wayne"s been around for years.
Applying mark-up up front is just a lot more transparent, so again using Wayne"s eg (sorry Wayne this is not a troll you were just first up)
He would say selling 60% of SM @ 1.67.
This would raise the full buy in and he gets his 40%
People can then judge if they think the ev of the player justifies the mark-up.
--- End quote ---
Yeah.. as I said, too many terms. The up front "mark up" is what I was referring to as opposed to "premium". I"m sure you understood. Thanks for the much clearer explanation. I"m never good at explaining things, I confuse myself half the time! :D :D
Des:
--- Quote from: mal666 on June 15, 2012, 18:44:01 PM ---
--- Quote from: Sef on June 15, 2012, 15:34:02 PM ---
--- Quote from: deanp27 on June 14, 2012, 18:25:56 PM ---
Current threads are stating in terms of 100% staking but with60/40 return etc. personally think the board should have a universal way of stating the premium (I would use decimal method).
I mean 60/40 on a 100% stake is a HUGE markup (about 1.67) and established pros would struggle to sell at that rate and I think stakers should know this before this board gets established.
--- End quote ---
I disagree. Need to try word this right, too many terms. lol. Using this example it"s sold without a premium.. it"s sold as a percentage return so for every 1% you pay for you get 0.6% of winnings. On a premium sold at same rate you would pay for 1.67% and recieve 1%. So I think as long as the stakee has laid out the plan for which way he is selling then it"s up to stakers to decide how acceptable it is. If you don"t like it, don"t buy! ;)
I think thats right anyway!?!??! lol :D
--- End quote ---
Of course there"s a premium, it"s just worded a different way.
As this is new here I"d expect quite a few people don"t really know much about staking. APAT is pretty broad in its membership so that obv includes plenty of newbies. It"s only fair to point out what is the norm.
Using Wayne"s op for eg, states 10% = $107.50. But you"e not getting 10% you"re getting 6%.
6% x 1.67 = $107.50
He even admitted himself he didn"t really know what was standard and Wayne"s been around for years.
Applying mark-up up front is just a lot more transparent, so again using Wayne"s eg (sorry Wayne this is not a troll you were just first up)
He would say selling 60% of SM @ 1.67.
This would raise the full buy in and he gets his 40%
People can then judge if they think the ev of the player justifies the mark-up.
--- End quote ---
Nice contribution there Mal, appreciated.
mal666:
Ha, no probs. Enjoy the staking side of poker.
Can I just add the mark-up directly correlates to roi.
If you buy at 1.2:1 your horse needs a 20% roi for you to break even.
SirPercival:
--- Quote from: mal666 on June 15, 2012, 19:33:14 PM ---
Ha, no probs. Enjoy the staking side of poker.
Can I just add the mark-up directly correlates to roi.
If you buy at 1.2:1 your horse needs a 20% roi for you to break even.
--- End quote ---
Damn, I was thinking of selling at 1.0 but now need to make it 0.8 :D
Swinebag:
--- Quote from: mal666 on June 15, 2012, 18:44:01 PM ---
--- Quote from: Sef on June 15, 2012, 15:34:02 PM ---
--- Quote from: deanp27 on June 14, 2012, 18:25:56 PM ---
Current threads are stating in terms of 100% staking but with60/40 return etc. personally think the board should have a universal way of stating the premium (I would use decimal method).
I mean 60/40 on a 100% stake is a HUGE markup (about 1.67) and established pros would struggle to sell at that rate and I think stakers should know this before this board gets established.
--- End quote ---
I disagree. Need to try word this right, too many terms. lol. Using this example it"s sold without a premium.. it"s sold as a percentage return so for every 1% you pay for you get 0.6% of winnings. On a premium sold at same rate you would pay for 1.67% and recieve 1%. So I think as long as the stakee has laid out the plan for which way he is selling then it"s up to stakers to decide how acceptable it is. If you don"t like it, don"t buy! ;)
I think thats right anyway!?!??! lol :D
--- End quote ---
Of course there"s a premium, it"s just worded a different way.
As this is new here I"d expect quite a few people don"t really know much about staking. APAT is pretty broad in its membership so that obv includes plenty of newbies. It"s only fair to point out what is the norm.
Using Wayne"s op for eg, states 10% = $107.50. But you"e not getting 10% you"re getting 6%.
6% x 1.67 = $107.50
He even admitted himself he didn"t really know what was standard and Wayne"s been around for years.
Applying mark-up up front is just a lot more transparent, so again using Wayne"s eg (sorry Wayne this is not a troll you were just first up)
He would say selling 60% of SM @ 1.67.
This would raise the full buy in and he gets his 40%
People can then judge if they think the ev of the player justifies the mark-up.
--- End quote ---
slightly disagree with this Mal (but only slightly)
I agree that putting a markup in staking threads should be the norm, but the suggestion you have given wayne implies that he is playing 40% on his own dime and does not explicitly say that he is not putting a bean forward.
I think it should still say: (something like)
"selling 100% with backers cut of 60% - this is 1:1.67"
Some people do prefer to back people who are putting some of their own money in over players who are fully backed.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version