Hope I'm posting this in the right area, and if not please let me know. I'm new to this site (actually came here a year ago, and didn't find the staking process very simplistic (was too stubborn to try to learn)) and had a question. My only staking experience is through that other site, so if I use the wrong terminology, let me know. If I am to post an 'event', say a package of Sunday MTTs, how is accounting done here? How do I let people know that they own a piece of that 'event'? I see some people putting 'booked'. I assume this is the way. Also, after the 'event', do I just go through the thread and figure out who I owe? Appreciate any feedback.

*also I know that for the first 6 months, I need to use that newbie link for posting things. Do I do all my accounting (booked, etc.) there? Seems like that would bog down that thread, so I wanna make sure.

Quick guestion, i bought 10% off of someone who won a donkament, he now says that the winnings are split 60/40 and i get 10% of 60%, is this standard?

yeah, that sounds standard to me. the backer's cut was 60%, and you represented 10% of the stake.

On the face of it that doesn't sound standard to me. What are the details of the stake? Buyins, markup, how much you invested etc?

lol, no

if you bought 10%, you get 10% of profits+stakeback


(just put all the details here of the deal, so can comment on it better)

yes Zima is right...if he didn't say anything you get 10% of the total cash

And 60/40 is way way off for a piece of one tournament(would be like him charging 66% markup), should be 80/20(25% markup) if he were going to do it that way

We really didn't discuss any details, he was just like: anyone wants to buy %, I said sure i'll take 10% gl..
(that's obv a lesson learned for next time)

He won 5850 so i figured i would get 585, but he said it's only 350 because he deserves 40% of my stake for being the player.

To me it seems like if we didn't agree on that before he played I just get 10% of whatever he won, he insists otherwise :S

you deserve 585 and its not even close.

With markup in the first place this is not standard: you buy 10% of winnings. Without anything said this is a zero markup, variance reducing offer from you. With a deal of split profit agreed... well it's "ok" I guess.

This: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...84&postcount=3

I started to rethink the idea of freerolling with split profits.
I think when you accept a deal of freeroll with 50/50 profit split you don't end up with half the ROI longterm. There is a bias.

Suppose you stake a 0% ROI player on a $100 BI tourney. Expected Value is 100, profit=0. Money for investor expected=$0 and stakee=$0. Longterm both sides end up with 0.
Let's say the stakee win a tourney now (for $1K). This is going to happen to any breakeven player on a large sample size. Profit=$900 Backer gets $450 and the problem is that stakee gets $450.
Although his ROI is 0, stakee end up adding half of any profit to his pocket and is going to have an EV>0 (this money is coming from somewhere... so investor's EV<0). The bias in split profit is acting as a markup is and with 60/40 split profit maybe you are EV-. I guess that it depends on true ROI and prize repartition in some way.
Maybe this is the point he wanted raised here: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...&postcount=585

I am too lazy to put more thought on it now. If someone already checked the math behind this he may explain it.

Who was this player?
How much did you transfer him?

If you transferred him 10% of the original buyin, you get 10% of any profit. If you sent him 10% of the 60% than you get 10% of than. Either way, seems like he's a joke and is trying to lowball you.

Exactly what I thought, just wanted to hear more details first in case we were missing something.

out this motherfka or have him post his side, we want screen names this is pretty outrageous tbh

Talking to him right now, don't want to name and shame him before i give him another chance to give me the rest of the money. Will out him if he doesn't agree tho.

After talking to him again just now he re-read the convo we had agreed that I was right.
He read all the posts and I'm sure that helped so thanks a lot for all of your feedback

Interesting thread, thanks for all the info.

I have a question: A friend of mine is a very successful MTT player and wants to make the transition from online to live. The plan is to have investors backing him for a full year on the live tournament circuit, we're talking not only buy-ins, but plane tickets, hotel bills etc.

What would you say would be a fair profit split if the investors were to back him 100%? Sure, he has the benefit of being able to play lots of big tourneys (WSOP, WPT, EPT) for free, but he still needs a financial incentive IMO. Or would that be outrageous? What do you guys think? 75/25? 80/20? 90/10? 95/5?

To illustrate one example: If the investment is 100K, and is split into 10K shares (=10%), a 75/25 split means that if the player makes 80K profit during that year, 60K is paid back to the investors (6K each 10% share).

The most important thing is at how much do you evaluate his ROI. If you have expenses on top of the Buyin you will need to report this as a cost for someone in the split of the ROI.

Just playing with random numbers assuming pure freeroll, no makeup:
BI=10K
Player's true ROI=60%
Transport, hostel etc=3K=30% (which is acting as another rake!)
Then there is only 60-30=30% of ROI left to share between backed and backers to remunerate respectively work and risk taking. Let's say you split 50/50, then he should get 15% of markup.
Now I'm not sure how to translate this into a freeroll split but based on bobboufl11's post this would be roughly a 90/10 split. If he could jump up and explain how he got his numbers here that'd be great.

Note: The cost of the transport hostel etc has been put on 50% to backer and 50% to backed here. To realise its effect just look at the numbers with and without. Without it, you'd have 30% of the ROI for you, now you end up with 15%. The 15% extra cut is 50% of the 30% (of buyin) extra expenses.

Now all you have to do is to put the right ROI, the right costs and figure out how you want to split what's left (and see if it's worth the investment ).



EDIT: if anything is not correct please tell me.

Actually, this would be no different than someone selling 100% action at a 70/30 backers cut on PTP with no makeup/cake on PTP. And this is quite common.

for winning players, 50/50 with make up and 70/30-80/20 without makeup is standard. It is on the backer obviously to decide if the players states/game is worth it.

sorry, actually 1.3 to 1 markup is a roughly 77% cut, even better

so, how standard is it on PTP to put your travel expenses in the deals and charge huge markup...?

most wsop baps and other series baps have travel included, along with taxes obvi

most as in prolly 75%

well thats pretty cool of PTP to give out such charity.

That's what I heard, thus my question. Thanks SmokingPig for the calculations, it is appreciated.

I think you only realize an average return of 50% (1.96 / 1.3)... not a huge difference but I've noticed a lot of people just using expected ROI minus markup to come up with their ROI which will be slightly inflated.

not sure why the bolded is true... it just means there will be fewer people willing (or maybe rather able!) to pay high markup on BAP shares which will put downward pressure on stakees' ability to charge higher markup.

Thanks for the help rje. Its very much appreciated.

How do you get access to post in this forum? It won't give me access to beg here...