Yes, it is that simple. That is why it's used.

Ups my mistake, i used a $1000 starting bankroll instead of $2000. It does have stakeback.


What i meant was:

Starting BR: $1000

Ending BR: $2000

Profit: $1000

2+2 Total investment: $800 (80%)

1%: $8


At the end the horse ends up with:

- the $8 stakeback + $8*0.7 with 70% no makeup
- the $8 stakeback + $8*0.8 with 80% no makeup

etc.


I don't know how i ended up with those numbers, my bad

Yep, the confusion was with the "selling X% action". When i use that term i usually mean that i'm only giving the option to sell X% of the initial buy-ins and that i'll buy myself the rest.


Now that i read more carefully your example with markup.

2+2 doesn't use stakeback? How do they receive 70% only of the $500 cashes? Does that mean that if i ask for $1000 and cash for $500 i still receive $150? because that would explain why 70% is so low

If you had 30% of your own action, then the bolded would be correct.

sorry to keep bothering but didn't understood.


When you say if i had 30% of my own action what does that mean? Are we speaking about the player investing some amount himself?

If i understood corretly, 42% markup selling 70% of the action means selling a total of $1000. That's the starting banrkoll right? Where does that 30% come from? Isn't that just the % that the player will receive in the end? Or does that means that on top of those $1000 he have to put another 30% ($300) and play with $1300?

so no stakeback?

Wow, props to DoGGz for answering all these questions but really marcof3 you need to look around, read the stickies, various threads, etc and get yourself familiar with how things work.

I know it can be overwhelming the first time, it took me hours to to figure out everything, but it will help you a ton more and really is the better way of learning.

If you sell 70%, the only way to have your buyins covered 100% is to sell @ 42% markup. That will not happen. Therefore, some of the buy in cost would have to be covered by yourself.



No

you're right Nofx Fan, i already tried to figure out using some threads, but i'll get there eventually

I'm gonna start a session anyway so no more questions

Thank you very much for the help DoGGz, and apologies for my english.

I've searched 'makeup' but really didn't find what I was looking for.

I sold of 50% of myself in the WCOOP 2009 and left my investors with a -ROI. I am planning on selling more of myself in this years WCOOP. I didn't mention anything about makeup. I was thinking about offering my precious investors a chance to reinvest in me this year and pay back any makeup that I owed, or didn't owe them.

Selling %'s is different than getting staked, correct?

So, is what I'm pretty much asking is, is it standard to offer makeup back to previous investors when you're selling off shares next?

No

just found this:

Thanks JP OSU

That was actually a typo. I meant slight to no markup.

Alright, I was kind of confused by that. But I think JP answered my question. Thanks for clearing that up.

Tilted by the terms of some of these packages. I have seen a bunch of packages posted with unreasonable terms today. I have been active in the market place for over a month now and have bit my tongue and moved on ever time when seeing one of these packages. The problem is is that they seem to be coming more frequently and it seems as though the sellers might be getting the upper hand. The last one that I just read the player was selling 70% of his action to a $530 WCOOP event at 15% markup. He had an average buy in across sites of about $12 with an ROI of 5%. This player should basically be honored if he can sell to this event at 0% markup. This is just nonsense.

Should I;

1) Keep doing as I have and just move on to the next thread
2) Call this player out right in their thread
3) Question the player via PM

This is a survey....please vote and I will do what is best overall for the marketplace.

I don't sell much action and the two times I did, I did it at ten percent MU with a 30 percent roi and only sold 50 percent of myself, but your number two, at least the way it's phrased, just sounds so bad to me I felt compelled to reply. I guess I don't see why you would have a problem with it. Is he being misleading or not posting all the numbers correctly or something? Obv you don't want a piece of the deal, but why would you make it your concern what others buy or don't buy?

I'm trying to say this as respectfully as possible. Anyway, my clear choice would be number 1, unless he's not being honest, open, and truthful.

I mean, maybe number 3 if you are very interested in him and want to negotiate a better deal, but again, number 2 sounds horrible to me. Maybe I'm missing something though, and I look forward to seeing others replies.

I think number 2 is fair if it's done with tact. The last thing we want is investors to make too many bad investments and lose money and give up on the marketplace.

I never thought of it that way, I didn't know there were that many uninformed investors. Very tough spot, it's like trying to protect people from themselves.

I have to admit, I just read a thread (was trying to find the one he mentioned) about some guy from SC and it's a mess, and misleading. I can see why frustration would set in and this would need to be done.

With that said this opens a can of worms. I just saw a guy(well known successful player) sell out quick at 35 percent MU for the scoop ME. I guess that's an excepted value because no one said anything. Also, has there ever been a case where potential investors were talked out of buying and the horse then ships something? What happens in that case?

I thought I read a thread on this debate somewhere. I'll try to find it, but I thought it was a good debate and most people came to an agreement, witch was basically... If the person is being dishonest or not open then it was decided saying so in his thread is fine, and IMO should be done. If everything was on the up and up but seasoned investors didn't think it was a great value, it was not to be said in the thread but rather spoken by not investing in the person.

I'm obv rambling now, but again, looking forward to more people's opinions on this.

I like number 2 but with a lighter tone than "call out". Just a polite question such as "why is the mark up so high?" in the thread should do.

I think investors should be doing their own research but it does help when others voice input too.

I often see people just jump on the bandwagon when someone with a high postcount/has been on 2p2 for a while buys a % in a thread even though it's a bad invest (myself included).

The issue is that it's hard to quantify what is a good package and what isn't. You can't just pull up his stats, see some ROI number, and immediately know it's a good package. I have noticed a trend of people selling higher and higher markups including people who probably have no business doing so.

I don't call anyone out because value is completely subjective and I don't want to oppress my views about a particular buy onto other people.

Actually i would say nr. 2 the soft way like sect7g stated.

I sometimes ask in threads why they charge such a mu with a bad roi when i think that it doesn't make sense at all, mainly to people who are new at the market place.

I also see some people selling package after package with no return to investors and still charging up to 25% mu. In that case i just don't invest not saying anything, as i think taking a look at previous packages should be the least an investor should do before buying.

This is what I mean about subjective. A great player could go many days without making a profit for his investors, and I wouldn't judge a packages value on how well he's done in over his last x share sells.

This really is not an accurate indicator of anything. I doubt that there is nearly enough of a sample size here to make this meaningful. Example if a player has a 50% Roi they could easily brick a handful of packages in a row and that doesn't mean that the next time you shouldn't buy their package. Also if a losing player happens to sell a few negative EV packages and turns a profit this does not mean that investing in their next package is a good investment.

Summary; I doubt any seller on here has even close to enough of a sample size for this to be relevant.

This is very true, but I am only talking about the ones that are blatantly obvious. If you have a 5% career ROI with an $11 abi and a good sample size and are trying to sell 75% of your action to a $500 WCOOP event at 15% mark up, there is nothing subjective about this. You are -EV!

Back years ago when I was grinding these levels I wish there was a place to go where I could sell some of my action to take a shot at a huge tournament. I would glad to take action at no mark-up just so I could have the opportunity to play. It is such a great opportunity and luxury to be able to do that.

I have kept my mouth shut, but sometimes I feel as though some of these posters need to be told this reality.

Related matter:

A winning player with ~40% eROI should feel good about charging 25% continuously regardless of past packages' results. I am very confident about this as I beat myself up about selling several -25% ROI packages over the last year and a half while charging the same markup before binking for my backers. As a buyer, if you can't understand results-disorientedness, don't buy my packages. Rather, I have a big gripe about the opposite scenario.

Is it standard for people to turn a good run into increase in markups that are very marginal for the backer and in some cases outright laughable? I understand that success should increase the demand for one's shares, so if shares were undervalued before, an increase is necessary.

However, some people in this forum are really pushing the envelope on what a world-class player is worth, and I doubt that they are anywhere in the elite. The other thing is that they are charging bigger markups for packages that are based on tougher, online fields and in some cases have worse structures.

Despite my success this year, I feel like the next WSOP packages I sell will be charging roughly the same amount, possibly charging 5% for online transfers, but essentially the same thing.

Disclaimer: I say this only as a seller. I don't buy here very often.

I definitely wanted to make a separate post for this:

I appreciate it when people troll the threads out there that are unreasonable, -EV, or suspicious in general. It is good for the community and entertainment for lots of people. As a seller, always feel free to ask me any hard questions or grill me about anything that is unclear. If I am worthwhile horse, this will never be an issue so you should never feel bad or embarrassed(unless you state something factually incorrect arrogantly). You are doing the community a service.