well i stopped buying shares with dumb markup, so im doing my part

Do you think there should be a definite ceiling on MU SWD?

Or in your decision making process, is it just a case by case basis?

Im not a staking/investment expert by any means, and tbh havent been investing much recently. I would think there should be some ceiling. I personally dont wanna invest in somthing with a tiny or unclear edge. Or pay a significant mu in a event with huge variance. Idk just some ramblings of my thoughts.

I think providing a reference as someone who has dealed for you is better than nothing. Obviously few people want to do a full on vouch for someone as it puts the voucher at unnecessary risk. In fear of blowing my own trumpet I like to think I handle references quite well. E.g.

Straight up as how things happened. Make your own judgements. If someone I provide a reference for grims you, don't call me!

No, just send the boys around!!! lol

Nice, carefully worded references though.

Maybe I would suggest you say where they should send the boys around though, in case someone misinterprets that as your place!

Don't think it's ramblings I am genuinely interested on people's view on this.

I had seen you around buying pieces a while ago and haven't recently, so that means something.

Like you said though (when you said that you are doing your bit), if small groups of "large piece" buyers, or large groups of "small piece" buyers, start getting put off by the levels of mu and stop buying, then that will almost definitely have an impact on the rates charged I would think.

A ceiling is dumb though, some people deserve the high markups they ask for, while others are probably a bad investment at even money.

Would there be a limit on how much you'd pay for even the best jorg?

I know what you're saying though, as it is very subjective.

But is there some tipping point where it doesn't matter how decent the player is, no one would pay.

Like you could charge say 50% and people would probably buy from you.

Do you think you could charge 80% and still sell?

I know that is being ridiculously outrageous but I am interested in where it stops/or if it never stops.

I would think in an open market the price would plateau at some stage?

This is more of what I meant. A great mtt superstar could have a 300% roi in the sunday million, but would people buy it for 100% markup? Idk maybe they would.

If the price would plateau in an open market, then you don't need a cap...

FWIW I'm positive I could charge >100% markup for the WSOP main event and sell it out, and I'm sure a lot of other people could too.

Interesting. I wasnt meaning in my post earlier that there should be an enforced cap btw, if ppl are willing to buy shares at a certain rate let them.

Yeah i agree jorj (no I brought it up to ask SWD if he set some sort of ceiling or his views - blame me for that).

I meant it from that perspective and why I said it was subjective.

More interested from an investor's persepective if you would set your own cap and what that may be.

That will be different from case to case investor to investor.

I guess I am interested if you guys had figures in your mind, but I understand perfectly if you don't want to share that here if you do.

Like there would have been a stack of people who would pay you whatever markup you liked jorj, just for a sweat in the SCOOP. But for serious investors there has to be a limit where it is just ridiculous to even contemplate - maybe I am just trying too hard to seek an answer here that doesn't really exist? (you beat me to it with your post jorj -but yeah i get that).

A markup cap is definitely silly

Then surely there must be more openess with allowing people to question the mu, etc. in threads then?

At the moment it is like blasphemy should anyone dare question it.

Someone early on mentioned the Gary Neville/Roseeker debacle/scam and it was in my mind from the moment azn started this thread.

I read that thread from cover to cover and you can see how people instantly get their back up as soon as someone starts questioning things. Then a majority of people jump on them for having some sort of agenda.

The guy who eventually "outed" them as cheats came into the thread by request, tried to establish a bit of credibility by explaining his background etc, everyone jumped on him like he was big noting himself, then everyone proceeded to eat humble pie when the guy turns out to have intimate working knowlege of computer forensics etc., and he provided overwhelming information that lead to their total confession.

People said he was agenda driven from the start. I guess he was - he wanted fairness and truth.

I think it's important to realise that in any gambling and money related situation that there are going to be shady characters. If we allow an open and transparent process, which includes fair and respectful questioning of conditions pertaining to the offers of shares etc, then that will, in effect, have a better control of possible scams/shady behaviour.

Just to follow on with the Roseeker eg. This guy openly admitted that he thought his "edge" was being able to scam his fellow 2+2'ers. These guys may be in the minority here, but I would feel safer investing money if I thought I could freely question sellers without feeling intimidated by the backlash of whitenoise and indignation that would inevitably rain down on me.

staking is so -EV i swear

invest in urself

anyone remember Gigabet who sold like 300% of his action and lost on purpose for 200% roi?


from experience, i can say that staking is almost definitely -EV with few exceptions.

I'm not one to chime in when I see a rip-off package but I'm fine with people who do. Sometimes it is just ignorance from the person who made the thread, sometimes they intentionally trying to charge high markup and free roll their way into some games and take the rakeback they generate from the games and 20-30% they left over for themselves. Nothing wrong with educating people, although it would be better if buyers researched these sorts of things before investing.




I've been killing it on CMU, haven't really invested too much here since Pokertoronto stopped selling. George Lind seems like a good investment though.





Karma caught up to him.

last couple of times I "trolled" super ridiculous staking threads I got flamed by everyone.

Another thing that REALLY SHOULD be mentioned(not sure if someone already said it or not) is that alot of tournament packages have like 5 SUPER TURBO events and the entire package is a 20-30% markup. I'm 100% sure no one can ever achieve a 20% ROI in super turbos over a decent sample size. 300 chips 15/30 starting stacks.. yea ok

As someone who wasn't aware how many good players there were posting packages here until a couple weeks ago just wanted to bring up something that CTS posted a while back but didn't get talked about much. Not in large %'s like George, CTS, Vivek, etc but I have bought a ton of action in this forum in that time and the posting 2nd packages or 3rd packages, has soured me a bit on the entire process.

I think it's a very gray line towards almost being shady when someone posts a package with a group of tourneys, sells out and then posts another package and usually posts something along the lines of "oh, you know what, I missed these" and sells another package usually in higher buy in things than the other one was for(and always for the same markup as the first one which is ludicrous). The fact that they start out with a complete lie to start the selling of the 2nd package sits wrong with me. We aren't stupid, you didn't "miss them" the first time. It also is irritating that they use the previous package as a selling point for their new package. "Hey look how fast my other package sold".

Selling another package takes away some portion of EV from the first package....whether that means that someone is going to skip a 1k to play the 5k the next day or whatever it might be. There is definitely an affect on the first package by the 2nd one and it is always going to be a negative affect. I bought a first package from one person.....only to have them sell a 2nd package that included a 5 PM start the same day as a tourney in my package. If someone is going to be doing this, it needs to be done in the same package and stated up front (much as JPOSU did). Buyers of both packages should be aware of this and I doubt many aside from me made the connection.

Quite possible this is standard here but I don't think it should be and as a buyer of the first package I should definitely have the ability to pull my money from the first package if a 2nd package is posted even if I have already sent money. Even more than the EV aspect, I really think posting a 2nd package becomes a character issue (not saying everyone that does it is being shady but it definitely comes across that way to me).

Anyway, just my thoughts. Sorry so long.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/16...shares-790023/

posting partly for the lolz but also because it exemplifies the absurdity of some of the issues posted in this thread and should be archived for future reference....and future lolz.

With all of the horrible investments currently being offered, would it ever be OK to go into someone's thread and offer a lower crossbook? I'd be OK with waiting until an original sellout if need be.

For example: A player that I think is -EV offers himself at 20% MU. I then come in the thread and offer people an opportunity to make that same investment on the player with me for 15% MU. Also, if a player is sold out after investors have bought into shares that I already thought were overvalued, I'd love the opportunity to sell more shares at that same price to those who would still like to get in on the deal.

I totally agree with this, people are just taking advantage of how much the marketplace has blown up recently. In most cases these people just weren't sure how hard to press their luck the first time, and then when their packages sold out quickly, decided they had an opportunity to play some higher stakes/more tourneys.

Having 2 tourneys in one day in 2 different packages is just really really awful.

+1 say the cap was 50% or something then you'd still have people with 10% roi's trying to sell with 50% MU which is clearly outrageous but people might be like lol there's a cap so obviously we're not getting ripped off and just in general it's better to let people make their own decisions with their own money. As much as a rip-off as some of them are (and I just read the thread klink "trolled", apparently some posts got deleted so maybe he had worse posts but he seemed pretty reasonable the thought process by the guy charging a ton of markup was just super lol and just didn't have that good of an understanding of poker at all), if one person offers it and another will buy it why should 2p2 be telling them they can't do this?

I don't know if this is necessarily true, especially with me I cant imagine this being the case. If you aren't one of my good friends I am never taking nor enjoying a -EV sweat of some random. If this is the case for the majority, which I honestly don't know as I feel its a wild assumption, then that is a bit mind boggling.