Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

News, Views, and Gossip For poker news, views, and gossip

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-10-2013, 01:24 PM   #1
Loopshot1
old hand
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,236
Bank of Timex.

Seen reference to this all over Twitter but can't figure out what the hell it is exactly?

Is Michael...

Buying up players make up?
Loaning?
Staking?
Cross booking?

Even Haralabob chimed in claiming it was brilliant except for the whole interwebs element. What do you guys know?
Loopshot1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 01:29 PM   #2
Wotton
adept
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 751
Re: Bank of Timex.

The twitter account is pretty clear: you can't short sell in the marketplace so Mike Mcdonald is doing it himself plus some other type of market clearing activities: offering the possibility to players to leverage themselves in certain events essentially.

If someone is selling a package at a high markup he'll offer you to buy it at a lower markup (which is ggod for you if you think the ROI of the player in question justifies the markup quoted by Timex). If the person cashes, he pays you out of his pockets the winnings. If not he pockets the money you paid him. So he's "shorting" the player's package.
If you someone plays the main, but they actually want to be in for 20k, they can ask Mike to quote them a price for the other 10k. The prices I've seen quoted are quite high though.
It's very cool.
Wotton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 01:53 PM   #3
BustoPro
old hand
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Downwardly mobile
Posts: 1,668
Re: Bank of Timex.

Hmmm at what point do regulations and such kick in?

There must be SOME limit to how many quasi-securities one individual can create...

And all kind of financial ideas are considered "brilliant" until something goes wrong.
BustoPro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 01:57 PM   #4
samooth
veteran
 
samooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: gutrotting
Posts: 3,307
Re: Bank of Timex.

^ yeah by irrational, results-oriented thinking ppl
samooth is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 02:16 PM   #5
ThePressure
adept
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 985
Re: Bank of Timex.

I don't quite get how he makes money.
ThePressure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 02:22 PM   #6
exec771
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
exec771's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 17,429
Re: Bank of Timex.

He makes money by getting people to pay high markups for players he doesn't think are worth it.
exec771 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 02:22 PM   #7
samooth
veteran
 
samooth's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: gutrotting
Posts: 3,307
Re: Bank of Timex.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_(finance)
samooth is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 02:26 PM   #8
partywme
adept
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 956
Re: Bank of Timex.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePressure View Post
I don't quite get how he makes money.
Timex obviously thinks the markups people are charging are way to high, He is basically offering odds against players cashing/winning tournaments
partywme is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 02:27 PM   #9
buzz12586
old hand
 
buzz12586's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 1,292
Re: Bank of Timex.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BustoPro View Post
Hmmm at what point do regulations and such kick in?

There must be SOME limit to how many quasi-securities one individual can create...

And all kind of financial ideas are considered "brilliant" until something goes wrong.
If you are worried about it then don't participate. Why are you worried about the VOLUNTARY interactions of other people?
buzz12586 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 02:28 PM   #10
kylephilly
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
kylephilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: It's Always Sunny...
Posts: 9,372
Re: Bank of Timex.

Marchese bought 20% of himself at 1.65 to the 5k PLH event

$5,000*1.65 = $8,250; 20% * $8,250 = $1,650 paid to Timex

Timex pays 20% of whatever Marchese cashes for.

Is that correct?
kylephilly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 02:32 PM   #11
Wotton
adept
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 751
Re: Bank of Timex.

Quote:
Originally Posted by buzz12586 View Post
If you are worried about it then don't participate. Why are you worried about the VOLUNTARY interactions of other people?
But what if THE MULTI BILLION USD market of poker staking blows up because of all this. THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN.
Wotton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 02:36 PM   #12
ThePressure
adept
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 985
Re: Bank of Timex.

So Timex could sell any players at a certain markup with no involvement from the player, as long as the player plays the tournament.

So in the Tom Marchese example, Timex thinks Marchese isnt worth 1.65 so takes the action.
ThePressure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 02:36 PM   #13
TheBroseidon
adept
 
TheBroseidon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,169
Re: Bank of Timex.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePressure View Post
I don't quite get how he makes money.
-Timex believes players who sell shares are charging exorbitant markups on those shares.

Ex. Player A is selling shares for the main event at 1.5 MU. Thus if you want 1% of his action, you pay $150 instead of the $100 at face value.

-Timex believes that Player A is not good enough to warrant 1.5 MU, and assesses Player A's value at 1.3 MU.

-Timex then offers to sell pieces of Player A's action at a price inbetween those two values - perhaps at 1.45 MU. He pockets the money if Player A fails to cash, and pays out the percentage if Player A cashes. If he is an accurate predictor of MU and sells at a price that is above breakeven, he'll make a profit in the long term.

He's also offering action on any player, likely at MU lower than we're used to but what he still feels is overpriced (so he can make a profit).

Winners in this scenario:

1. People who buy shares. They're able to get a cheaper price investing in players, and are able to invest in any player they desire - even if the player would never publicly sell shares himself (Eg. Ivey, Blom). Timex is also highly respected in the poker world, and payouts from him are all but guaranteed (on twitter he claims to have a bank of ~10m between himself and his investors).

2. Timex. If the market is as overpriced as he believes, he'll be able to offer a service as well as make a profit - until the market corrects itself. If he's a good predictor of MU (Which I imagine he is, given that he's offering this service). Basically, he thinks players aren't as good as they claim, and is willing to undercut their staking prices (to a degree - he'll still be charging more than what he believe their true value to be).

He's also charging high markups on people who don't usually offer shares, exploiting the current market failure.


Losers:

1. People who overprice their shares and are denied action in favor of the BoT.




tl;dr - He's shorting the entire poker staking market, because (according to him) people aren't as good as they think they are.

Last edited by TheBroseidon; 06-10-2013 at 02:43 PM.
TheBroseidon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 02:37 PM   #14
darthsikle
adept
 
darthsikle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Perkasie, PA
Posts: 745
Re: Bank of Timex.

I would sell myself at a negative markup to subsidize my main event dreams.

How do negative markups affect his calculations?
darthsikle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 02:38 PM   #15
darthsikle
adept
 
darthsikle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Perkasie, PA
Posts: 745
Re: Bank of Timex.

http://blondepoker.com/forum/index.php?topic=61414.0
darthsikle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 02:41 PM   #16
Wyman
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Wyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Redoubling with gusto
Posts: 12,649
Re: Bank of Timex.

Quote:
Originally Posted by buzz12586 View Post
If you are worried about it then don't participate. Why are you worried about the VOLUNTARY interactions of other people?
Because it's a good idea for the poker community at large to keep checks on itself, so that no one ends up defaulting on an obligation? Scams/defaults (even in good intentions) are bad for the community.

Seriously, there are a few people in the community that can handle these swings, but a medium amount of runbad for the 'bank' coupled with a medium amount of leverage, and all of a sudden the bank can owe out a few million.

It's reasonable for the community to want some sort of escrow or at least to have the bank's positions documented (perhaps even by a trusted 3rd party even if you think it's too invasive to require that this is public) before considering making wagers investments.
Wyman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 02:52 PM   #17
TheTenderVigilante
grinder
 
TheTenderVigilante's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Doesn't have insurance
Posts: 634
Re: Bank of Timex.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wyman View Post
Because it's a good idea for the poker community at large to keep checks on itself, so that no one ends up defaulting on an obligation? Scams/defaults (even in good intentions) are bad for the community.

Seriously, there are a few people in the community that can handle these swings, but a medium amount of runbad for the 'bank' coupled with a medium amount of leverage, and all of a sudden the bank can owe out a few million.

It's reasonable for the community to want some sort of escrow or at least to have the bank's positions documented (perhaps even by a trusted 3rd party even if you think it's too invasive to require that this is public) before considering making wagers investments.
you're badly overestimating how much money is at stake on timex's end. these are fractional investments of players playing in tournies where the winner's share is rarely over 550k
TheTenderVigilante is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 02:57 PM   #18
ThePressure
adept
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 985
Re: Bank of Timex.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBroseidon View Post
-Timex believes players who sell shares are charging exorbitant markups on those shares.

Ex. Player A is selling shares for the main event at 1.5 MU. Thus if you want 1% of his action, you pay $150 instead of the $100 at face value.

-Timex believes that Player A is not good enough to warrant 1.5 MU, and assesses Player A's value at 1.3 MU.

-Timex then offers to sell pieces of Player A's action at a price inbetween those two values - perhaps at 1.45 MU. He pockets the money if Player A fails to cash, and pays out the percentage if Player A cashes. If he is an accurate predictor of MU and sells at a price that is above breakeven, he'll make a profit in the long term.

He's also offering action on any player, likely at MU lower than we're used to but what he still feels is overpriced (so he can make a profit).

Winners in this scenario:

1. People who buy shares. They're able to get a cheaper price investing in players, and are able to invest in any player they desire - even if the player would never publicly sell shares himself (Eg. Ivey, Blom). Timex is also highly respected in the poker world, and payouts from him are all but guaranteed (on twitter he claims to have a bank of ~10m between himself and his investors).

2. Timex. If the market is as overpriced as he believes, he'll be able to offer a service as well as make a profit - until the market corrects itself. If he's a good predictor of MU (Which I imagine he is, given that he's offering this service). Basically, he thinks players aren't as good as they claim, and is willing to undercut their staking prices (to a degree - he'll still be charging more than what he believe their true value to be).

He's also charging high markups on people who don't usually offer shares, exploiting the current market failure.


Losers:

1. People who overprice their shares and are denied action in favor of the BoT.




tl;dr - He's shorting the entire poker staking market, because (according to him) people aren't as good as they think they are.
Thanks - I get it basically in the Marchese example, Timex thinks 1.65 is still overpriced so takes the action, Marchese either disagrees or doesnt care, plus PLO is so swingy.
ThePressure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 02:58 PM   #19
Loopshot1
old hand
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Seattle
Posts: 1,236
Re: Bank of Timex.

So generally speaking this arrangement is -EV for the collection of actual individuals looking to sell packages?
Loopshot1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 03:11 PM   #20
Wyman
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Wyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Redoubling with gusto
Posts: 12,649
Re: Bank of Timex.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheTenderVigilante View Post
you're badly overestimating how much money is at stake on timex's end. these are fractional investments of players playing in tournies where the winner's share is rarely over 550k
That is true for each individual investment, yes, except for those in (e.g.,) the ME.

But what -- besides his own risk tolerance and his integrity -- would stop him from taking 1000% on someone he felt was badly overpriced in the MP? Now he's got 5.5MM at risk.

My point isn't that what he's doing is inherently bad; I am firmly of the opinion that we should be allowed to make these types of wagers and markets. But, counterparty risk is an incredibly big deal here.

This isn't like dealing with a US Bank, where there is some insurance, and then even if they blow up and you have investments with them and they can't pay out, the gov't will bail them out. I mean look at what happened with FTP -- they had a liquidity event and couldn't pay out. Look how long it's taking people to recover their money.

I'm just saying that some oversight and transparency in the process is a good idea so that we can actually facilitate this type of action.
Wyman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 03:12 PM   #21
Restless-Eggs
banned
 
Restless-Eggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Stud8 1/2$ - 3$/6$ on PS
Posts: 1,715
Re: Bank of Timex.

@Loopshot1

Only bad for those players, who sell with a mark-up that is higher than their ROI. Its standard to take half of your ROI in mu, I think, so 1.20, if you have 40%, but there are lots of people who sell with a MU that is even higher than their true ROI, these players often just binked one big score at higher buy-in and now earn $ with it. Lots...

It all comes down to making investors feel safe and not fear intended collusion-bust-outs. If he can do that, this has potentional to go big, imo.Maybe he should only allow a max wager of xy$ per person, player and day/BAP to look more safe. Openly showing all investors somewhere online, with a nickname, ofc.

Last edited by Restless-Eggs; 06-10-2013 at 03:25 PM.
Restless-Eggs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 03:17 PM   #22
exec771
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
exec771's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 17,429
Re: Bank of Timex.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wyman View Post
That is true for each individual investment, yes, except for those in (e.g.,) the ME.

But what -- besides his own risk tolerance and his integrity -- would stop him from taking 1000% on someone he felt was badly overpriced in the MP? Now he's got 5.5MM at risk.

My point isn't that what he's doing is inherently bad; I am firmly of the opinion that we should be allowed to make these types of wagers and markets. But, counterparty risk is an incredibly big deal here.

This isn't like dealing with a US Bank, where there is some insurance, and then even if they blow up and you have investments with them and they can't pay out, the gov't will bail them out. I mean look at what happened with FTP -- they had a liquidity event and couldn't pay out. Look how long it's taking people to recover their money.

I'm just saying that some oversight and transparency in the process is a good idea so that we can actually facilitate this type of action.
Yea, especially with ME bets it's not hard for him to get over leveraged.
exec771 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 03:23 PM   #23
Banned4lyfe
Sup-Bah? Pop-Bah Pooh-Bear Permanently Pooh-Bah Billy Walters Jr
 
Banned4lyfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: SoCal ✈
Posts: 13,932
Re: Bank of Timex.

Banned4lyfe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 03:25 PM   #24
TheTenderVigilante
grinder
 
TheTenderVigilante's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Doesn't have insurance
Posts: 634
Re: Bank of Timex.

Quote:
Originally Posted by exec771 View Post
Yea, especially with ME bets it's not hard for him to get over leveraged.
eh

look at the action he's booking and offering and it's not like someone's going to show up and say "gimme 50% of x in the main"

if he goes 10-20% across the board at the most on an ME investment, the most he stands to lose on a single wager if the guy ships is anywhere between 700k and 2 million. obv, idk timex's financials but if the absolute worst were to happen in every investment he takes for the main he shouldn't lose more than 3 million, which it seems wouldn't be an over-leveraging
TheTenderVigilante is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2013, 03:25 PM   #25
exec771
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
exec771's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 17,429
Re: Bank of Timex.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Banned4lyfe View Post


exec771 is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:30 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive