So it turn out it is a good idea to back him. You would make 2,8k$ if you backed him full time.

Marketplace is broken as **** and I don't see it changing anytime soon. If you can sell a car worth 1000$ why wouldn't you sell it for 2000$ if someone is ready to pay that.

It reminds me bumhunting in poker actually.

Wow, that's quite fascinating. I had to do some math to figure it out. I thought he would only get 20% of the $59511 (profit), but he's getting a ton from the markup + the way he structured the stake. See below.

There's 2 ways to structure a stake and looks like he's picked the one which is the lower variance of the two.

If he sells a package that consists of $1000 in buyins, it can be structured as:
1) with markup ($1000 @ 1.25 = $1250)
2) with a % split ($1000 @ 80/20 split)

When he sells 80% for 1), he receives $1000 and owns 20%. In scenario 2, if the cut is 80/20, he raises $1000 and owns 20% of profits (after stakeback).

If he plays out the entire package of tournaments (no refunds from missed tournaments/rebuys/addons, etc), and manages to cash for exactly $1000, this happens in the scenarios:

1) Investors receive $800 or $10 per %, as they own 80% of $1000. This is a 20% loss, as the original cost was $12.50. The seller gets $200 (20% of the cost) for putting up no money.

2) Investors get back $1000 because of the stakeback caveat. Investors break even (original price was $10 per %, new price is $10 per %). Seller gets $0.

However, if the buyer manages to achieve 100% ($2000 in cashes), the numbers are different:

1) Investors get back 80% of $2000 = $1600 or $16 per %. This is a 28% profit. The seller gets 20% of $2000 = $400 (40% of the cost of the package).

2) Investors get back their $1000 back first, and then the remaining $2000 is split $800/$200. The sellers get 80% return, seller gets $200, the same amount when he breaks even with the other structure.

Under structure one, you start making money as soon as you win a dollar. If had a crappy day and only cashed for $100 (in a $1000 package), he still profits $20 (2% of the buyins) while investors lose 92.5% ($12.50 becomes $1).

Structure two favors packages which have the potential for high returns (i.e. a package consisting of a Sunday Million with 30k entrants and a $1 mill first prize).

To sum it up, structure two has more upside and there will be a point where the slope of the seller's profit line for 2) surpasses 1) at something like 10x return (it's all relative to the markup and % sold).

For the O8 games he plays, it's definitely more profitable to be selling under structure one because you rarely have days where you have 10x return on a $10000 package.

Also, it's in the seller's favor to try to make the package as large as possible. If he plays $3000 of games and returns $1000, he only gets $200. But if he plays $6000 of games and returns $2000, his return doubles.

If he had only 5% of himself (i.e. sold 76% @ 1.25) and has to put up $50 of his own money, it's not in his best interest to play as many games as possible (i.e. NLHoldem, HORSE, Limit O8, etc) as he would be losing money if he fails to cash in those.

It's quite shocking that he's managed to make $50k+ without having to have a bankroll and shift all the risk towards the buyers. Maybe more of us should start selling such a high % at a high markup before he leeches all the money from the marketplace???

Or you can just build a bankroll and play all for yourself lol

Can someone explain the stakeback caveat, why it is utilized, and whether it is standard, optional or rare?

I'm considering selling shares for mid-stakes & weekly(ies) at some point.
What is the most reliable source of data, if one wants to illustrate past results to potential investors? It appears to me that SharkScope makes unwarranted assumptions based on average behavior of MTT participants (e.g. the number of rebuys in a rebuy MTT... I played a single bullet with FPPs in TCOOP $82R NLO8... and it shows my profit as -$241). It also seems to use arbitrary start dates (e.g., I don't consider myself a particularly good NLHE player, but my MTT graph starts in late '08, after I had my most NLHE success by far in summer of '08). If I use such data, I at least want it to accurately illustrate my limited success in poker (both O8 & overall). Also, inaccurate data would seem to make it difficult for investors to easily verify current results.

Obviously that's the ideal solution, but selling shares can have advantages for both the player and the investor.
Personally, I would have major qualms selling more than 50% share in anything, but I understand why others do.

I don't really hold it against mddgfc that he sells such packages.

The ones I really despise are those like DrK: Solicit and sell shares in packages that they couldn't BR themselves... then degen on other stuff and so can't even pay back to investors what they are owed... then, instead of going to get some sort of "real" job to pay back investors and build their own BR, which given their proclivity to degen, would probably have been the best thing to do in the first place... find a staker, so that they can continue to degen. That takes some serious ballz... and some other traits that I wouldn't welcome.

In theory, if you're a breakeven player with crazy results from 5 years ago, you could sell 300 packages and cash for $300k (profit of $0) and still earn $60k.

The buyers are extremely results oriented tho, so you'd have to start putting up results for a while (i.e. running hot in the first 3 months and then running bad and/or normal the rest of the year).

He'd make more than he did if he played with his own BR and also gets to reap 100% of the FPPs + other VIP benefits.

I've just been informed that the second scenario (with stakeback) is never going to be better for the seller than scenario 1. The stakeback component will result in 100% less ROI for the seller. The only way for my argument to work would be if he offered a better rate for himself (i.e. 75/25 or 70/30).

I don't know what's standard anymore. I used to see 80/20 and 75/25 deals with stakeback packages for a single event; something like a $5 Million Sunday Million where a player with an ABI of $5 wants to play without denting his $1k bankroll and the investor wants to gamble by having an extra horse in a 30k player field.

For bigger packages, it's rare to see such structures. However 50/50 with stakeback has been the most standard structure for backing deals. The backer/investor in this case doesn't only provide money tho. There's elements such as coaching that the backer adds in value to get this extra cut.

I think OPR is very relevant for MTTs and Sharkscope is good for showing SNG stats. I think the most important part of selling is to build up a solid reputation with a few investors at the start and then it will take off. The easiest way to do this is by selling your first package at no markup and including some games that you would normally play (i.e. $8.80 Omania). You want to start off by earning investors' trust by giving them MAX value.

Afterwards, once you have positive results after a week or two, add a markup and/or increase your ABI. If an investors sees someone selling a $300 package at no markup and then has 100% ROI in their first package, more will jump in. Once you've built up a pool of investors, slowly add some markup and increase your ABI.

There's an insane amount of money in the marketplace atm, so you really shouldn't have any trouble selling at no markup to start.

We have a winner.

Thanks, that seems like solid advice.

I can see initially offering packages at no/limited MU... or offering higher ROI micro stakes as part of the package... but not both.

I also don't think 1-2 weeks is any kind of indication of EV... even 1-2 months with limited number of MTTs wouldn't be IMO. However, I appreciate your insight that MP is very results-oriented, and that must be considered.

Thanks again for your input!

Streityboy and broken_ja both make solid arguments.

If u are a winning player with ROI > 10%, just take all the risk yourself and maximise winnings. Say you get staked (or take the stake and sat in as mddgfc often does, success = 100% ROI on the buyin + VPPs, return to investor = unchanged) to the OH8 ME in SCOOP, TCOOP, WCOOP and finish 4th,

U just scooped > $40K, congrats. Now give away > $32K.

Conversely if u are a losing/BE player and somebody is stupid enough to want to stake you, by all means, take the money. It will be a total fluke if u make the FT of any big series.

If u have a mortgage and require proof of a reliable source of income, the bank manager MAY accept 6-12 months of profitable share selling - although u will still need a deposit > 25-30% (manager then has discretion on purchasing insurance, which u still won't get showing only poker income). Banks don't accept SC or OPR stats, however good they might be.

If you sell 80%, u can be totally risk-averse and happy to grind out a living, but then why be a pro poker player lol? There are 101 easier jobs out there.

101 jobs where you can be at home, get up late, eat lunch with your family, watch your kids grow up and then start grinding when the rest of the family watches TV?

He doesn't necessary have to be selling off the same amount of what he regularly does, for those events/series that you've mentioned. Maybe if he regularly sells off 80% of himself for his regular grind/packages, he then adjusts to only selling 40% of himself for those.


If one is inclined to taking 'shots', and they should be, I think they should keep most of their action for series/events, where the value and payoff are worth it. Everyone loves/would love to win the Wednesday $530, but it's not very good value by comparison. Something like the PartyPoker $22/$5K Gtd on Sundays, Omanias, $55 Saturday on Stars, or the daily $5r/$2.5K Gtd (of course everyone can afford that one), should never sell any of their action.


I'm sort of on the fence as to whether the Sunday NLO8 $215 falls into the category of being a good value MTT; considering it regularly generates a decent volume of runners.


Someone who wants to regularly play in the daily $33's, $22's, $55, $109, $530 Wednesday, weekend $215's, after looking mddgfc's VERY sweet deal (for him - and I don't have a problem with him), especially when one doesn't have a freakishly big ROI (although his ROI is pretty good considering he plays in mid/higher BI MTTs), probably should be looking at structuring a package like he's done. Think about the stress saved by having that kind of deal in place.


An ROI > 10% kind of sucks, if it's just over 10%. I'm not sure what the bottom line for ROI should be that would qualify as being decent/good, but I doubt that anything in the 10-20% is okay (for O8 MTTs that is).

hey there stevef*****McQueen,

yeah agree with the bold part for sure. The 530 is pretty poor value even for a very good mtt reg. I can't get myself to play it even though out of 2 times played chopped HU the 2nd time. And I always fail at those tilting satties.
Saying that I have no probs losing $500 in 1 hand of 3/6 to exit2film or w/e that luck sacks name is

Obv series are good value but gets damn expensive so i'd rather sell action to these. Like sell 50% and play quite a few. Or just luckbox a scoop or wcoop early even and freeroll the rest would be preferable.

The weekly nlo8 is the only weekly that has good value these days. Lots of nlhe players that like to play the odd 4 card game and appeals to them as its nl.

I've had 2 part-time jobs easier than playing poker that I could do from home - I used to be a moderator (I know didn't suit me) for a wine company. I was responsible for standard stock level and replenishment plus monitoring customer discussions about what wine/region/bulk deal they thought we should sell in future. Oh I also had to taste all these wines and go on a course, the horrors! The job was a complete piss-take but paid like $17/hr.

I still work part-time as an analyst, providing ad-hoc support for friends in various sectors from market research to physics. It's an easy but extremely tedious job for someone with 3 degrees - messing about with STATA and doing a few regressions. It would kill me to do it > 20hr/week but again pays more/hr than someone with an ROI ~ 25%.

@ Steve - sure, a proper MTT player in any format would expect 30% +. But if u have an overall record of >10% ROI, then at least u have a chance in the game. Geez from what I see to actually WIN a tourney you need to be picked by PS to get AA or A 2 3 5 every 4-5 hands, plus run them obviously. Like Jesus King in Omania yesterday, he won with and against AA, was getting 2-3 hands per button and sucked out the A 4 5 9 vs the A 3 4 K. He beat quite a steady and talented field with invincible cards. Point is provided u know how to play a little, if u catch a burner u could easily take down a big one.

With my current bankroll () I'd have to sell a lot of my action to buy into the +$215 events. I'm with you on the 'luckbox' in one of the earlier events, and just playing on my own dime the rest of the way. 'IF' I did well throughout the year though, I would set some of my winnings aside, saving them for those specified events/series. I forget which series is the one with the +2K buy in for each NL/PL/FL, but I'd need a really fat bankroll (perhaps like Giffordonian's last month) to want to pay my own way in.


I think O8 needs more characters like Billy.

... being the key word. I'd love to add to the highlighted word, but I'm not in the mood to be awarded a tin foil hat.


Yes, having a + ROI is a good thing, but if hovering around 10% in MTTs is your primary source of income, you're in trouble. If you're playing in high stakes MTTs, probably NLHE MTT's, that's another thing.

One of the biggest issues facing o8 mtt players is the lack of volume for majors/ big events which mean it can take along time to show your true roi. With only 4 decent value majors a week + big series this can take a long time.

In the early part of last year I ran -7k in events $100 + which may sound like a lot but in reality only means bricking 6 weeks of majors and a big series.

I managed to profit overall during this time when you include the smaller stuff but it hurt my income massively.

This is probably the primary reason there are very few pure o8 guys as people get to a certain level and see that income is capped at a certain point until you add other game types or cash, hypers ect.

It is also probably a major contributing factor as to why % wise more o8 guys sell action than nlhe.

i bought shares from u and other o8 players,but i never got a email from stars about that(lucky me)
that isn`t nice of u

i can only tell from my experience;
i usally only invest in o8 guys i think that are good,
so i usally play against this group(all good players) with caution anyway.
but these guys are also more likely to fold against a shove from me(like 3 spades on the flop and i have A),since they should be thinking players.

I'm not sure what the criteria is for a table block but it can normally be sorted out by an email.

It's not like I take pleasure from knocking out people I know but with the guys I play against daily we start to know each others tendency's and so it is common to get into some interesting spots particularly against the more aggressive players.

Reg wars are quite common although I try and stay clear of these mostly.

Scruffy speaks the truth IMO, you ALWAYS play harder against friends/regs. Not to say harder = more aggressive, for me it's usually harder = more respect, tighter range pre. For regs I don't like, maybe I am more aggressive from position and more likely to call their position action if I have a decent read.

So PS game integrity got back to me. The ONLY time it is OK to play against someone you have staked is in main MTTs. You are NOT allowed to play cash or SnGs or SnG satellites. Apparently PS also checks actions between players who transfer funds from one PS account to another - although no mention was made of separating said players @ MTTs, as others have said.

Hai guis!

Only playing live NLHE and PLO now

...hope you are all crushing!

That's a name from the past. You used to be a HU specialist right?

Hope you're crushing too.

Thinking...

Bank of Timex type deal on MDDGFC. I think that the Bank of Timex idea got nixed because he was going to try to steal his action and crossbook for lower markup then the player was getting staked.

If he sells out a package and there are still investors that are interested at 1.25, is it ethical for me to book that action?

Mark...do you look at this forum? Thoughts?

ethically okay imo (if only selling after package sold out and at same mu) but not sure if legal
http://www.onlinepokerreport.com/700...s-than-a-week/

@ booink - looks like the Timex dude beat me to the punch and is treating the poker share market just like the real stock market!

If anybody wants a go at being Timex themselves it wouldn't be OVERLY difficult. First you would need to know the players, then using a bit of stochastic calculus, work out the 99% VAR @ each desired level of profit, then sell @ whatever # you feel comfortable at. Just don't do what Scholes and Merton did with LTCM.