IS INSURANCE BETTER THAN FACT?

[drunkguy]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by The General:

The better books will say see ya, we dont need that headache and we do not want to disclose that info. This was brought up by Ken and immediately shot down by some bookmakers. Not to mention, we would not know if the numbers were true or not.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The problem in this is that everyone is LETTING the books make that choice. However, if enough books came on board and provided a safety net to players, the rest would HAVE to follow suit for competitive reasons.

The only way to get the books/forums to take on added risk is to put enough pressure on them. If books don't want to verify that they are keeping money safe, it is easy enough for the RX to institute a policy that all "recommended books" need to provide that information (in a verifiable format) or be dropped from the preferred list to some secondary list.

However, that represents a risk to the forums' business model. Unfortunately, they are not willing to risk money coming out of their pockets for the benefit of the players.

Even without going totally all-out, Rx could:
a. have a separate "higher-ranked" approved list for books that are verified "safe"
b. raise advertising fees for unsafe books (this would also help weed out the less safe books, providing added credibility to the RX)
c. have an in-house safety policy to a set limit (well, MW beat you to that)

Of course, you are not going to gain credibility overnight - too many people have been burned already by recommended books. But, when the books you verify as "safe" are proven over time, you will finally start to get to the point where the recommended list means something.

The forums/books/organizations that finally do start this ball rolling will see IMMENSE benefits (at least in the long term). The question is: who has the guts to step up to bat?

 

[historian]

Ken's idea has MUCH more merit than any other "insurance" ideas for exactly the reasons posted in this thread. There is NO CHANCE a top level book will guarantee a mid to lower level operation.

The idea of documenting cash flow on a book by book basis and voluntarily will be a way to allow smaller operations to prove they have the bucks to play in the big league. IF only starting with the advertisers on this site it would be a tremendous first step. And yes WWTS or Pinnacle may choose to not participate but I do think it would hurt them in the short run.
I know i would feel safer if i saw that BHB or Royal had 300k in Neteller and another 100k in WU funds available for payouts. No banks in Switzerland or any other private banks......JUST GOOD OLD FASHION CASH FLOW!!!!

Good Luck to All

 

[drunkguy]

Shrink-

regarding your proposal...I see 2 potential issues...

how often would cash in Neteller/WU be verified?If a book knew it was going under (which is usually the case) it can just withdraw that money and say they are using it to pay "someone else" or that it is not enough to cover the debt. Unless there is a way to "lock" that money for a period, there is no way to know that the money will be used to pay off players.

Also, what's to say that the amount they quote as players balances is correct? The book is the only one with that information and that can be manipulated quite easily.

 

[JohnnyDeMarco]

Insurance? If one huge books flops the rest will left in the cold.

Take State Farm for instance.The biggest insurance company in the world. If there were a big enough natural disaster In California it would wipeout the entire company, leaving no benefits or coverage for the rest of the policy holders

The key here is that if a book is solid enough, with the right backing, they should be able to be bonded through an international bonding comapny. Each book should liable for their own customers.

 

[Jazz]

I may as well go on record and state that I will not put money into any new book again, period, unless the status quo changes concerning some form of arrangement to protect players.

I understand there are difficulties, but of course those difficulties exist because there isn't enough incentive yet (overall) to bring forum owners and books to an agreement that usurps any degree of control over the money.

However, I am now offering one - I will no longer put any cash, even a small amount, into a new book whose banner pops up on a forum site and is recommended at that forum unless there is some form of protection offered for the player. I will refuse to do so even if I think the risk/reward quotient favors me. Will it matter? I don't know, but it will matter to me that I send a message that, to steal a quote from that movie "Network", "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore" (well, I'm really not mad but more sick and tired - lol).

And I'll advise people to do the same.

 

[wilheim]

I know a lot of books claim to be licensed and bonded etc. The problem is proof. I believe a book that can document beyond a doubt that all player funds are insured no matter what happens, has a strong marketing advantage over any competitor, everthing else being relatively equal. Think about it, any player in the process of choosing an offshore sportsbook to send money to will be foolish to not use the documented beyond a doubt insured book. Where can a book obtain such insurance is another question. Assuming there is a carrier available, then it would take only one major book to start the ball rolling.

wil.

 

[DarrylParsons]

You guys got it all wrong. There are only 3 acceptable alternatives in dealing with books that don't pay...



Alternative #1:

Alternative #2:

Alternative #3:

LOL, but seriously, interesting thread!

 

[JohnnyDeMarco]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JohnnyDeMarco:
Insurance? If one huge books flops the rest will be left in the cold.

Take State Farm for instance. The biggest insurance company in the world. If there were a big enough natural disaster In California it would wipeout the entire company, leaving no benefits or coverage for the rest of the policy holders

The key here is that if a book is solid enough, with the right backing, they should be able to be bonded through an international bonding comapny. Each book should liable for their own customers.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

 

[jigga]

Johnny, off the subject but may I ask, how come you don't offer Arena Football scoring updates?

 

[JohnnyDeMarco]

they are supposed to be on there-I will check and make sure they are.

 

[WINNINGHAND]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jazz:
I may as well go on record and state that I will not put money into any _new_ book again, period, unless the status quo changes concerning some form of arrangement to protect players.

I understand there are difficulties, but of course those difficulties exist because there isn't enough incentive yet (overall) to bring forum owners and books to an agreement that usurps any degree of control over the money.

However, I am now offering one - I will no longer put any cash, even a small amount, into a new book whose banner pops up on a forum site and is recommended at that forum unless there is some form of protection offered for the player. I will refuse to do so even if I think the risk/reward quotient favors me. Will it matter? I don't know, but it will matter to me that I send a message that, to steal a quote from that movie "Network", "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore" (well, I'm really not mad but more sick and tired - lol).

And I'll advise people to do the same.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Who are you still with?