BetFairs Mark Davies (the Prince of betting exchange PR) has just gotten a second omelet in the face.

No Gravatar

First, the Financial Times &#8212-and, now, Freakonomics.

The journalistic rule should be that, if you cite one prediction exchange, you should cite the one that is the most liquid on the market you are writing about. For UK politics, it is clearly BetFair.

BetFair has clearly a PR problem.

BRITISH CRETINERY: The Financial Times features the InTrade probabilities -not the BetFair ones.

No Gravatar

This is really stupid. The decerebrated journalos at the FT chose to feature the illiquid, Ireland-based, un-regulated InTrade prediction markets instead of the very liquid, UK-based, regulated BetFair prediction markets on the next British congress.

Makes no sense at all.

The BetFair PR boys have an omelet on their face. They should work harder.

DISAMBIGUATION: The &#8220-illiquid&#8221- adjective refers to the UK political markets on InTrade &#8212-not the US political prediction markets.