Tag Archives: monopolies

User revolt against the de facto monopolies in prediction markets?

Posted on August 9, 2009 by Chris F. Masse

InTrade (in the U.S.) and BetFair (in the U.K.) are de facto monopolistic, real-money prediction exchanges. Will those monopolies spur users to revolt? Will we see an open-source movement in prediction markets? That’s the question I asked privately to some … Continue reading →

Posted in Analysis (Industry), Business, Exchanges & Markets, Information Technology | Tagged Apple, BetFair, browsers, de facto monopolies, Google Voice, InTrade, iPhone, iTunes, Jason Calacanis, Macintosh, Microsoft, monopolies, prediction markets, Windows | 4 Comments

“BetFair’s de facto monopoly will eventually end…”

Posted on July 5, 2009 by Chris F. Masse

I agree with the second paragraph —but maybe not with the thesis of the post.

Posted in Analysis (Industry), Exchanges & Markets | Tagged BetFair, de facto monopolies, monopolies | Leave a comment

The Guardian now treats BetFair as a monopoly.

Posted on October 15, 2008 by Chris F. Masse

- The Guardian on the BetFair premium charges, the privatization of the BetFair forum, and BetFair’s monopoly. – [Our previous story.] – The Financial Times on the BetFair prediction market(s) about the next UK general elections.

Posted in Analysis (Industry), Betting, Exchange & Market Management, Exchanges & Markets, Internet Marketing - Internet Commerce | Tagged BetFair, monopolies, monopoly, prediction markets, The Guardian, The Sporting Exchange | Leave a comment

BetFair impose new “Premium Charges”, and their very active traders are up in arms. – Plus, do BetFair gag the critics?

Posted on September 9, 2008 by Chris F. Masse

My analysis of this PR debacle: BetFair has a very complex information technology system, which is very costly, making BetFair less profitable than the fixed-odds betting operators (the big British bookmakers). They attack the problem with a dual approach: they … Continue reading →

Posted in Analysis (Industry), Ethics, Exchange & Market Management, Exchanges & Markets, Internet Marketing - Internet Commerce, Market Transaction Costs | Tagged bet exchanges, BetFair, BetFair blog, BetFair charges, BetFair costs, BetFair fee structure, BetFair fees, BetFair Forum, BetFair Premium Charges, BetFair Q & A, betting exchanges, betting markets, censorship, David Yu, de facto monopolies, Ethics, event derivative exchanges, event derivative markets, monopolies, prediction exchanges, prediction markets, The Guardian, The Sporting Exchange, transaction charges, transaction costs, transaction fees | 51 Comments

Midas Oracle is the only publication that defends the event derivative traders (even when they are too sarcastic, boisterous, or annoying) —at the risk of infuriating the prediction market big brass.

Posted on September 4, 2008 by Chris F. Masse

Posted in Exchange & Market Management, Exchanges & Markets, Internet Marketing - Internet Commerce | Tagged bet exchanges, BetFair, betting exchanges, betting markets, Ethics, event derivative exchanges, event derivative markets, event derivatives, InTrade, John Delaney, monopolies, prediction exchanges, prediction markets, Todd, TradeSports | 1 Comment

InTrade-TradeSports has a web server misconfiguration problem, and CEO John Delaney has a character problem.

Posted on August 31, 2008 by Chris F. Masse

As I wrote at the time, the InTrade-TradeSports websites were unavailable, last Friday, August 29, 2008, during a good part of the morning. InTrade-TradeSports is not only an event derivative exchange, but also a webspot that non-trading people often consult … Continue reading →

Posted in All Best Posts Ever, Analysis (Industry), Ethics, Exchanges & Markets, Internet Marketing - Internet Commerce | Tagged bet exchanges, BetFair, betting exchanges, betting markets, de facto monopolies, Ethics, event derivative exchanges, event derivative markets, event derivatives, InTrade, John Delaney, monopolies, prediction exchanges, prediction market industry, prediction markets, Todd, TradeSports | 15 Comments