My first argument is to value hedging, its role in the economy, and its function as a booster for the derivative exchanges (including event derivative exchanges). My second argument is to say that it&#8217-s up to the CFTC to lower the regulatory costs, again, as they did a first time for HedgeStreet (the first non-intermediated derivative exchange) in 2004. I understand that my argumentation is special, and some of you might think that I have a screw lose. That&#8217-s a fair criticism. That&#8217-s OK &#8212-I can take it.

–

My 2 comments to the CFTC:

– My first comment-

– My second comment.

I&#8217-ll probably end up in the group of losers, after the CFTC will have ruled.

–

Jason Ruspini has, of course, a much more elaborated view, and you might refer to his comment to the CFTC &#8212-for a more vertical argumentation.

–

But I also support Tom W. Bell&#8217-s argumentation, because, obviously, his argumentation has value. (Other people have interesting takes, too.)

–

Speaking of Tom W. Bell, take a look at his series of comments responding to Jason Ruspini&#8217-s critiques.

–

Previous blog posts by Chris F. Masse:

• The FaceBook profiles of the 2 most important men of the field of prediction markets
• THE HUMAN GADFLY WHOSE OBJECTIONS ROBIN HANSON IS DUCKING…???…
• Google now considers Midas Oracle as a major blog.
• Horizon 2015: A long-term strategic perspective for the real-money prediction markets
• Join our group at LinkedIn to have your “Prediction Markets” badge on your profile. It’s ‘chic’. (“Groups” info should be set as “visible”, in your profile options.) We are 63 this early Saturday morning —keeps growing.
• If you have been using PayPal to fund your InTrade, TradeSports or BetFair account, please, check that horror story.
• 48 hours after the launch of the “Prediction Markets” group at LinkedIn, we have already 52 members —both prediction market luminaries and simple people (trading the event derivatives or collecting the market-generated probabilities).