Is InTrade being manipulated? Why does InTrade give a discounted probability for Barack Obama as US president?

No Gravatar

A quick link panorama.

#1. Is InTrade being manipulated?

– Nate Silver shows that there are abrupt downward pressures on the Barack Obama event derivative, while we also see some abrupt upward pressures on the Hillary Clinton event derivative.

However, you can see by yourself that InTrade is resilient enough and does a great job of going back to normal [*], after just a few hours of trading:

– At Portfolio, blogger Zubin Jelveh blows the incidents out of proportion.

– Professor Lance Fortnow has a more careful analysis and notes that the price of the Barack Obama bounces back quickly enough.

– Quick thought: Maybe the media should use an average of event derivate prices for the last 5 work days&#8230- so that the abrupt perturbations would be eliminated.

[*] UPDATE:

Professor Eric Zitzewitz:

I’m not sure you can conclude from Silver’s graphs that the market goes “back to normal.” You can conclude that it moves back in the opposite direction of the impact those large trades. Back when the Hillary for President market looked like it was being manipulated, it appeared that the manipulator was both placing a large purchase and then placing limit orders to provide price support and slow down the reversion of the price.

UPDATE: Are we witnessing manipulation attempts on the &#8220-Florida to vote Republican&#8221- prediction market at InTrade?

#2. Why does InTrade give a discounted probability for Barack Obama as US president?

– As you remember, Emile Servan-Schreiber of NewsFutures believes that it&#8217-s a Republican conspiracy all over.

– Professor Justin Wolfers puts up an hypothesis: it&#8217-s legally impossible for US traders to arbitrage on BetFair.

– InTrade put up a crappy excuse: the industry is still too &#8220-young&#8221-. How lame. How stupid. The industry was younger in the previous elections, where arbitrage opportunities didn&#8217-t exist according to professors Justin Wolfers and Eric Zitzewitz (see their 2004 paper and their other publications).

– Blogger Zubin Jelveh swallows the InTrade P.R. line, and adds another crappy InTrade P.R. line: More arbitrage opportunities are being exposed in open air because much more observers are hunting down arbitrage opportunities in 2008 than in previous elections. That&#8217-s a second blatant cretinery, uncorrected by the Portfolio blogger. Re-read Justin Wolfers&#8217- blog post. Professor Justin Wolfers states that:

The current variation in price is larger than I have ever seen in my years of studying prediction markets. The forces of arbitrage that would typically eliminate these differences have been handicapped by the legal restrictions preventing U.S.-based traders from using overseas markets.

– Finally, professor Lance Fortnow says nothing about the arbitrage opportunities between InTrade and BetFair, but does offer some technical points about the issue of polls versus the prediction markets, centered around the question of state correlations. Read on.

UPDATE: Eric Crampton (a Canadian exiled in New Zealand) says he has managed to turn a buck by arbitraging between InTrade and iPredict New Zealand. He also makes 2 theoretical points. Go read it.

UPDATE: Greg Mankiw just linked to Nate Silver.

With regard to the 2008 US elections, both Justin Wolfers and Robin Hanson implied that BetFair is not as predictive as it should be.

No Gravatar

Previously: About Justin Wolfers&#8217-s column

Justin Wolfers&#8217- Freakonomics post (which suggests that BetFair would have a better predictive power if US traders could use it).

InTrade vs. the other prediction exchanges

No Gravatar

Justin Wolfers gives his views about the (now past) differences between the probabilistic predictions given by InTrade on the 2008 US presidential elections&#8230- and the ones generated by the other real-money and play-money prediction exchanges. One hypothesis: US political insiders can&#8217-t access BetFair, legally, and thus can&#8217-t arbitrage. (But they can trade legally on the Iowa Electronic Markets, NewsFutures, Inkling, and HubDub, one could retort.)

Emile Servan-Schreiber&#8217-s hypothesis still holds.

Or else &#8212-your own hypothesis is welcome.

P.S.: The latest news is that InTrade now gives Barack Obama slightly above John McCain.

How do InTrades prediction markets work, and are they really accurate?

No Gravatar

Thanks to the InTrade person who uploaded the first CNBC segment on YouTube, and fixed the initial technical problem.

I renew my asking for the second CNBC segment to be uploaded at YouTube, too. [If someone else than InTrade does it, please hit me with the YouTube URL. Thanks.]

My analysis:

  1. InTrade-TradeSports CEO John Delaney does a good job explaining the mechanism of the wisdom of crowds.
  2. They cut professor Justin Wolfers too short. It&#8217-s a nuclear disaster &#8212-once again. Justin Wolfers is an admirable and ultra friendly person, a great prediction market researcher, a good prediction market analyst, and a wonderful blogger, but his TV appearances are, so far, totally crappy. The guy needs to hire a publicist who will teach him to flatten his Australian accent and to talk straight and plain &#8212-to go to the point real quick.
  3. &#8220-It seems like someone at CNBC decided at some point that they would NEVER address the legality issue.&#8221- – Dixit Deep Throat.
  4. After the broadcast of the video shot in Ireland, the camera goes back to the TV set, and, at this point, the comments from the journalists and the guest (Steve Forbes) show that they still don&#8217-t understand fully the prediction markets. They don&#8217-t have the right facts, and their analysis is not crystal clear.
  5. Overall, a good explainer on the prediction markets &#8212-taken into account that CNBC is an entertainment media. For deeper explainers, see the Wall Street Journal, the Financial Times, or Midas Oracle.

YouTube video (the last part was censored by InTrade-TradeSports CEO John Delaney – PRECISION: the discussion between the journalists and the guest on the TV set was suppressed)

APPENDIX: CNBC video + CNBC video #2

UPDATE: The second CNBC video segment that TradeSports-InTrade CEO John Delaney does not want you to see on YouTube

INTRADE-TRADESPORTS CEO JOHN DELANEY CENSORS CNBC ON YOUTUBE.

No Gravatar

HE CENSORS THE END OF THE FIRST CNBC VIDEO SEGMENT TO FIT HIS MARKETING AGENDA.

HE ORDERS THAT THE SECOND CNBC VIDEO SEGMENT NOT TO BE UPLOADED ON YOUTUBE.

THE PROOF OF THE CENSORSHIP:

YouTube video (whose last part was censored by InTrade-TradeSports CEO John Delaney – PRECISION: the discussion between the journalists and the guest on the TV set was suppressed)

PLEASE, SOMEBODY, DO UPLOAD THE FULL VIDEO SEGMENT ON YOUTUBE, UNCENSORED, AND HIT ME WITH ITS URL. I&#8217-LL RE-EMBED IT FOR EVERYONE TO SEE. THERE IS NO CENSORSHIP ON MIDAS ORACLE. WE ARE NEITHER IN CHINA NOR IN IRELAND. WE ARE FREE WORLD&#8217-S CITIZENS. WE WANT TO SEE THE NAKED TRUTH, NOT DOCTORED TAPES.

The second CNBC video segment that TradeSports-InTrade CEO John Delaney does not want you to see on YouTube

APPENDIX: CNBC video + CNBC video #2

APPENDIX: THE ULTIMATE THING THAT TRADESPORTS-INTRADE CEO JOHN DELANEY WANTED TO CENSOR BUT COULDN&#8217-T THANKS TO MIDAS ORACLE.

Now that Joe Biden is the Democratic vice president nominee, what to think of Justin Wolfers August 1st column for the WSJ?

No Gravatar

The good point is that he dealt well with the fact that the VP prediction markets fed on primary indicators that are less reliable than the ones used for the political elections.

The bad point is that, at the time he wrote up his column, Virginia governor Tim Kaine was the favorite of the InTrade VP prediction markets. The others were, in decreasing order, Evan Bayth, Kathleen Sebelius, and then&#8230- Joe Biden. So, the critic reading his column today could say that the prediction markets are oversold to a gullible public and that a prediction market bubble ready to pop up is forming under our very nose.

– Now, we know that Barack Obama made his decision while vacationing in Hawaii (less than 2 weeks ago). That&#8217-s only from that date that the VP prediction markets started generating probabilistic predictions worth quoting. The trick is that Justin Wolfers (and the other prediction market analysts) didn&#8217-t know that, on August 1st. (PDF file)

– I don&#8217-t regret my decision not to publish about the VP prediction markets. I&#8217-d look like an idiot today.

The second CNBC video on InTrades prediction markets is up and running.

No Gravatar

CNBC video + CNBC video #2

In both segments, the appearance of Justin Wolfers is a nuclear disaster. They cut him ultra short. Maybe because of his strong Australian accent, I don&#8217-t know. But the end result is bad. It&#8217-s a pity. Justin Wolfers would have had many interesting things to say.

PS: InTrade people, please, put that on YouTube and tip me when it is done, so I can embed those videos.

UPDATE: YouTube video (the last part was censored by InTrade-TradeSports CEO John Delaney – PRECISION: the discussion between the journalists and the guest on the TV set was suppressed)

UPDATE: The second CNBC video segment that TradeSports-InTrade CEO John Delaney does not want you to see on YouTube

CNBC airs an upbeat explainer about InTrades prediction markets.

No Gravatar

Via our good friend Jason Ruspini.

CNBC video + CNBC video #2

– Please, put that on YouTube, and then give me the YouTube URL. I&#8217-ll embed the video in another post.

– Who is that guy that they will interview later on, Jason??? [UPDATE: Serge Ravitch]

My observations:

  1. Quite upbeat. Almost an advertisement for InTrade.
  2. No mention whatsoever that InTrade is illegal in America.
  3. On the website, they call InTrade a &#8220-political futures market&#8221-.
  4. The InTrade critic was Barry Ritholtz. They just showed his blog. He wrote that the trading on InTrade is &#8220-pitifully&#8221- small.
  5. The first prediction market analyst they want to hear is InTrade CEO John Delaney. The second is professor Justin Wolfers. And that&#8217-s all.
  6. Steve Forbes asked whether &#8220-this thing&#8221- (InTrade) predicted Joe Biden &#8220-weeks ago&#8221-. The answer is that InTrade predicted Joe Biden some days ago.
  7. Joe Kerner put an emphasis on liquidity, whereas the emphasis should have been on the market as the mechanism that delivers a collective verdict.

UPDATE: YouTube video (the last part was censored by InTrade-TradeSports CEO John Delaney – PRECISION: the discussion between the journalists and the guest on the TV set was suppressed)

UPDATE: The second CNBC video segment that TradeSports-InTrade CEO John Delaney does not want you to see on YouTube

The vetting of the many potential Democratic vice president nominees was not as secretive as I thought. – Bo Cowgill was right, in hindsight.

No Gravatar

The New York Times has a recount on how Barack Obama reached his decision on Joe Biden. The final decision was probably made 10 days ago, while Barack Obama was vacationing in Hawaii.

[…] Mr. Obama’s decision had as much to do with Mr. Biden’s appeal among white working-class voters and compelling personal story, and his conclusion that the Delaware senator was &#8220-a worker.&#8221-

The important information in the NYT piece is that Barack Obama personally called governor Bill Richardson &#8220-late last week&#8221- to announce him that he was not considered anymore. That&#8217-s around the time the Joe Biden rumor began to have more weight in the media circles &#8212-see the InTrade chart below.

Bo Cowgill, back in May 2008 (when I started to act as a prophet of doom):

This is dumb. Cover them if something interesting happens. Maybe your theory will turn out to be wrong. Anyhow: Although the decision is made in secrecy, the Presidential nominees have a number incentives which we have plenty of information about. Specifically:
* They want someone who will balance their tickets in terms of geography, race and class.
* They want someone who will help with weak areas of their campaigns.
* They want someone who will be a good campaign surrogate — giving good speeches and attacking the opponents effectively.
* They want to avoid a VP who will de-motivate or offend the base.
* They want to avoid someone with a bunch of skeletons in the closet such as angry ex-wives, out-of-wedlock kids, etc.
* Etc etc.
Anyhow, I don’t see any reason to ignore these markets in case something interesting happens. I read Midas Oracle so that I don’t *have* to read a whole bunch of other websites!

Bo Cowgill was on the right track, now that I think of it &#8212-in a society where everything leaks out.

On the opposite of the spectrum, Tom Snee was too much extreme in his view:

According to Tom Snee of the Iowa Electronic Market, at Iowa University, futures markets need more hard information than they get in the veepstakes, to reliably predict a result.

Markets are very good at predicting elections, he says – but not choices being made inside Barack Obama&#8217-s or John McCain&#8217-s head.

Justin Wolfers was more measured.

So, Bo Cowgill and Justin Wolfers are the winners, on that one.

I was partially wrong. I am a bit too extreme, sometimes. (Did someone else notice that? :-D ) I need to learn more about&#8230- granularity.

PS: On the Republican side, now&#8230-

Price for 2008 Republican VP Nominee (others upon request)(expired at convention) at intrade.com

Who will be the Republican Vice Presidential Nominee?

While InTrade CEO John Delaney is deceiving the journalists to sell his wares, Tom Snee of the Iowa Electronic Markets is telling them the truth: BEWARE THE VP-CANDIDATE PREDICTION MARKETS, THEY JUST AGGREGATE RUMORS.

No Gravatar

BBC News:

According to Tom Snee of the Iowa Electronic Market, at Iowa University, futures markets need more hard information than they get in the veepstakes, to reliably predict a result.

Markets are very good at predicting elections, he says – but not choices being made inside Barack Obama&#8217-s or John McCain&#8217-s head.

Thank God for the BBC.

Thank God for the Iowa Electronic Markets.

Shame on John Delaney &#8212-over 3 generations of Delaneys.

Other than Tom Snee (the IEM spin doctor), Chris Masse and Justin Wolfers are the only prediction market analysts to have sent out warnings about the VP-candidate prediction markets.