That is the part that confuses me, in essence if investor profits drop by an estimated 33% then it should have investors concerned but devans thinks he has the correct formula to take Bustabit/Bustadice further and to be honest it is hard to argue with him because of his excellent track record. How do investors reconcile perfectly held belief and trust in devans along with a drop in profits by 33% - that is something difficult to accept.
(...)
I think keeping the equilibrium aside several investors are a little upset they were not advised beforehand or maybe even consulted before the changes were made. I know you made a post explaining your reasons so I hope they would be satisfied with the explanation.
Is it really necessary to say that 5000+ BTC and 6500 BTC are significantly larger bankrolls than they need to be? Another way of looking at it is the size of bankrolls are advantages and are attractive to investors in that others would want to invest as it shows the website and its owner are genuine/trustworthy etc. Maybe a change in format should have been implemented after consulting investors so that would have eased the transition better.
I explained my reasoning for not providing an advance notice in bustabit's thread: Giving an advance notice is something I considered, but ultimately decided against because it would have made virtually no difference to existing investors. Had I announced the change a few months ago your only options would have been to remain invested or divest, the same options you have now.
Having an unnecessarily large bankroll is not an advantage. For one it's an unnecessary liability. All other things being equal I'd rather be responsible for 3,000 BTC or 4,000 BTC of investors' money than 5,000 BTC or more. It also indicates that the casino is charging investors below market value. Ideally the bankroll is just large enough to support all bets that players want to place and no larger. First and foremost bustadice is a casino and its players the customers, so attracting a large bankroll is not the end goal but the means to the end of allowing our players to bet. I referenced the explanation you gave and thanked you for it. Anyway it seems you are going full steam ahead and from what can be seen here there are a few investors that have expressed some reservations but there is no flood of complaints or grievances. If the profits still provide a good return for investors even after dropping approximately 33% then surely they would remain rather than pull their funds out. Unfortunately there aren't any other decent investment opportunities that I know about. Yolodice recently closed investment completely (I think the owner had most of the bankroll, so it makes complete sense). Crypto-Games returns are quite low. And there isn't much more. |
|
|
|
Sorry for the confusion. I didn't understand what you meant by "what remains of their share after Bustabit deducts its share". Both bustadice and bustabit now charge a 50% commission on net profits instead of a 0.25% commission on every wager. That means that bankroll investors have less variance now but also receive less EV than they previously did. Sorry, "what remains of their share after Bustabit deducts its share" means 50% profit commission. I should have worded the question more appropriately. When you say "bankroll investors have less variance now but also receive less EV than they previously did", did you run it past investors for their views? May I ask what the primary reasons were for the change? If you already had a working and highly successful formula on your hands alongside an excellent reputation why change the format when it might alienate some investors? If you have thought this through and believe all investors will prefer this route then I wish you success. I see your reputation and the Bustabit/Bustadice reputation as something quite formidable in crypto gaming circles so hopefully investors will be go with the flow. No investor would ever prefer this formula. This is essentially dropping our expected returns by 1/3. |
|
|
|
As announced, bustadice will start charging the bankroll a 50% commission on future net profits instead of the previous 0.25% commission on all wagers. This will have the immediate effect of increasing the wager and profit limits for players while simultaneously decreasing variance for investors at the the expense of reducing their expected value.
Whenever the bankroll's profit exceeds its previous high point, bustadice will receive 50% of the profits beyond the high point. No commission is collected on profits below the high point. For example, say the bankroll's profit high point is 100 BTC, its current profit is 99 BTC and players combined lose a total of 4 BTC in a round. 3 BTC of that is net profit (exceeding the previous all-time high), so bustadice would receive 1.5 BTC and the remaining 2.5 BTC would go to the bankroll. The commission is charged in real time, so investors can continue to invest and divest whenever they like.
For players, nothing changes other than the wager and profit limits increasing by a third as mentioned above.
Which format worked out better and would give more net income on average for investors: Bustabit taking 0.25% commission on all wagers or what remains of their share after Bustabit deducts its share? Investors were getting 75% of what the casino was expected to make. Now, only 50%, essentially dropping expected returns by 1/3. |
|
|
|
Terrible news. And that's while daily wagered average keeps dropping ( https://dicesites.com/bustabit). Bustabit was my favourite investment in crypto by far. Now expected returns are suddenly half, so I'll have to consider whether I even want to invest at all. At least, as a token of appreciation to those of us that helped make your casino grow (and already got charged a lot in comissions), you could had increased the dilution fee or some other measure that didn't affect people that wanted to keep their investment. The reason the wager volume appears to be dropping over the last few months is primarily because of Bitcoin increasing in price. In terms of purchasing power it tends to stay fairly constant: month | wagered
---------+-----------------
2018-02 | $996,376,713.89
2018-03 | $62,256,276.80
2018-04 | $55,414,979.31
2018-05 | $64,872,011.18
2018-06 | $64,930,742.48
2018-07 | $398,807,398.10
2018-08 | $113,090,361.89
2018-09 | $73,694,508.50
2018-10 | $105,458,904.53
2018-11 | $123,457,666.00
2018-12 | $146,456,440.29
2019-01 | $73,070,953.46
2019-02 | $87,914,651.62
2019-03 | $84,647,544.76
2019-04 | $98,037,393.96
2019-05 | $141,976,857.91
2019-06 | $153,353,497.08
2019-07 | $134,437,656.74
2019-08 | $112,786,472.89 I do expect the bankroll to decrease in size a little, but that's okay as long as the wager and profit limits remain high enough to accommodate all players. And it's unlikely that the limits will fall below what they were with the previous commission structure given that the new one allows them to safely be increased by a third. It may not be dropping in USD, but it is in BTC, which is the currency we are investing. It makes no sense to talk in USD terms when we are investing in a different currency. |
|
|
|
Effective immediately bustabit will charge the bankroll a 50% commission on future net profits instead of the previous 0.25% commission on all wagers. This will have the immediate effect of increasing the wager and profit limits for players while simultaneously decreasing variance for investors at the the expense of reducing their expected value.
Whenever the bankroll's profit exceeds its previous high point, bustabit will receive 50% of the profits beyond the high point. No commission is collected on profits below the high point. For example, say the bankroll's profit high point is 100 BTC, its current profit is 99 BTC and players combined lose a total of 4 BTC in a round. 3 BTC of that is net profit (exceeding the previous all-time high), so bustabit would receive 1.5 BTC and the remaining 2.5 BTC would go to the bankroll. The commission is charged in real time, so investors can continue to invest and divest whenever they like.
For players, nothing changes other than the wager and profit limits increasing by a third as mentioned above.
Terrible news. And that's while daily wagered average keeps dropping ( https://dicesites.com/bustabit). Bustabit was my favourite investment in crypto by far. Now expected returns are suddenly half, so I'll have to consider whether I even want to invest at all. At least, as a token of appreciation to those of us that helped make your casino grow (and already got charged a lot in comissions), you could had increased the dilution fee or some other measure that didn't affect people that wanted to keep their investment. |
|
|
|
|
I see daily wagered dropping lately. Maybe running some kind of promotion could be worth it.
|
|
|
|
.................
Good luck everyone and cheers!
Ethan
I see Max bet profit is reset now but why ? Is there anything else will be reset too ? Max bet profit is lower because investments aren't allowed. |
|
|
|
YD was for many dice investors one of the better investments in terms of % and reliability.
sad for the investors that made YD big and that took the risks (especially in the beginning).
the best action would be to let all current investments run (endless) and to no accept new investments anymore.
+1. I think this is a terrible move unless most of the current bankroll is already from the owners. And it's also quite ugly towards current investors. I bought a lot of Doge just to invest them here when they were around 60 satoshis each. |
|
|
|
Afaik Bit EXO has been establised since many years ago (2016 i think). The only one problem is, their main account got banned on this forum
Well, that's more than enough to discourage any investment there. |
|
|
|
Can invest your dogecoin at bit-exo.com while you wait for higher price.
Maybe in some years after establishing a good reputation. I wonder what percentage of current bankrolls is owned by Ethan himself, but unless it's very high I think this is going to be very bad for the casino. I'd understand not allowing more investments if he considers current bankrolls are big enough, but if now they tank, wagered is going to drop a lot. Anyway, it's his choice. There are alternatives for investors (not many in Dogecoin unfortunately). |
|
|
|
|
Terrible news.
At least you could let us investors stay there and just close new investments. I believed in your project and I bought a lot of Dogecoin just to invest them there. Even if I made a profit of around 30%, DOGE is worth less than half what I paid for them, so I'm still losing a lot. And when liquidating them I will lose even more.
Me, and I'm sure most investors, actually want our bankroll to be used for promotions as that's profitable for us long term (exactly as it is for you if you own 100% of it). I think this decision will be very negative for everyone. You will no longer collect fees from investors, bankrolls will be smaller, maximum prizes will be smaller, so also less people will play.
|
|
|
|
Yolodice does have restrictions to make this more unlikely to happen - they don't respect leverage by capping the max profit at the lowest of 0.5% of the leveraged bankroll or 2.5% of the actual bankroll. So while about everyone is invested at "10x leverage", they're actually only getting 2.5x leverage in actuality.
Lowest or highest? If lowest, 0.5% of bankroll would be 5% if average leverage is 10. |
|
|
|
10x is definitely not nothing when you consider that some sites do not even let you have leverage,,, and yes, when the bankroll is small, it really adds up to the same thing. Remember that it is not just about making more profit,,, it is also about putting your funds at more risk. I am on x10 on yolodice and it works out well, but on another site x10 has made me lose over 15%, but of course, all in short term.
Long term everything should work out to house edge.
Not really, bankroll growth can be negative if returns are very volatile. That's why a 10 times leverage is stupid. |
|
|
|
10 times leverage is nothing, i had used 25x leverage on justdice in my investment and it turned to good amount after i left it for several months.
That's because volatility in terms of bankroll there is extremely small. And of course investors are not literally forced to use high leverage, but they have to if they don't want to be diluted. And it deters investors not willing to overleverage. The casino doesn't benefit from this process, it just makes the bankroll way more volatile only to be able to accomodate high potential prize bets that almost noone plays to get. |
|
|
|
What is the point of having this two investment? I believe it will pay you out in the end because bank will never lose money, even if they lose it back, in the end they will take it back again. Just matter of the time anyway but if you think that you will always play just to gathering back on what you loss from before, believe me I tried it and it does not end up well. It is better to invest it on the max button if you want to get a short term income or vice versa. This is proved to be a very effective way on investing
Those two investments could be in different cryptocurrencies and even though those losses could be recovered back in the long run it's still risky because of that x10 leverage. As what Darkstar said before, some max wins could easily hurt the investors bankroll and even wipe some of the investor's bankroll entirely depending on how big and fast is the damage done by the high rollers. True, allowing 10 times leverage doesn't make sense. It's just forcing everyone to risk more than they would want to because other reckless investors are overleveraged. Something like up to 3 times is fine. |
|
|
|
Then you understood me wrong. Once again, and I hope for the last time: profit on graph is actual profit paid out to investors. It is amount that investors got.
How do you explain this then: I run the same exercise but every month from July 25 2018 to July 2 2019, and I get that returns following your graph would have been 10.19% (bigger than if bankroll had been constant since that date, as I previously thought), while I made only 7.43%: Date Bankroll Profit Capital if bankroll is Constant during the month My investment 07/25/18 1523.63 1133.86 1.0000 1.0000 08/01/18 1549.17 1134.93 1.0007 09/01/18 1526.08 1146.17 1.0080 10/01/18 1527.49 1148.98 1.0098 11/01/18 1515.00 1203.59 1.0459 12/01/18 1447.85 1212.71 1.0522 01/01/19 1486.70 1226.54 1.0623 02/01/19 1496.46 1241.40 1.0729 03/01/19 1476.07 1246.89 1.0768 04/01/19 1440.69 1263.00 1.0886 05/01/19 1385.25 1272.56 1.0958 06/01/19 1382.68 1284.69 1.1054 07/01/19 1285.11 1280.17 1.1018 07/02/19 1285.84 1280.30 1.1019 1.0743 The formula to calculate capital is ((profit at that point in time-previous profit)/previous casino bankroll+1)*previous capital. For example, for 8/1/18: ((1134.93-1133.86)/1523.63+1)*1 |
|
|
|
If you look at the total bankroll over that time period, other than one initial spike a day or two after the investment start date, it is almost a flat line for the whole time period. You make it sound like it wildly fluctuates like some pump and dump coin value lol
We discussed this topic here some weeks ago, you can see my messages. Basically their graphs show "profits" before expenses, which I find misleading, they should indicate their that those are not real profits. You should expect to make more of less 70% of what the graphs shows (you must consider that bankroll keeps fluctuating as you were told, you can see the calculations I made in some previous messages in this thread). Not really. Graph shows actual profit paid to investors (100%). But total bankroll size is shown wrong on graphs, need to fix that one. That's not true, you even confirmed it when we talked about that here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=750760.msg51678418#msg51678418https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=750760.msg51678694#msg51678694 |
|
|
|
If you look at the total bankroll over that time period, other than one initial spike a day or two after the investment start date, it is almost a flat line for the whole time period. You make it sound like it wildly fluctuates like some pump and dump coin value lol
We discussed this topic here some weeks ago, you can see my messages. Basically their graphs show "profits" before expenses, which I find misleading, they should indicate their that those are not real profits. You should expect to make more of less 70% of what the graphs shows (you must consider that bankroll keeps fluctuating as you were told, you can see the calculations I made in some previous messages in this thread). |
|
|
|
|
The amount of DOGE wagered during this promotion was enormous. Please run more promotions like this, it works fantastically well for DOGE.
|
|
|
|
|
DOGE regularly jumps between like 20 and 70 satoshis, it's quite unstable.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
