Two thumbs up!
So how about those August numbers?  Coming tomorrow, Close of Business! In that case, sorry for being a pest! Just hoping we're on the right track for dividends,  . BTW, @CBTC... what happens with the proceeds from the Peerbet sale? Are those dividends or? Aug is just the 2nd month of the quarter, so no dividends this month even if we broke records. We will sort out any potential dividends after the end of the quarter (September) Re PeerBet sale: We will treat it like revenue (after expenses incurred and liabilities - normal stuff here); however, anyone that follows up closely knows we have a few bad quarters to dig out of, so the proceeds will go towards that. Anything left over is returned to investors with respect to our normal dividend distribution model. Got it. I wasn't aware we were only doing quarterly dividends here, . |
|
|
|
Did you perhaps try to mean something like:
Betting 0.1x on 1BTC and 10x on 0.01 BTC or something like that?
Ahh, I think that's what he's asking. Investors will definitely make a lot more on a small large bet, then lots of little bets. The reason for this is simple though, take an extreme example: 1 bet of 100 BTC @ 2x with 49.5% win chance vs 100 bets of 1 BTC @ 2x with 49.5% win chance they both have the same EV for investors (+1 btc) but in terms of risk profile, they're in different leagues. Ask me to back the first bet, and I'd wince and refuse. Ask me to back the latter sequence, and I'd have trouble concealing my boner. So I think it's makes a lot of sense the way it is now. The more you risk, the more you need to be compensated to take it. The interesting thing about that, though, is that I think it's all psychological. I need to drag Dooglus into this -- his math never ceases to amaze me and he runs scenarios to help better understand. Because let's say we're doing the first one. You either win 100 BTC or you lose 100 BTC. 49.5% means you have a better chance of losing. The second one is, assuming we just use a dumbed down math, going to result in a net-zero (nothing lost, nothing gained). In the investor's side, though, it would end up with a loss due to commissions. I'm going to be honest... I'm not 100% sure what a great solution would be. I wonder if Dooglus would look things over and give his input, because he could definitely put to rest feelings one way or the other (he's proven me wrong on numerous occasions, so it's definitely possible that he could do the same here as well). In any case, thanks for taking the time to discuss things, look at stuff, etc. instead of just blowing everyone off! |
|
|
|
Hehe definitely :p well at least you got some clear house edge and commission numbers now, that should help already :p
Oh, it does. We had discussed things in a few of the MP sites about the lack of real clarity on MP's home page. I can't stress how much I love this data, so thank you again! |
|
|
|
Hi Jacktheking, please give us up to 12 hours, we will send you a PM once it's added  Ahh. I played this game when I was a kid years back. I recently find it on Steam and I wondered if I could buy it using Bitcoin. Thank you for accepting my request. The best Music, Games, Places are always the ones with memories stuck to them Here is the game: RollerCoaster Tycoon 2: Triple Thrill PackAdded this to my cart and than tried to checkout via Coinbase but my mobile wallet said that the merchant signature is not verified. So I went on to checkout via CoinPayments. Sent a total of 0.039773 BTC to the wallet 1DhPwnpZKDKqr3YHhyy95bLTqxagocb1bH - https://www.biteasy.com/blockchain/transactions/bc56960eeb23b2631773b1825ba238cc86427988dd72f9d1b0dc3b78385f7614. Waiting for 2 confirmation before I continue. That is the weirdest fee amount I've ever seen. Normally people do it in full amounts (i.e., 100 bits, 200 bits). I've never seen it like that: 93.86 bits. Can I ask why?  |
|
|
|
have you tried getting this submitted to faucet lists and rotators? I think that may help boost traffic.
Just an idea.
I like the concept since it's pretty unique.
I have requested many faucets lists and rotators to add my site. Most of them added my site to their list or rotator. However, there is a few which said my site is not a normal faucet and they need to consider be adding. Anyway, welcome you to BitRevenues. . I've seen some posts from him requesting that, so yes, :p. I'll get it back up on mine shortly as well -- I had removed it when he was forwarding ad-block users to other sites (as it broke the frame).
Hmm. I will be forwarding user to another part of my site to tell them to switch off AdBlock if that is a problem. Thank you for your continue support for BitRevenues. . Ahh, the issue with the forwarding is that doing it in any way will break my frames (essentially taking them away from my rotator). I think it's the method being used... not 100%. But when you get things set up I'll add it and see what happens. |
|
|
|
|
Updated signature! Ran into an issue (I thought I had copied everything but it had missed "[/center]" at the end and kept flagging it as invalid -- just a heads up in case anyone else has the same issue).
|
|
|
|
Thanks Bjorn. I'm wondering if it's possible to add like a yearly ROI to it as well (if a site's been out for a month and is up 1%, that'd be a 12% yearly ROI). That would help understand the direction of the sites on a more long-term basis (extrapolated, of course) in relation to other investments.
At this moment I am only privately beta testing this for all sites (and made some decent money with it, so not sure if I will make it public TBH :X my site is not commercial at all, but this tool I made seems pretty valuable to me.) But one can easily do this themselves in a manual way. Generally the formula is something like this: gain = one_coin_of_br * wagered * investor_edge You can see BB had 7100 wagered in last 30 days, so let's say MP had 8k in a month. BR is currently 460 (was lower for last month though!) Investor edge is 0.21% according to my stats. (Normally this is "HE - commission" for other sites) 1/460*8000*0.0021 = 0.03652173913 so your 30 days expected gain is 3.65%. Yearly 43.8% I guess. Note: Last month BR was actually more around 350 so expected gain was around 4.8% that month. Also BR normally dilutes you, but in the case of MP it also makes the investor_edge lower. So 0.21% is not guaranteed at all.
Note 2: in reality BB's profit was around -0.25% for investors in last 30 days, so actually a loss for investors because of the variance (players were relatively lucky.)I keep up with most things manually as it is, but having more data automatically given reduces the burden, :p. |
|
|
|
Ahh, my fault. Just briefly dealt with both and was thinking it was SD, but that's the one with all the giveaways in chat, . |
|
|
|
Is there any dice game site which gives you more chances on winning using martingale? Any more betting strategies better than martingale?
I guess that is depends on the houseedge. The lowest houdeedge for now is 0.1% and that is on betterbets. You can check it on my profile or may be you can check through their forum on here https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1065847.0Actually, "Sharp Dice" goes as low as 0.01%. |
|
|
|
Cashback Club rake and affiliate bonuses have been credited to player's secure Moneypot accounts, enjoy everyone! This week players earned over 1.6 BTC back for playing at https://betterbets.io
Thanks! And it looks like raffle tickets are increasing quickly. Are there more 2+ winner lotteries planned? Great question, much of this depends on the success of the current raffle and volume that is generated by it. I have some very big plans for the raffle system, and our developers are currently polishing the final touches on a portion of this new system for the upcoming update. BetterBets will commit to giving players bigger bonuses and prizes as we grow, multiple winners is something I could see happening regularly. Great to hear! And the upcoming update, does it deal with the raffle system ("new system") or is it unrelated? I love the updates, :p. |
|
|
|
What about an update on the android client?
Yes. Tell us something. estimated percent completion, major milestones completed, or estimated completion date Saying nothing leads some people to conclude that nothing is being done. Pretty sure that is the case. It's not, but we're not in the business of giving timeframes any longer. Stuff takes longer than would be desirable. Significant parts of existing things get rewritten along the way in ways that you can't see, and it's a more intensive effort than some people thought it would be. Welcome to the world of software. It sucks. We're hoping to have more info soon. Usually people can give a time frame, though. Even brand new MMORPGs (which take years to develop) can give times as to when they'll be finished and ready to launch, :p. |
|
|
|
While I can kind of see where you're coming from, you're looking at it the wrong way. Take, for example:
Max win 10 BTC.
1 player is betting 1 BTC at 10x for max win
1 player is betting 0.01 BTC at 10x (1/100 max win)
Both are essentially going for the same thing, at the same risk to investors (person 1 can lose once, person 2 can lose 3x) but both are, relatively, an equivalent bet.
Hmm, I don't understand your example? The risk to the investors on the first one is 100x as much. For instance, imagine you had a 1% house edge, and a 100 BTC bankroll. Taking the first bet would be absolutely insane (hugely negative expected bankroll growth), while the second bet is a great deal! Or put another way, if you had a 100 BTC bankroll you'd probably want a 10% house edge to even consider the first bet. But you'd happily take the second bet even if it had a 0.1% house edge. This is exactly how MoneyPot works, investors are rewarded proportional to their risk in such a way that ensures every bet they accept is "kelly compliant" Consider this my "was up all night" math, lol. I was looking at it like: 100 bets at 0.01 BTC/10x is 1.0 BTC at 10x, when it's not. Not sure why that's how it clicked, though, as it's an obvious error. |
|
|
|
Two thumbs up!
So how about those August numbers? Coming tomorrow, Close of Business! In that case, sorry for being a pest! Just hoping we're on the right track for dividends, . BTW, @CBTC... what happens with the proceeds from the Peerbet sale? Are those dividends or? |
|
|
|
Well, to be fair, I didn't say that the app developers were getting a great deal (they are) or that the investors were getting a shit deal (I wouldn't classify it like that), I first asked for clarification and then said that I was shocked by the figures. And I stand by that, I am shocked by it. If you had asked me to guess, I just would have assumed that the two sides (developers and bankrollers) were splitting the profits made.
Obviously the people who are bankrolling the sites are doing so intentionally and with a full understanding of profit splitting system in place so everything is clearly fair but, yes, it is quite shocking to see the actual numbers.
Fair point. One thing worth noting, is that there's no rule in place like: "App Developers make x3 as much as investors", but rather investors share is proportional to the risk taken. For instance if someone is going for max-profit, then investors make 100% (and apps 0%), which app developers routinely complain about =) But if someone is going for a very small win compared to the max-win, the bets constitute very little risk to the investors so I think it makes sense to give that extra money to app-developers. What I'll do is do is create a dedicated thread for the investing side of MoneyPot, so we can keep the conversation going there as I'm totally open to changing the system, but just getting tired of hearing complaints from both sides in something that is inherently zero-sum =) While I can kind of see where you're coming from, you're looking at it the wrong way. Take, for example: Max win 10 BTC. 1 player is betting 1 BTC at 10x for max win 1 player is betting 0.01 BTC at 10x (1/100 max win) Both are essentially going for the same thing, at the same risk to investors (person 1 can lose once, person 2 can lose 3x) but both are, relatively, an equivalent bet. |
|
|
|
Whenever I see people pitching trading bots I can only think... If it actually worked, you wouldn't need my money.
It depends more on return than anything. Would you say the same to the proven hedge fund managers? "I get that you've got a net worth of hundreds of millions but if you truly made money you wouldn't need mine?" That's asinine. Walmart is a profitable company and even THEY borrow (as do PayPal, eBay, and tens of thousands of other profitable companies). Stock brokers/mutual fund can do something that I can't by trading on my own, and they are dealing in much bigger markets where they don't have to worry about slippage as much as in the crypto world. As for big companies borrowing, when they do they explain in detail how they are going to pay back and why it makes sense for both parties. I'm not seeing how that's in any way related to the thing I quoted. Explaining how they use the bot would literally fall under your "explain in detail how they are going to pay back..." statement. Edit: I'm not saying this is a good investment. I'm steering clear, myself. Just saying that these arguments are invalid. |
|
|
|
Make this Wave 3 more comfortable and remove this 3rd party (jasonk) link to get paid because that's doesn't make sense for any wallet service and let it on user choice when they want to withdraw this.
Yeah, this was my issue, too. I don't like the whole jumping through hoops thing. Just streamline the process and let it be done. |
|
|
|
Many players still don't understand the action points in OFC. They play with a short stack, and if they hit fantasyland, they have very little action left. They win much less than they think they are supposed to, and think it's a software glitch. As a result, these players may stop playing, and that's bad for the games.
Perhaps there could be a pop-up briefly explaining that you can't win more than your starting stack on any given hand, and that fantasyland counts as part of the same hand that qualified for it. This can show when someone joins a Chinese table, and of course a check box to stop showing the message to those who have seen it.
I thought you had to have x amount to join (like, say, at least the maximum you can lose), a lot like hold'em (where you can't just join with half a big blind). |
|
|
|
Was wondering how long it would take SparkedDev to start trying to get others to invest in his "investments."
SparkedDev - You have made enough claims of investing hundreds of BTC that I think some proof is in order. Please sign an address containing several hundred BTC & show us the transactions of 100+ BTC you've made from your address to invest in the claimed businesses.
Eh, I've ignored his whole "we have 15k BTC to invest" thing. Even if he does have that much, him putting money into something doesn't make it a good investment. |
|
|
|
"Risk" is, of course, referring to the variance involved in gambling. Paying money to build a site isn't risk, it's an investment and paying out bonuses and rakeback once a site is successful is obv 0 risk. You must admit that it's pretty shocking that the people funding the site (which is what allows you to take so many bets) are making 10% of what the people owning the site are making while absorbing 100% of the risk.
I don't think that's fair. They're both risks, just of very different sorts. Personally I feel like the investors are getting it pretty good as they don't have to also put their time and energy into it. But if you feel like the app developers are getting a great deal, I'd invite you to be part of it. Or if you feel like investors are getting a shit deal, I'd encourage you to divest or not invest at all. Anyway, speaking of investor risks, it looks like gamblers have won around ~28 BTC more than expected. This is money that would normally be in investors pockets. This is the very risk that investors are being paid for =). So if you really want to compare, I think it's more fair to compare 38.4 BTC (expected investor earnings) against the ~93.5 BTC (guaranteed app earnings) and say based on current betting patterns apps are making ~3x as much as investors. Also, unfortunately, I don't think anyone has really made much money off the platform yet (be it me, investors or apps), and I think it'll be a lot more productive growing our community, getting our volume up and bringing people from fiat gambling, then getting into bitch fights over the scraps. Well, to be fair, I didn't say that the app developers were getting a great deal (they are) or that the investors were getting a shit deal (I wouldn't classify it like that), I first asked for clarification and then said that I was shocked by the figures. And I stand by that, I am shocked by it. If you had asked me to guess, I just would have assumed that the two sides (developers and bankrollers) were splitting the profits made. Obviously the people who are bankrolling the sites are doing so intentionally and with a full understanding of profit splitting system in place so everything is clearly fair but, yes, it is quite shocking to see the actual numbers. I do agree with you on this. It wasn't until I actually followed the whales that I realized we were much more disadvantaged (as investors) than I originally thought. Which also explains why both times we got back to the same profit level, I was lower and lower in the negatives. I'm hoping that as more people join it will kick back up. Right now I'm very cautiously watching, myself, . |
|
|
|
have you tried getting this submitted to faucet lists and rotators? I think that may help boost traffic.
Just an idea.
I like the concept since it's pretty unique.
I've seen some posts from him requesting that, so yes, :p. I'll get it back up on mine shortly as well -- I had removed it when he was forwarding ad-block users to other sites (as it broke the frame). |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
