I really liked how Argentina was playing against Croatia, scoring 3 goals against such a strong defence was impressive. The whole strategy of Croatia is not to score many goals but rather prevent the opposing team to score goals. I can understand that some people don't like the Argentinian team after their game against Netherlands, but to me they look like they winner for the 2022 worldcup. The France against Morocco game is going to be interesting, but I don't think there is any real chance for Morocco to beat France. I am putting all my money on France for tonight. The finals is then going to be France vs Argentina and I think I will be going with Argentina for the last game. Argentina was really playing well so far and also they have one more day of rest to the finals and managed to beat Croatia in 90 minutes, so the players should be in a better form. Messi should be really hyped to finally get the trophy this year. Looks like the title is going to South America this year, even though I expected it to be Brazil first.

Oh I must have missed that news, even though it's happening right under my nose. Never heard this bank name before to be honest. It seems to be some a very small investment bank that operates in the areas of Private Equity, Merges & Acquisitions and crypto currencies. With a 15m purchase price the bank can't be too large, even though they seem to be having offices in Munich and Luxembourg. Now I am wondering if they also have traditional banking business where a lot of consumers have their bank account their and deposit money, or if it's mostly a specialised bank. Acquiring a bank that is highly specialised and operates in some areas like cryptos is a good. What I don't like would be for crypto companies to acquire large consumer banks that hold all the fiat money. Crypto currencies where designed to be decentralised and an alternative to traditional banks, now becoming the banks themselves would be wrong.

Quite surprised that here are 80% of the people who first started out with investing and then went into gambling. For me it's the exact opposite. When I was in highschool the topic of investing was really boring to me, my parents tried to teach me the value of money and that it was a good idea to save money for later in life. But I didn't really want to listen to them. Instead of saving my weekly allowance I used it to buy new Playstation or PC games or used the money to buy candy. Only later in life when I first started living alone during university I realised how expensive life is and that is much better to start saving for bad times. So as a kid gaming was so much more fun than thinking about money, and also gambling was way more fun. My grandfather used to take me with him to play lottery and always gave me some scratch cards where I could keep the winnings. It was no surprise that as soon as I turned 18 I visited my first casino. I think most kids these days are gamers and will eventually try out gambling in their life and only start to look at their finances when they are older.

It's true that business should accept crypto currencies as a form of payment, it makes purchases for customers much easier and will help to increase the reach of cryptos. The main problem I see for corporations to switch completely to cryptos and stop using fiat money is that all the bills of the company will likely still need to be paid in fiat money. Tax payments will need to be paid in fiat, most employee have probably contracts that pay in fiat and most utility bills also will demand fiat money. This creates a mismatch between receiving cryptos from customers and all the capital outflow in fiat. In case there is a lot of volatility in the crypto markets that could lead to losses for the company when paying bills. I think the world is not ready yet to only function on cryptos.

Looks like Standard Chartered banks is just trying to get in on the Bitcoin bashing we have seen over the last few weeks. The FTX disaster dealt a big blow to the crypto community and resulted in a loss of confidence in the crypto markets. It's going to take weeks for the bitcoin price to recover again. But as long as we are in the 16-17k USD range I would not worry about any such bad news from banks. It's clear that banks feel threatened from bitcoins because they will take away a large part of their business. Dealing in multiple currency is a lucrative business for banks as they can collect a lot of fees when buying and selling the same currencies over and over again. Before cryptos the consumer had no real alternative, we could only consider switching to a different who would charge is the exact same fees. Now with cryptos we can finally be independent of banks and that is was making them afraid. When it comes to forecasting the bitcoin price I would not be trusting any bank, they have their own agenda.      

Martingale is a good strategy we can follow from time to time to make a profit, while reducing our losses. But the strategy also has it drawbacks that needs to be addressed and can't be followed blindly. I agree with you that we can't follow one strategy continuously, because there is no strategy that is going to give us always a profit. Even the best strategy is going to fail eventually. For me the main issue with a martingale based strategy is that you need large amounts of capital to start with compared to your initial bets. The risk of hitting a loss 5-6 times in a row is there and we need to be able to survive it without going broke. Having a large bankroll for a long losing streak also means that our winnings are relatively small compared to our initial money. That means we need to invest a lot of time if we want to make a decent return on our bankroll. In my opinion it's the best approach to combine multiple strategies and use a martingale approach as a general overall for the betting sizes. But we can't follow it blindly and should adapt our strategy whenever it's necessary.

First time I am hearing about the Anti Martingale Strategy (AMS), sounds pretty funny to be honest. Martingale is my standard betting strategy I use when I don't want to think too much about gambling. It works best for my gambling behaviour as it guarantees in most cases that I will finish with a positive gambling evening. Only one win will recover all my previous losses, which is great if you want to build up your bankroll steadily over time. The big issue unfortunately is the tail risk, that you can get wiped out in a single session when we are facing a loss streak. Another drawback of the martingale strategy is the large capital requirements, we need a decent bankroll to start with to withstand several losses in a row. Would be nice to see the strategy in action and see how well you are doing with it. For how many rounds have you used the strategy? Did you make a decent win of it? Assuming that we are losing a bit more than we are winning, we are going to double up less often than in a martingale strategy. So the AMS should actually be less risky than the traditional martingale strategy.  

Every buy and every sell order is going to influence the Bitcoin price. The larger the orders the large the price impact, that is why whales can definitely influence the price in their favour to a certain extent. This doesn't mean that decentralisation doesn't exit. Bitcoin is a decentralised network that doesn't rely on one main framework controlling everything. When you speak of the "whales" it sounds a bit like it's a group of people that all work together, this is obviously not the case. I think there is a difference between whales from North America, Asia or even Europe. They all are living in different currency regions and will trade on their own personal needs. In my opinion it's not only the whales, but also the HODL investors who are influencing the Bitcoin price heavily. Without the strong HODL community not giving into the selling pressure the price of Bitcoins would have dropped much lower than it did this year.   

It's true that a casino with a limited online presence and no community is a red flag and should be looked at more closely before depositing any money there. It could be that the casino is very new and only launched their operations a few weeks ago. If that is the case they might be trying to build up a community and I would consider giving them a try if there are some good promotions for new customers. But if the casino has been around for some time, then I would probably stay away from it. There must be a reason why the casino has no regular gamblers and it could be a scam. For me the first step with any casino I haven't used or heard of before is check for online reviews. I want to know how many people have played at the casino and if there have been any issues before, like someone winning money there and having trouble with the withdrawal process. There are lot of different review websites online, and everybody could write his own review without giving any proof if his claims are legit or not. That is why I also like to check here on the forum and see if some of the older members with high trust ratings have played at the casino before. It makes a big difference if someone you trust gives a review for a casino, or if it's a review from a random site online.    

I noticed the growing number of videos on youtube over the last 12-18 months, of people living in boats, vans and tiny of grid cabins. There is a growing number of people who try to break the cycle of ever rising real estate prices, and there is also a huge demand of ordinary people to find out about these topics. These videos have millions of views from people all around the world. I think most of the western countries face the same problem like in the USA. More housing is needed because more people are singles and live alone, or in smaller families. And the housing is concentrating on a few large cities which offer the best employment option. People are not willing to commute long distances anymore and rather pay higher rent prices to live in trendy new area. The main issue I see in my country is that old houses and office buildings needs to be converted in apartments, also large apartments will be split into two smaller apartments as they can get more money for them. And this process takes many years, the whole housing situation can't be fixed within 2-3 years.

For a HODL investor there is no reason to be fearful right now. In my opinion the Bitcoin price at the moment is relatively cheap and buying some coins for long term holding is a good idea. If like you said that you don't need the capital right now for spending, than investing it makes a lot of sense. The best argument for me to buy more crytpos at the moment is the double digit inflation rates. You are losing on average 10% purchasing power of your FIAT money by only letting it sit in your bank account. So why not invest the money and participate of the next bull market? And there is nothing really to fear about, because even prices will drop for bitcoin further in the short term, as a long term holder this is not going to affect you.  Crypto currencies like most other assets tend to move in cycles, so it's just a matter of time for the next rally to come.

The casino in my home town is very posh, you need to wear a suit and tie to enter. All the people I see there are elegant and I don't expect them to be looking for targets. A few times I saw some very beautiful woman who were alone in the casino, maybe they were looking for some older men to support their gambling habits. So far I haven't felt unsafe at the casino, the parking is right next door and there is always security at the door. I even heard that if you win larger amounts someone will escort you to your car. To be honest my winnings at my local casinos were always mediocre, I never had large sums of money in my pocket when leaving. As a woman it might be different as well and it's always better to visit in a group, it's also more fun.
As for the online gambling boom we saw over the last two years, I would not leave large sums of money at the casino. Whenever I have a bigger win I withdraw money, this also helps me to save some of my gambling profits. I would treat a casino similar to a crypto exchange, don't leave all your money on an exchange. It will cost some money in transactions to always move money around, but at least we are save in case the casino or exchange gets hacked.

What a game that was yesterday. I was sure Brazil was going to win the game as Croatia. They had so many chances, 11 shots on target, whereas was Croatia had only 1 and of course they make that 1 shoot count and score the goal. Overall the game felt a bit unlucky for Brazil and it made me a bit sad to lose another big bet in the worldcup. Not sure if a team like Croatia who seems to be only winning in penalty shootout deserve to win the finals. In my opinion both France and Argentina are stronger than Croatia and should win against them. At least Argentina made it work in a way too close match, I was sweating a lot watching the overtime. There have been quite a few penalty shootouts in the last few games which make the outcome so much more risky, one bad shot can cost you the whole tournament. As for today I think France is going to pull through, but it might go into overtime again. Also Portugal is going to win against Morocco. Then France and Argentina should win the semi finals and meet in finals where hopefully France is going to win so I don't lose another bet.             

I agree with you, people who live in rural areas in poor conditions should try to improve their financial situation before investing in crypto currencies. Becoming rich through bitcoins sounds nice, but is not realistic in the current market situation. Before anybody buys risky assets, no matter if its cryptos, stocks, investment funds or commodities, they should determine how much money they have at hand and how much they can afford to lose. Nothing is worse to buy cryptos today and be forced to sell them again in 6 months because you need the money. Being forced into selling coins can result in a huge loss. Another issue you might face when living in rural areas is that there are not many options to use your bitcoins for actual purchases. In my opinion bitcoin and other crypto currencies should always be part of a broader investment portfolio. The times to get rich quickly with bitcoins is over.

It's true that we need to take risks to get anywhere in life. There is nothing free when it comes to trading and investing. Without risks is only our bank account that provides no interest or a maximum of 0.5%. Comparing that to 10% inflation is awful. We need to take risks to make decent returns, but this doesn't mean that we should be taking any risks. A good trader can distinguish between the risks that are worth taking and the risks to avoid. Running after the highest possible risk there are is not going to make us rich. It's like only betting on 0 in roulette. The risk we take needs to be in relation to our capital and our expected profits. If we don't have enough capital to sustain a loss we are in big trouble.

I don't really like if others make decisions for me, that includes gambling and sports betting. Only good friends I trust to bet my money for me, relying on betting recommendations from strangers is a no go for me. Not sure how AI based betting is going to be any different. Is this going to be a self learning AI that can access all the sports information on real time to update his predictions? Would be nice to see how well the AI is doing in out of sample test. I expect it to be average results, otherwise bookmakers would need to adapt their quotes. When it comes to AI based betting it feels a bit like gambling bots that take all the actions from you and bet your money freely. This is always a blackbox to me and I am a bit afraid that there could be an error that will make me lose all my money. What if due to an coding error the AI bets all the money on a complete underdog? In the end it's our own money and we are responsible for the bets we take, even if we don't know what it is we bet on.

I agree with you that investing is the only real alternative we have at the moment. With inflation rates at 10% and not likely to fall next year it makes no sense at all to keep money at the bank. In my country the interest rates on bank deposits was 0% for the last 5 years, only now the rates are rising. But even if you get 0.5 - 1% interest on you money, you are losing 9% purchasing power each year. It even makes more sense to spend your money today an enjoy it for a nice vacation, or something else, instead of keeping it in the bank. Investing and trading crypto currencies would be my first choice to get rid of any excess money at the bank. Real estate I already have enough invested in, and I am afraid that property prices are going to fall soon because people will have trouble to get financing for their existing loans. Most of the real estate deals where calculated based on 2-3% borrowing cost, but now with the rising rates it will be much more expensive to refinance your mortgage loans. Also Gold and Silver doesn't really seem like a good investment at the moment. Gold made only 0.1% profit over the last 12 months, where you would expect so much more. My grandparents always said Gold is the best investment during a crisis, this doesn't seem to be true in 2022.

Not sure if I understand it correctly, the sports betting problem in Australia is that people bet more money than they can afford to lose? This is among the biggest mistake anybody could do when it comes to gambling or investing. In both cases there is a lot of risk involved and no guarantee to make money. That's why it's advisable to only use money that we can afford to lose. To me this sounds more as a banking problem than a gambling problem, and of course people need to be more financial responsible. I don't understand why credit cards are still so common these days where you only see the money you spent at the end of the month. I also have a credit card, but only for emergency and I never really use it. The fees and interest on credit cards are way too high and should be avoided as much as possible. I only use a normal bank card that gives me a notification within 2 minutes of using it and shows me the amount. On my phone I can check my balance anytime and don't need to worry about spending more than I have. I think the best solution would be for people to use more modern bank cards and limit their overdraft possibilities.

That is a bit hard to answer. I don't think there is a fixed number that is going to cover all your expenses and possible withdrawals, because of so many variables in the gambling industry. First of all, are you planning to work all alone on the casino or do you need employees? It can be quite expensive if you hire support staff, IT specialist that run the website and casino for you, and a security system to make sure there are no leaks and your money is save. The more people that work for you the higher your monthly running cost and your 100k USD could spent quickly. Another factor that can be quite expensive is advertising cost. It depends on how fast you want to grow your casino, to attract a large number of gamblers you need to run some ads to promote your casino. All this will be initial cost that only after a few month will be recovered by money made from your casino. And the last big factor is your bankroll to cover potential outflows. It could happen that a whale plays at your casino, becomes lucky and wins 50k USD. That would ruin your bankroll and needs to be addressed quickly. It's probably better to make sure that you other monthly income that you could rely upon to cover potential outflows.

I can understand the argument behind minimum wages and it makes sense for some jobs. You are right that everybody deserves a certain living quality to have a happy and fulfilling life. There are two problems I have with minimum wages. First, some jobs involve money that is being paid outside of the tax scope, for example tips or builders on the construction site working Saturdays. All the money that can be hidden from the government makes a big difference. And the second factor that makes minimum wage unfair is the different living expenses. For example in the UK, it makes a huge difference if you life on London or in Wales/Scotland. Rent and food prices are depending on your location, so paying everybody the same minimum wage is unfair. The same in Finland, people in Helsinki need to pay much more than people who life in the countryside. Maybe a more dynamic approach to minimum wage, based on where you live would be better.  It's sad that the economic model doesn't work and the government needs to intervene.