Bitcoin Beamer 2015 WSOP World Series of Poker Sponsorship‏

[vennali]

I am confused about how much are you actually using as a markup. You are looking for 45 BTC , and for 1 BTC you are paying 1% of the winnings. Isn't that a markup of slightly over 50% only for the sake of bitcoin advertisement ?

I was pretty confused as well.  If I'm reading it right, he is selling 1BTC for 1% of NET winnings, meaning that the break-even point for investors would be somewhere in the area of a $35,000 cash.  This would mean that he needs to place near the top 100 of ~6500 players... or a 1/65 chance of breaking even for investors.

So I guess the package is in no way meant to attract investors, but only those who wish to spend big on bitcoin advertisement. Still a pretty heft price to pay as an investor.

[bitcoinbeamer]

I am confused about how much are you actually using as a markup. You are looking for 45 BTC , and for 1 BTC you are paying 1% of the winnings. Isn't that a markup of slightly over 50% only for the sake of bitcoin advertisement ?

I was pretty confused as well.  If I'm reading it right, he is selling 1BTC for 1% of NET winnings, meaning that the break-even point for investors would be somewhere in the area of a $35,000 cash.  This would mean that he needs to place near the top 100 of ~6500 players... or a 1/65 chance of breaking even for investors.

No this is also incorrect Dogedigital. Any cash means the investors get their BTC back. Then you subtract that amount from the payout and then each investor gets 1% of the net winnings. Here's an example...I win $100,000. Since the buy in is $10,000 you would subtract that from the $100K leaving $90K to divide up. If you had sent me 1 BTC then you would get your 1 BTC back which represents part of the $10K buy in and then you would get 1% of $90K which is $900.

[Dogedigital]

Can you do an example where you min cash then?

[bitcoinbeamer]

Can you do an example where you min cash then?

Yes and I believe they are actually paying the top 1000 players this year and the min cash I believe is $15,000. Need to double check with WSOP when I get there. So if these numbers are correct then if I min cashed and you send in 1 BTC to sponsor me then you would get your 1 BTC back plus 1% of $5,000 which is $50. That's what is meant by net winnings.

[leavemealone_please]

How are you so adamant about raising Bitcoin awareness when you only have 13 activity with all the posts relating to this staking proposal?

Are you involved with the Bitcoin community or contributing to its exposure anywhere else?

As stated in my last post. Beamer sells bitcoins to a large community in the Kansas City area and he does it very well and efficientluy

[IanQuinn]

I am confused about how much are you actually using as a markup. You are looking for 45 BTC , and for 1 BTC you are paying 1% of the winnings. Isn't that a markup of slightly over 50% only for the sake of bitcoin advertisement ?

I was pretty confused as well.  If I'm reading it right, he is selling 1BTC for 1% of NET winnings, meaning that the break-even point for investors would be somewhere in the area of a $35,000 cash.  This would mean that he needs to place near the top 100 of ~6500 players... or a 1/65 chance of breaking even for investors.

No this is also incorrect Dogedigital. Any cash means the investors get their BTC back. Then you subtract that amount from the payout and then each investor gets 1% of the net winnings. Here's an example...I win $100,000. Since the buy in is $10,000 you would subtract that from the $100K leaving $90K to divide up. If you had sent me 1 BTC then you would get your 1 BTC back which represents part of the $10K buy in and then you would get 1% of $90K which is $900.

So again you are not taking out the full 45 BTC worth to return to investors, as you are keeping 11.25% for yourself then keeping another 55% for yourself.  Horrible investment.

[bitcoinbeamer]

I am confused about how much are you actually using as a markup. You are looking for 45 BTC , and for 1 BTC you are paying 1% of the winnings. Isn't that a markup of slightly over 50% only for the sake of bitcoin advertisement ?

I was pretty confused as well.  If I'm reading it right, he is selling 1BTC for 1% of NET winnings, meaning that the break-even point for investors would be somewhere in the area of a $35,000 cash.  This would mean that he needs to place near the top 100 of ~6500 players... or a 1/65 chance of breaking even for investors.

No this is also incorrect Dogedigital. Any cash means the investors get their BTC back. Then you subtract that amount from the payout and then each investor gets 1% of the net winnings. Here's an example...I win $100,000. Since the buy in is $10,000 you would subtract that from the $100K leaving $90K to divide up. If you had sent me 1 BTC then you would get your 1 BTC back which represents part of the $10K buy in and then you would get 1% of $90K which is $900.

So again you are not taking out the full 45 BTC worth to return to investors, as you are keeping 11.25% for yourself then keeping another 55% for yourself.  Horrible investment.

If I cash then all investors get their BTC back plus a share of the winnings as stated above. This is a sponsorship which is much different than an "investment".

[theskillzdatklls]

as an actual poker professional i can tell anyone here, LOL this guy

[notserp]

as an actual poker professional i can tell anyone here, LOL this guy

yup 1% for 1btc is 150% markup and if btc goes up its even more lol

[fox19891989]

I don't get your point, so every donator can get 1% of your winnings? So if only 10 donators, so they only take 10% of your winning, and you took the remaining 90%? It is not fair for them cos if they don't donate u, you won't earn any money.

IMO the donators take 80-90% of the winnings and you take 10-20%, that's better.

[vennali]

I am confused about how much are you actually using as a markup. You are looking for 45 BTC , and for 1 BTC you are paying 1% of the winnings. Isn't that a markup of slightly over 50% only for the sake of bitcoin advertisement ?

I was pretty confused as well.  If I'm reading it right, he is selling 1BTC for 1% of NET winnings, meaning that the break-even point for investors would be somewhere in the area of a $35,000 cash.  This would mean that he needs to place near the top 100 of ~6500 players... or a 1/65 chance of breaking even for investors.

No this is also incorrect Dogedigital. Any cash means the investors get their BTC back. Then you subtract that amount from the payout and then each investor gets 1% of the net winnings. Here's an example...I win $100,000. Since the buy in is $10,000 you would subtract that from the $100K leaving $90K to divide up. If you had sent me 1 BTC then you would get your 1 BTC back which represents part of the $10K buy in and then you would get 1% of $90K which is $900.

Yes, but since total amount you are looking for is 45 BTC ( roughly $10k) , and if you were to cash 100K , then the investment of 1 BTC is roughly more than 2% of 45 BTC, but they will be getting only 1% , so its a double markup , which is a lot even though you are only doing it for bitcoin.

I do understand that you say its only a sponsorship deal and not an investment, but advertising it only to people there, could also be done with pasting bitcoin posters around . How would this be different ?

[bitcoinbeamer]

I am confused about how much are you actually using as a markup. You are looking for 45 BTC , and for 1 BTC you are paying 1% of the winnings. Isn't that a markup of slightly over 50% only for the sake of bitcoin advertisement ?

I was pretty confused as well.  If I'm reading it right, he is selling 1BTC for 1% of NET winnings, meaning that the break-even point for investors would be somewhere in the area of a $35,000 cash.  This would mean that he needs to place near the top 100 of ~6500 players... or a 1/65 chance of breaking even for investors.

No this is also incorrect Dogedigital. Any cash means the investors get their BTC back. Then you subtract that amount from the payout and then each investor gets 1% of the net winnings. Here's an example...I win $100,000. Since the buy in is $10,000 you would subtract that from the $100K leaving $90K to divide up. If you had sent me 1 BTC then you would get your 1 BTC back which represents part of the $10K buy in and then you would get 1% of $90K which is $900.

Yes, but since total amount you are looking for is 45 BTC ( roughly $10k) , and if you were to cash 100K , then the investment of 1 BTC is roughly more than 2% of 45 BTC, but they will be getting only 1% , so its a double markup , which is a lot even though you are only doing it for bitcoin.

I do understand that you say its only a sponsorship deal and not an investment, but advertising it only to people there, could also be done with pasting bitcoin posters around . How would this be different ?

Dogedigital, it's much different and the Rio won't allow me to just put Bitcoin posters up. Even if they did, it wouldn't necessarily be as effective. They charge a lot of money to allow vendors in there and with some of the responses on here, I don't think the cynical guys on here would have any interest in sponsoring a booth nor paying for anyone to run it. Either way, some people on here get it and others do not understand and see the true potential of having someone advocate for Bitcoin at the WSOP. This is fine as I don't think there's anyway to do something potentially big without having massive amounts of criticism, both good and bad.

[bitcoinbeamer]

I don't get your point, so every donator can get 1% of your winnings? So if only 10 donators, so they only take 10% of your winning, and you took the remaining 90%? It is not fair for them cos if they don't donate u, you won't earn any money.

IMO the donators take 80-90% of the winnings and you take 10-20%, that's better.

Fox, you are entitled to your opinion about the percentage splits but you are simply not understanding the math of this whole deal. The percentage of the winnings is determined by how much BTC you put in. Maybe someone else can explain this to you better.

[IanQuinn]

I don't get your point, so every donator can get 1% of your winnings? So if only 10 donators, so they only take 10% of your winning, and you took the remaining 90%? It is not fair for them cos if they don't donate u, you won't earn any money.

IMO the donators take 80-90% of the winnings and you take 10-20%, that's better.

Fox, you are entitled to your opinion about the percentage splits but you are simply not understanding the math of this whole deal. The percentage of the winnings is determined by how much BTC you put in. Maybe someone else can explain this to you better.

Fox did state it incorrectly, but I fully understand your math.  When a player's entry is covered by an investor they generally take 85%, after the entry fee is recouped.  You are only giving the investors 45% which is close to 50% of what they should be getting.

As for you calling it an sponsorship you know that is BS, because a sponsorship would get ZERO back therefore it is an investment.

Still believe that a team would have been a better idea for investors as long as you could prove their advance poker players.

Hope to see you here at the WSOP, I'll keep an eye out.

[fer87]

Good luck friends!

[fox19891989]

I don't get your point, so every donator can get 1% of your winnings? So if only 10 donators, so they only take 10% of your winning, and you took the remaining 90%? It is not fair for them cos if they don't donate u, you won't earn any money.

IMO the donators take 80-90% of the winnings and you take 10-20%, that's better.

Fox, you are entitled to your opinion about the percentage splits but you are simply not understanding the math of this whole deal. The percentage of the winnings is determined by how much BTC you put in. Maybe someone else can explain this to you better.

Fox did state it incorrectly, but I fully understand your math.  When a player's entry is covered by an investor they generally take 85%, after the entry fee is recouped.  You are only giving the investors 45% which is close to 50% of what they should be getting.

As for you calling it an sponsorship you know that is BS, because a sponsorship would get ZERO back therefore it is an investment.

Still believe that a team would have been a better idea for investors as long as you could prove their advance poker players.

Hope to see you here at the WSOP, I'll keep an eye out.

Since we are general members here, I think calling it an sponsorship is incorrect, we won't get any return if you can't earn your buy-in back. And we are not a company or website, how can we get returns or exposures in the public? So it is a kind of donation or investment(i prefer calling it as an investment), cos we may earn money from this crowdfunding.

[bitmonster1070]

Can't wait to see you out there playing Beamer.  Does your shirt have a nice big bitoin logo on it so the world can see?  Everyone there needs to see a nice big bitoin logo!  Maybe you could post a pic here for us so we know what to look for.  I see you got another big tipper on here.  I might have to deposit some more coins in there too.  How many days do  we have left  to buy in?     

[FanEagle]

I wish I could get investors to play some omaha, but I stopped askin for investors because of my surgery of next week.

[bitcoinbeamer]

Can't wait to see you out there playing Beamer.  Does your shirt have a nice big bitoin logo on it so the world can see?  Everyone there needs to see a nice big bitoin logo!  Maybe you could post a pic here for us so we know what to look for.  I see you got another big tipper on here.  I might have to deposit some more coins in there too.  How many days do  we have left  to buy in?     

Probably by Monday night I will stop accepting coin for the sponsorship. After I buy in then no more sponsors will be allowed. The bitcoin logo will be nice and big don't worry. Thanks Bitmonster!

[bitcoinbeamer]

I don't get your point, so every donator can get 1% of your winnings? So if only 10 donators, so they only take 10% of your winning, and you took the remaining 90%? It is not fair for them cos if they don't donate u, you won't earn any money.

IMO the donators take 80-90% of the winnings and you take 10-20%, that's better.

Fox, you are entitled to your opinion about the percentage splits but you are simply not understanding the math of this whole deal. The percentage of the winnings is determined by how much BTC you put in. Maybe someone else can explain this to you better.

Fox did state it incorrectly, but I fully understand your math.  When a player's entry is covered by an investor they generally take 85%, after the entry fee is recouped.  You are only giving the investors 45% which is close to 50% of what they should be getting.

As for you calling it an sponsorship you know that is BS, because a sponsorship would get ZERO back therefore it is an investment.

Still believe that a team would have been a better idea for investors as long as you could prove their advance poker players.

Hope to see you here at the WSOP, I'll keep an eye out.

IanQuinn, you are very incorrect here. It is very common that the players gets either 50/50 or 60/40 of the net winnings. I've never heard of backers getting 85% with the players only getting 15%. I've been around the circuit on and off for 15 years. Since you know so much about how it works in the poker world, how about you tell us all what your real name is and what credentials you have that make any of your statements on this thread worth taking in to account. I would love to meet you at the WSOP but need to know who you are.