'Consultation over the Gambling Introductory Offer Loopholes board' blog discussion

darloscot

innovate wrote: »

Time for GIOL to be laid to rest. It's been superb but so many parameters have changed now, so it's no longer suitable for MSE.

Those who want to still make money out of this know how to do it, and/or where to go for help/advice etc.

Newbies will find it very hard to make much more than a couple of hundreds from GIOL now - - might still be of interest to some, but it's not the gravy train it used to be.

All the best to any newbies and recent starters, and anyone else, though!

Hard to make more than a couple of hundred???? Now now, don't tell lies! You know as well as anyone that there is £2-3k easily from main bookie sign ups, just waiting to be taken by anyone who can be bothered to read up on it, and that would give you the knowledge and float to push on and make that again in another 6 months.

People hark back to the good old days, but I started Dec 2010 and tipped over £7k profit last night after making about £35 on a risk free offer from a major UK bookie.

hallmark

meher wrote: »

May be it was a big mistake letting Tim, your BG, one of the finest, if not the finest BG this site has ever had, go

That would be the same Tim who was incredibly rude to anyone when the mood took him (which was often), & who recommended that people caught up in the FGS debacle quickly withdrew their funds from Betfair before the bets settled?

Also the same Tim who was scathingly critical of anyone who mentioned multi-accounting then appeared a few months after he'd "gone forever" to post a list of advice, foremost among it was gnoming (I believe his expression was something like "this requires a constant stream of new accounts but we all know how to get those") or words to that effect.

darkniven

OldElstonian wrote: »

It's interesting to see so many current users of the GIOL board proposing "solutions" of either making the board less visible to casual browsers, and/or putting additional and more prominent warnings on the forum. They seem to miss the irony of that suggestion... if it were really risk-free then it wouldn't need any warnings!

so no other advice given within MSE has "warnings"?

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/cards/cashback-credit-cards#beware

Martin has said he is open to "a wide range of suggestions" - should we be pilloried for doing this?

JimmyTheWig

jobbingmusician wrote: »

As I posted on the thread, I felt torn. I don't 'do' spread betting. Half the posters on the thread were saying it was risk free, the other half that it wasn't, so I said I'd ask MSE Towers for advice. Sounds like they didn't know either!
...
So we have the situation where I was unable to evaluate the risk of an offer, and MSE Towers admit that they sometimes also struggle.

I'd say that following this consultation the rule should be "if in doubt, lock it out". Presumably there are more than enough offers that are not doubtful to make it worth keeping the board open for?

There are two ways in which non risk free (NRF) offers sneak through on this forum.

1. Because the BG doesn’t spot them, evaluates them wrongly, or doesn’t understand them.
2. Because the offers themselves are RF but participants don’t understand them and so do them wrongly, making them NRF.

A type 1 error is policed very well by other forum members, who will call loudly for the thread to be locked. The only problem occurs when there is disagreement about this, and there seems to be a clear decision on this thread that people would rather the BG locked too many threads rather than too few.

A type 2 error is more difficult to avoid, and raises the question to what degree we should be prepared to protect people from their own stupidity. It would, however, be solved by the suggestion which has been mooted several times of having an open board for the most simple introductory offers, and a more advanced locked sub board for those who had registered and could demonstrate that they understood the basics.

I agree with you on type 1.
I don't think that Martin is too stressed about type 2, as long as he's got someone on his team who understands the risks.

super_reds

hallmark wrote: »

That would be the same Tim who was incredibly rude to anyone when the mood took him (which was often), & who recommended that people caught up in the FGS debacle quickly withdrew their funds from Betfair before the bets settled?

Also the same Tim who was scathingly critical of anyone who mentioned multi-accounting then appeared a few months after he'd "gone forever" to post a list of advice, foremost among it was gnoming (I believe his expression was something like "this requires a constant stream of new accounts but we all know how to get those") or words to that effect.

We wouldn't be in this position if Tim was a Board Guide now, 100% sure and similarly PRS would not have happened. Personally didn't particularly like the chap but he knew his onions.

super_reds

darloscot wrote: »

Hard to make more than a couple of hundred???? Now now, don't tell lies! You know as well as anyone that there is £2-3k easily from main bookie sign ups, just waiting to be taken by anyone who can be bothered to read up on it, and that would give you the knowledge and float to push on and make that again in another 6 months.

People hark back to the good old days, but I started Dec 2010 and tipped over £7k profit last night after making about £35 on a risk free offer from a major UK bookie.

Surely depends on which bookies you do, Hills, Ladbrokes, Fred I would put in the risk free category. PRS, Bet 770 and a few others I wouldn't put in the risk free category.

theseagull

I really find it very surprising that Martin and or any of the mods haven't actually tried MBing. If they really live and breathe the MSE ethos it really is the simplest way to make some free easy money. Not really money saving experts if they aren't taking advantage of all the free cash being made right under their noses.

northernpunter

It is also interesting that Martin and MSE have gone very quiet on the matter.

Can we please just have some resolution on the matter so we can move forward? Otherwise this thread will just keep lumbering on....

On one side the people who either don't understand GIOL, have never used or read it, shouting it down and saying close it. Seeing the word GAMBLING and just assuming the worst. "Degenerate gamblers" I think someone called us.....even though we don't gamble every bet is laid off or dutched.

Then on the other side are the people that use GIOL, and actually understand it, as I have said before I have made a considerable amount of money from it over the last year, all through the help of people on the board, sharing information and spreadsheets, discussing strategies etc.

As I have and others have we have presented potential solutions so can we now please just make some definitive decisions on this?

Anonmouse

tobiascurious wrote: »

I am all for advantage play and low risk offers. But Martin insists he wants it to be risk free and unfortunately it isn't!! Because bookies can and do go under!! Things can and do go wrong at the exchanges!! A lot of it is low risk, hardly any of it is risk free

I hate it when people say "it is that simple", but it really is "that simple"!!

You are misunderstanding the meaning of Risk Free and trying to take it far too literally.

Any transaction you make with any company carries the risk of the company either not supplying the service/goods or that company going under. The consideration as to the solvency of a company should always be made but as per the MSE mantra that they do not comment or speculate and expect users to make their own decison as to the stability of any company.

An offer IS risk free according to the standards currently in place if you can make money regardless of the outcome of the bet and bonuses/refunds are paid as evidenced by written terms & conditions and of course assuming users have fully understood the offer and how to do it.

Getting hung up on this imaginary world where no risks exist is getting ridiculous.

Anonmouse

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

I'd say that following this consultation the rule should be "if in doubt, lock it out". Presumably there are more than enough offers that are not doubtful to make it worth keeping the board open for?

THIS THIS AND THIS AGAIN.

Was thinking this earlier and it seems pretty obvious and is in fact already the standard approach from JM at the moment if there is doubt - thread will be locked unless evidence it's risk free is presented.

Allowing JM+ any new board guides to delete threads instantly so we don't have to rely on people spam killing threads would be helpful.