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

waptext

It is money saving experts

nicknameless

I'm a long time lurker on MSE generally and recent active member (6 months or so) due to GIOL.

Prior to reading and using GIOL;

money saved via MSE = a few hundred pounds, give or take.

Post reading and employing the techniques used in the GIOL;

money made via MSE = several thousand pounds in less than 6 months.

As other posters have alluded to, this is not about money, or risk, as it would be an absolute no brainer to keep the forum open if that were truly the case. Rather this smacks of a government consultation exercise in its manner and almost certain outcome, with a convenient smokescreen of risk and shifting focus of GIOL content thrown in for good measure. Classic political manouvre, prior to a pre-determined course of action.

What a shame for users of MSE, particularly those who seriously might need some extra income in these difficult times. Ironically it should be the non-GIOL community of MSE that should be most up in arms, as they really could benefit from this.

Good PR move for someone though. Can't we just call it for what it is and do without the charades?

SomethingWitty_2

sparklefrog wrote: »

It would be a shame to see this board go. I have only recently started MB and this board has been a huge help and a great resource. I have visited MSE for a few years on or off and was aware of this board but didn't really take much notice due to the huge warnings on the forum header, so they do work at warning people off.
I am kicking myself I never looked into this earlier. After spending the last year cutting my budget to the bone and doing surverys(what a waste of time) ebaying and looking for discounts etc etc I have made more in the last few weeks than I made last year. Its a godsend.
There are enough warnings in the forum about risks involved (human error) .But I am strictly doing simple Match bets as I feel too new to attempt what ifs, arbs, dutches etc but I would hope the board would still be here to help me along when I feel ready to attempt these if I so choose too.
We are all adults here and nothing in life is risk free.
MB isnt for everyone, but in other parts of this site you discuss stoozing etc, whats to stop people opening new credit cards to stooze but then running up debts on them and their old cards, because the temptation is there if they have the credit cards when times are hard??
Your cant legislate against stupid but you can reduce the risks by fully explaining pros and cons and the GIOL board does that adequately.

Your post sums up my experiences and what I think perfectly, I wish I had seen it before posting my own rather wordy analysis - this sums it up. :T

Keep GIOL!

Former_MSE_Dan

Red_Joker wrote: »

Looks to me like MSE Martin has already decided to close GIOL and this consultation is a sham. Everyone should remember that the value of a forum is in its posters. We could all walk out whenever we like and set up a 'GIOL in exile' elsewhere and leave Martin to wring his hands over his 'Won't somebody please think of the children?' dilemma.

We shouldn't be thinking 'What have we done wrong? How can we convince MSE to keep GIOL open?' We should be thinking 'Would another forum value us more and would they do a better job of dealing with the trolls who attack us?' The answers to those questions are Yes and Yes.

Hi RedJoker,

This absolutely is a consultation, for all of the reasons explained in detail on the blog.

Many sites wouldn't involve users in decisions such as this - but we 100% believe it is the right thing to do so, so we have.

Dan

BGB

The rationale of those advocating shutting the board seems to be entirely to do with PRS. I didn't use the board then and I have never seen an offer like this in the 6 months I've used the board, it was in my view a one-off.

The so-called 'specialist spreadsheets' are given away for nothing by posters and I really don't see how the risk of error or level of complexity is any worse than stoozing which is an MSE staple. Furthermore, these more complicated would only be taken on by someone after completing the far more lucrative introductory offers.

My suggestion would be that offers are restricted to bookmakers who are of good standing (i.e. nothing lower than a B- rating on SBR). This would immediately reduce the risk of losing money in a bookmaker that goes bust to a negligible level.

In terms of their being no expert at MSE on matched betting. Surely that in itself is an issue. Do you all get so well paid that you don't need to supplement your income?

It seems far too much of a coincidence that this sudden growth in complaints is at the same time that TGT are making a concerted push to capture MSE posters/readers and due to concern amongst members that this free and open service is compromising their offers.

Finally, just to reiterate what a number of other posters have said. This board is without doubt more profitable than all the orthers no doubt combined and it would be a shame to take the opportunity of learning about matched betting from others.

jaydeeuk1

Sportsbookreview, Rpoints and TGT will be popping the champagne at the thought of this place closing

IMO, its done its job. The lines between risk free and low risk (ie, gambling) have become blurred to many people as offers become less lucrative and the urge to make as much cash as possible kicks in. The recent events of people losing large amounts of cash haven't helped either.

What if MSE were to create a spin off site just for matched betting, but unrelated to 'money saving expert' and without the warnings. This way the wealth of information is kept, Martin can keep any risky boards off the site, the users still get to stay together, the board will be easier to police for low risk/risk free offers. Even if MSE were to sell the content, I'm sure there would be a willing buyer for all the info!

meher

May be the problem is with the inadvertent projection of it as "gambling introductory" offer loopholes board? May be a change in name would be a start to downsize it? The more disclaimers and the more significance it is given to protect the nature of the board would only empasise peoples perceptions that it is a somewhat specialist area although the rest of us know the history of its evolvement even before the team realised. So it is perfectly valid dilemma because it might be seen as being socially irresponsible thing to let it run without having a good look into issues and the pattern of problems being raised.

blades123

Smeagal wrote: »

Agreed, when I started in 2006 the offers where just bet x get x free bet, nice and simple and as risk free as you are going to get, nowadays with there being very few of those offers about you get a lot of +EV offers and 'what if' type offers.

Over the long term you'll make money but not really what the board was set up for originally.

There are a number of mis-conceptions which people are posting to try and close this site down. I think one was from earlier today which has been deleted. You said arbing wan't risk free. How is arbing not risk free? Ain't that the point of match betting i.e to find arbs?

Secondly, this is not gambling. We do not gamble and will never do. If people bothered to read the threads on how to Match bet, they will see that at any point, we do not gamble and if you follow the rules then you should never gamble. Why place a bet which could easily lose when you can match bet and make money.

Finally, if you followed the rules, you should be ignoring offers that are. +ev where you can lose money. The offers which are "what-if" and "stake refunded if someone scores" are risk free. If you follow the spreadsheets (making sure you understand them first) then you can place the correct bets / lays with out losing money. They should be posted on here and it is made very clear to people by other posters what they should be doing i.e wait for team news. If there if no way of locking profit, then don't do the lads offer.

woodcroft

I certainly agree with the problematic word 'Gambling' in the title. Perhaps 'Bookmakers' instead?

Back in 2005 when I first came to MSE (I can't remember my old login ) I wouldn't have even popped in for a look what with that word there.

Could have been 50k+ up by now!

jaydeeuk1

BGB wrote: »

The rationale of those advocating shutting the board seems to be entirely to do with PRS. I didn't use the board then and I have never seen an offer like this in the 6 months I've used the board, it was in my view a one-off.

What about the first goal scorer event a few years ago? Many users £1000's down - luckily for them betfair had to foot the bill, but there was a hell of a lot of worry and stress that evening.

The so-called 'specialist spreadsheets' are given away for nothing by posters and I really don't see how the risk of error or level of complexity is any worse than stoozing which is an MSE staple. Furthermore, these more complicated would only be taken on by someone after completing the far more lucrative introductory offers.

Nothing like stoozing imo, which deals with regulated, financially backed and (most of the time!) completely safe institutions. The only possible !!!! up is you forgetting to pay off and having a months interest added. If a load of MSE'ers piled in to an Afghanistani bookmaker and posted about quick payouts and 100% bonuses, would you go in still? Yeah, you might be lucky and get in / out (like betafterbet) before it falls apart, or you might get caught. And MSE giol is so big nowadays, you can't compare the site to how it was in 2008/2009. If 10000 MSE'ers start stoozing, credit card comp's won't bad an eyelid. If 10000 MSE'ers piled in to a small bookmaker, like PRS, the people at the bottom of the pyramid will find that the T's and C's have been altered leaving them out of pocket, or worse there's no money to pay them with...

My suggestion would be that offers are restricted to bookmakers who are of good standing (i.e. nothing lower than a B- rating on SBR). This would immediately reduce the risk of losing money in a bookmaker that goes bust to a negligible level.

SBR is REACTIVE not PROACTIVE - take beted for example!!!

............