|
The site has been really fun and I made a few hundred bucks during the primaries which I mostly funneled back to Bernie but I am very very curious what will happen in the post-Trump era. There's always magic in the air when he's involved - we'll never have a "Will Biden pardon himself" market again.
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2021 14:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 01:52 |
|
|
bus hustler posted:The site has been really fun and I made a few hundred bucks during the primaries which I mostly funneled back to Bernie but I am very very curious what will happen in the post-Trump era. There's always magic in the air when he's involved - we'll never have a "Will Biden pardon himself" market again. After 2016 there were markets for the cabinet positions, who'd be the next to leave, new judges, etc. The hot areas were the weekly tweet count markets where people would actually bet on how much each account (VP, POTUS, RDT) would tweet. It was a bit of a roller coaster. Biden's admin will, uh, probably not be amenable to that sort of thing. Kinda curious where they go. Oh, here's a caveat to the voice vote thing: Voice votes (or votes by acclaim) are pass/fail votes where individual senator/rep votes aren't tallied--just the success/failure of the motion. It's literally a "whichever side the presiding officer feels was louder" type thing and only used in cases where the result would be obvious/expediency for unanimous decisions. For impeachment, there's really only one scenario where it'd be used: If they have 67+ locked in they'll use it to avoid blowback on individual GOP senators for their vote Any other vote count scenario and it would be too imprecise to accurately tally a result (and this is a trial, so they probably want to keep some accountability), especially because you'll have a simple majority likely guaranteed to vote guilty (so the ayes would sound louder regardless). So it's potentially able to be used, but it's probably not too much of a threat to mid-tier bets.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2021 16:24
|
|
|
ShadowHawk posted:On PredictIt, every bet you make is paired with someone on the other side. The house is not a bookmaker, they have no interest in how the market resolves in either direction. I understand how the trades are matched. That makes sense to me now but the last two parts I'm not comprehending his how the prices changed based on additional shares bought or how the $850 limit slightly raises the price?
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2021 17:08
|
|
|
Gabriel S. posted:I understand how the trades are matched. That makes sense to me now but the last two parts I'm not comprehending his how the prices changed based on additional shares bought or how the $850 limit slightly raises the price? Once the market is established, you can place a buy order for Yes/No shares. These can be filled by someone selling existing shares of the same Yes/No side (no new shares created) OR by someone buying the opposing value (No/Yes) and creating a new share. This moves the market up or down depending on your buy order. The 850 limit means there's only so many shares in play per person. Once a market is maxed out on people (5000 each) no new blood/cash can be injected and it tends to ossify, barring news. There's always some movement as people try to exit/do arbitrage but the opportunity for whales to do mass buys or sell-offs and pump the market is muted due to the lack of liquidity. It also keeps one person from buying enormous swaths of the market and monopolizing it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2021 17:21
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:Once the market is established, you can place a buy order for Yes/No shares. These can be filled by someone selling existing shares of the same Yes/No side (no new shares created) OR by someone buying the opposing value (No/Yes) and creating a new share. This moves the market up or down depending on your buy order. Thinking through this some more, lets go through a hypothetical Biden vs. Trump market. We have a total of fifty players on each side that each bought one .50c share. The price of either share is .50c. If another player bought 20 Biden Win Yes shares how would that change the market price? What if another player bought 850 Trump Win Yes Shares and also what if there wasn't a 850 limit but 2000? What would the pricing look like? How are the prices of shares are calculated is the piece I am not understanding. Gucci Loafers fucked around with this message at 03:31 on Jan 22, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2021 20:31
|
|
|
bus hustler posted:The site has been really fun and I made a few hundred bucks during the primaries which I mostly funneled back to Bernie but I am very very curious what will happen in the post-Trump era. There's always magic in the air when he's involved - we'll never have a "Will Biden pardon himself" market again. It'll be interesting to see how things turn out but what's also fascinating is how the markets move with emotions and headlines. The McConnell conviction vote was about ~ .15c higher earlier until announcements from Johnson, Graham and Cruz came out that they're standing behind Trump.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2021 23:34
|
|
|
https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/6986/Will-Pete-Buttigieg-be-confirmed-to-a-Cabinet-position-by-Mar-1 This one's nice because it's not like the market's on who WILL be in the cabinet position on a particular date, it pays out as soon as he's confirmed as long as it's before that date.
|
|
#
?
Jan 21, 2021 23:38
|
|
|
Gabriel S. posted:How are the pricing of shares calculated is the piece I am not understanding. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2021 03:17
|
|
|
Apologies, I was phone posting. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2021 03:30
|
|
|
Gabriel S. posted:Thinking through this some more, lets go through a hypothetical Biden vs. Trump market. We have a total of fifty players on each side that each bought one .50c share. The price of either share is .50c. If one of the share holders wanted to sell, they'd put it up for 51 cents (or a higher number!) and wait for someone to buy. That would move the price up, effectively. The price isn't calculated. The price is the price of the last transaction. So if it was 50/50 with no bids, someone puts in a sell order for 80 cents and then someone else buys it, the price is now 80 cents. Of course, there are no backlog of buy orders, so the next transaction could be 1 cent or it could be 99 cents; it's "what the market will bear" In a real market with a lot of shares/buyers, the price fluctuates up and down at the approximate likelihood of the event as judged by common thinking. It's entirely susceptible to bluffs, feints, lies in the comment section, you name it. I believe the premise of the site is a study in psychology (and to make lots and lots of cash for the people running it). So your answer is: the price of shares is entirely subjective and the list price is just the value of the most recent transaction; the real list price is what the buys/sells will allow. Of course, the final value of any share is $1.00 or zero, when the market closes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 22, 2021 07:27
|
|
|
Perfect! Now I've got it! Thanks all! Now, we just got to get some newer markets and some activity. Impeachment week is coming! 
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2021 00:24
|
|
|
The trial has been set, so now a vote is guaranteed to happen before April 29. So https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/7054/How-many-Senators-will-vote-to-convict-Donald-Trump-on-incitement-by-Apr-29 should be a fun one to watch. Lot of volatility in the brackets depending on which GOP senator is "strongly concerned" or red-hot mad. There is, however an opportunity: "50 or less" NO should be relatively safe to invest in to park some cash for a 5-8% return (at the moment). We already have a few fairly reliable GOP votes, so for 50- to be the final tally you'd need a significant chunk of dems to think Trump is an OK guy who's blameless for almost getting them killed. So...probably safe. Maybe.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2021 00:25
|
|
|
I've got the following markets open,
The trial will be interesting to watch and some of the new markets are appealing. Burr, Tills, Thune honestly probably have a much higher chance of conviction that many of would think. Thune for one has a good relationship with McConnell and doesn't want to see the Republican Party destroyed inside out by the former president but who knows how it'll turn out. I'm kicking myself for getting into McConnell's market a little too early but things are looking good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2021 00:35
|
|
|
Even the REALLY lovely dems voted to convict on the last impeachment and I'm not sure anyone new is Manchin tier lovely so yeah it's hard not seeing dems+romney as the bare minimum.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2021 00:35
|
|
|
reignonyourparade posted:Even the REALLY lovely dems voted to convict on the last impeachment and I'm not sure anyone new is Manchin tier lovely so yeah it's hard not seeing dems+romney as the bare minimum. I am thinking the next few weeks will go like this. Let's see how my predictions turn out. 1. People learn that more than just Romney will vote to convict. Middle tier lines increase. 2. Trump and his defenders give their speeches and defend the former president aggressively attacking moderate Republicans. Top tier and middle tiers decrease. They kind of already started it these weekend with Johnson, Gram, Cruz, Hawley, etc. threating if McConnell attacks the president he's against unifying the Country. Obviously, this is bullshit but Republicans.  3. Moderate Republicans don't back down, do their own speeches and rounds with evening talks shows. Bottom tier drops, top tier decreases but mid tier spikes. The tough part is estimating how many potentially defectors we've from the GOP. 4. This is the tricky one. If McConnell openly admits he's voting to impeach the president, another big scandal erupts or irrefutable evidences emerges from trial. Every tier drops but top tier spikes. Gucci Loafers fucked around with this message at 00:54 on Jan 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2021 00:51
|
|
|
things to consider re: impeachment conviction Mitch really really does not want Trump to form a Patriot Party, that is going to siphon votes from the GOP. Mitch only cares about one thing: power for the GOP. A Patriot Party threatens that. Keep an eye for any news of Trump moving to actually start a Patriot Party. If he launches it, I think it's very likely Mitch starts quietly whipping votes to convict. Removing Trump's ability to run for office in 24 won't completely deflate a Patriot Party but it will significantly weaken it. I think there are a fair number of GOPers considering voting yes on conviction, more than are being reported in the media. They're just being quiet because it would look very bad to the base to muse openly about conviction before the trial has even begun. I think there are a few who will do a Susan Collins and make a big show of considering all the evidence, then vote to convict. I think there's a lot of really ugly poo poo about the capitol storming we haven't seen and some of that will come out in the trial. edit: also, https://twitter.com/CNN/status/1352759955976290305 If you wanted to squeeze a few pennies out of the confirmation markets, quite a few of them might wrap up in the next couple weeks. Fritz the Horse fucked around with this message at 01:12 on Jan 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2021 01:07
|
|
|
word of advice, you don't want to be hunting pennies in most of the confirmation markets. for those nominees who already have hearings lined up, ok, sure. but the rest, absolutely do not hunt for pennies in them. you want to short them if anything.
abelwingnut fucked around with this message at 01:20 on Jan 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2021 01:18
|
|
|
My thoughts as well but it doesn't look like much will happen with this market for the next two weeks unfortunately. That said, when I look at a market and see something like 6.4M Shares traded does this mean there's $6,400,000.00 Million Dollars being bet?  
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2021 01:21
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:I've got the following markets open, Are you a yes or no on Newsom recall? I didn't think they had a prayer, but then the Secretary of State gave them 4 more months to collect signatures, GOP groups started throwing money at it, and the vaccine rollout is a complete fiasco. I think the vaccine issue might get enough moderates and low info people involved that the recall will get there.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2021 01:32
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:My thoughts as well but it doesn't look like much will happen with this market for the next two weeks unfortunately. Its shares traded back and forth during the life of the market, and share price can be as low as 1 cent or as high as 99 cents.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2021 01:34
|
|
|
Crosby B. Alfred posted:That said, when I look at a market and see something like 6.4M Shares traded does this mean there's $6,400,000.00 Million Dollars being bet? Like in theory you and I create 100 yes and 100 no share by putting in a total of 100 dollars, and then those same 200 shares could just get traded millions of times. So if people are buying and selling yes shares for a price oscillating between 1 and 2 cents, but no one's bidding for 98/99 cent no shares, then you can get an enormous amount of share volume without much money moving around, and even less money depending on the actual outcome.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2021 01:37
|
|
|
In theory a market like that could get up to 170 million dollars being traded around, but that would be in a scenario where every contract was at 50/50 and every single trader was maxing out, and also nobody was betting in multiple no markets to get negative risk. That's pretty "spherical cow in a vacuum" territory.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2021 01:52
|
|
|
coronaball posted:Are you a yes or no on Newsom recall? I didn't think they had a prayer, but then the Secretary of State gave them 4 more months to collect signatures, GOP groups started throwing money at it, and the vaccine rollout is a complete fiasco. I think the vaccine issue might get enough moderates and low info people involved that the recall will get there. Leaning towards yes but it is a tough call. They probably have around around 750k valid signatures at this point and have another 8 weeks to get another 750k. I think it's doable but I wonder without Trump in office, on the twitter, on television riling everyone up, etc. will that still motivate Californian Republicans to recall Newsom? Especially when Kevin McCarthy's ratings and the rest of the GOP is in the dump?  reignonyourparade posted:In theory a market like that could get up to 170 million dollars being traded around, but that would be in a scenario where every contract was at 50/50 and every single trader was maxing out, and also nobody was betting in multiple no markets to get negative risk. That's pretty "spherical cow in a vacuum" territory. That's insane. Do they share any data or there any good estimates how much was gambled away on election night?
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2021 02:02
|
|
|
I just found the place where it tells you how many shares exist in a market, with 2,356,819 shares in the conviction votes market which is probably about a million dollars tied up in that one market after accounting for multiple no shares being less investment, not more.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2021 04:16
|
|
|
Gah, loving tax documents arrived.
|
|
#
?
Jan 23, 2021 06:15
|
|
|
My tax docs showed up also, and they're, well, wrong. The income is in the wrong box and I am not getting the same math. I could be dumb/wrong myself here, however I see some people saying they got follow up emails with statements of corrections to be issued. I also see some people on Twitter talking to PI who says emails were sent out. I have not gotten a follow up email yet. I'd inspect whatever you get for errors.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 01:40
|
|
|
How is everyone managing their trades day to day? I am trying to create a Twitter List that keeps track of breaking news, Current Politicians and some kind of Political Wonk list. I think that'd be way more reliable to make decisions vs. anything in the comment section.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 02:39
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:After 2016 there were markets for the cabinet positions, who'd be the next to leave, new judges, etc. The hot areas were the weekly tweet count markets where people would actually bet on how much each account (VP, POTUS, RDT) would tweet. It was a bit of a roller coaster. note that the tweet markets got banned because some rear end in a top hat threatened to shoot yang's campaign staff if he tweeted too often / not often enough
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2021 02:52
|
|
|
extremely normal timeline we live in
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2021 02:15
|
|
|
i mean in general outside of trump the fact that staffers control the tweets of these people and could super easily manipulate those markets for money given they are often fairly low paid, it's not a bad decision. nobody is going to hold up a cabinet confirmation hearing but "# of tweets sent by a candidate not named Trump" is not a fully random or fair market.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2021 14:30
|
|
|
bus hustler posted:i mean in general outside of trump the fact that staffers control the tweets of these people and could super easily manipulate those markets for money given they are often fairly low paid, it's not a bad decision. rumor has it AOC was playing her own market but there's no confirmation and it could just be salty bettors
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2021 17:26
|
|
|
Tunicate posted:rumor has it AOC was playing her own market but there's no confirmation and it could just be salty bettors guess we'll find out if she runs for president and releases 10 years of tax returns  cant wait to bet on the "will it turn out that AOC was playing her own market" market with ya'll
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2021 23:43
|
|
|
Tunicate posted:rumor has it AOC was playing her own market but there's no confirmation and it could just be salty bettors For half a brunch worth of fundraising you can fund a couple staffer's accounts with enough cash to buy up half the order book and raise your PredictIt odds from 1% to 30%
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2021 23:59
|
|
|
ShadowHawk posted:The more spicy rumors were that campaigns were ordering mass buys of their candidates to make them look more viable than they really were. By campaign cash standards it's actually relatively cheap to move the PredictIt markets, especially obscure ones. I can't imagine a single race where this would make a difference among voters or the media for that matter. Especially an obscure race meaning anything less than the presidential or special election Senate like Georgia this year. I could see a few staffers doing this on their own, betting based on internal polling, but as a campaign strategy, especially where small-ish races are concerned, spending money on that would border on malpractice. What would be the strategy for this besides media buzz?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2021 03:32
|
|
|
Bloomberg buys were very suspicious and he was burning money
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2021 03:44
|
|
|
Mr. Toodles posted:What would be the strategy for this besides media buzz?
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2021 06:16
|
|
|
bloomberg and yang were the only real suspects
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2021 00:22
|
|
|
abelwingnut posted:word of advice, you don't want to be hunting pennies in most of the confirmation markets. for those nominees who already have hearings lined up, ok, sure. but the rest, absolutely do not hunt for pennies in them. you want to short them if anything. hope you listened!
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 02:11
|
|
|
wasn't there a market for whether trump would finish his first term, and where the hell is the market for whether biden will
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 02:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 01:52 |
|
|
slicing up eyeballs posted:wasn't there a market for whether trump would finish his first term, and where the hell is the market for whether biden will The motivation driving that was whether trump would be impeached, get bored and resign, etc. Not that he would die--PI walks a fine line, but basically anything "because death" is verboten to be bet on. If Biden is ever in legal jeopardy I'm sure the question will be raised, but right now the only plausible motivation is that he's medically unable to continue, and that's not particularly kosher for PI to invite speculation on.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 17:06
|
|