Bookies, Tote, Exchanges

Slim said:
You would first need to agree what a "bad customer" is and both sides might have differing views and analysis. This is far from clear cut. Mergers and a long long process.
Click to expand...

The low hanging fruit as it were will be fairly easy to identify & agree on I'd say
 
Paddy had already restricted me and following the Betfair merger it took all of about 4 weeks for Betfair to send me the same e-mail, even though my activity with them had been limited during that time.

But agreed it would be low on priority, yet speaking as someone who has integrated multiple investment firms post buyouts, one of the first thing you do is pull in a union of customers to assess the scope of asset classes invested in etc. and it wouldn't surprise me if the same concept is applied to bookmakers but with the intention of understanding which legacy firm is stronger (more prevalent) in which sports etc.

I'm probably being over pessimistic to be fair, which is a sign of the current situation I guess.
 
Slim said:
It is really really difficult to integrate the operating platforms. The company is now so big that closing everyone will be very low on the priority list.
Click to expand...

Mate of mine worked on the IT integration for the Ladbrokes/Corals merger. Integrating the tech is not a walkover, but is eminently doable. You basically collapse the two operating platforms onto a common infrastructure, and run the them side-by-side. You only integrate the bits you're interested in, and the ledger/equivalent containing bad accounts, is probably one of the areas they would want to have a poke about, to be honest.
 
I've absolutely no doubt they are looking at the customer databases but I'm less cynical about this because too many customers are restricted that shouldn't be. They can now see your business across 4 accounts and can make a better judgement on your risk level.
 
In the past I worked on things in a couple of different business sectors to identify 'good' & 'bad' customers and seen first hand how it's all purely driven by the bottom line, people just get shoved through a rules based decision tree type thing and see what they're scored as at the end.

Hence my view that it's pretty much guaranteed they'll cross reference their customer lists.
 
pawras said:
In the past I worked on things in a couple of different business sectors to identify 'good' & 'bad' customers and seen first hand how it's all purely driven by the bottom line, people just get shoved through a rules based decision tree type thing and see what they're scored as at the end.

Hence my view that it's pretty much guaranteed they'll cross reference their customer lists.
Click to expand...

It's clearly not going to help customers that abuse bonuses, bet arbs, are just too good etc etc but the customers who had a heavy hand will benefit from the extra data.
 
I'm usually only part part time on this stuff but as I've now got the exacta/forecast/trifecta/tricast returns in my own setup I'm continuing with my datamining during my enforced time off.
I've also built a exacta/forecast/trifecta/tricast 'system tester' but can't say I've found anything usable yet, as such I wondered if baldy had increased the number races covered by trifectas but reduced the returns. So I looked at just flat 10 runner hcaps over time , to compare apples with apples, and it would seem it was only last year they took a dip.

Flat Hcap 10 runner Median Trifecta Odds.JPG
 
Last edited:
Back
Top