Hey guys;
I wanted to bring this subject to dicussion here in the forum.
I would also like to propose that anybody that takes part on this discussion does it with an open mind. I am always eager to learn and I know many of you can lead me in the right direction or correct any mistakes I may have commited during my analysis.
When I read The General's posts on Oklahoma SportsBetting.com, the whole ordeal triggered all my alarms. It seemed to me like this new book (in operation for the last 4 months) was targeting the forum audience in a rather aggresive manner. So I reviewd their model and John and I agreed that their business model is NOT profitable. After we finished our discussion, SBR posted:
[size=-1]quote:[/size] <HR>4.24.2004 (12:52 PM CST)
OklahomaSportsBetting(SBR rating D) Refusing so far to take SBR phone calls or respond to SBR emails - Book runs a very high risk business model - At this point, SBR knows of no other bookmaker or anyone else in the industry that will vouch for them - Players funds at this operation could be at higher risk than the current SBR rating of D would indicate. <HR>
A couple of days after, I personally called Mr. Michael Montanaro, GM of OSB. The discussion prolonged for almost 1 hour and none of the issues that will be presented here were satisfactorily addressed by Mr. Montanaro. I invite Mr. Montanaro to refute my arguments and to do it publicly in this thread.
Why did SBR rate OKlahomaSportsBetting with a D?. This will be long, but I'll try to be concise:
Issue #1: Risky Bonus Structure
Allow me to quote an inserpt of OSB's bonus page:
[size=-1]quote:[/size] <HR>First Time Deposit Bonus rollover requirements:
10% = 3x play-through requirement
15% = 5x play-through requirement
20% = 8x play-through requirement
Any bonus over 20% = 10x play-through requirement <HR>
For the sake of brevity, let's disect the following structure:
15% Sign-up Bonus: 5x play-through requirement
How much theoretical percentage does a book get to have on this bonus structure? A 5% of the total rollover amount.
In this case: 5% of $5750. That equals $287.5
Now, one of the possible scenarios might look like this:
$287.5 - $150 (bonus amount) = $137.5
$137.5 = 2.3% theoretical percentage of hold.
But OSB offers a 10% rebate on losses. Let's say a customer loses $1000 in the first month; so it now turns out that OSB must give customer B $100 out of $137.5 they got from Customer A.
$137.5 - $100 = $37.5
$37.5 =
0.65% of total rollover amount.
But even then, OSB offers Referral Bonuses, up to
20% referral bonus
What if my buddy Sick Gambler is in the process of raping them as I speak? How many "bonus whores" can you find in the forums?
My point to debate is:
This bonus structure is flawed and provides no real percentage of hold to the house. Mathematically speaking that percentage of hold might very well fall under 0.5% We all have seen books with these model fail in the past.
*** This bonus structure is also combined with the following perks***
Issue #2: Percentages of hold on turnovers
At -110, the house can expect a theoretical percentage of hold of 4.54%
Bettor A bets $11,000 to win $10,000 on Team A
Bettor B bets $11,000 to win $10,000 on Team B
Total turnover for the book: $22,000
Total profit: $1000
$1000 = 4.54% of total turnover.
OSB offers -107 on Wednesdays. Total percentage of hold on a 14 cent line: 3.2%
And -105 on Fridays. Total percentage of hold on a 10 cent line: 2.3%
What if Lander decides to take OSB for a walk in the park?
The arbitraging nature of the reduced juice market is the joy of middlers and scalpers.
Issue #3: Percentages of hols on MLB
OSB offers a dime line up to -150/+160 (for what I can see in their live lines, totals included)
What's the percentage of hold on dime line -150/+160? This is an extensive discussion. I invite you all to read the followin thread by
REALITY:
The Scorecard For Bookmakers By REALITY
Issue #4: Phantom Credit End
Mr. Montanaro claimed OSB was a long established shop, with a solid credit end backing it up; yet, he was unable to find a solid credit operation to vouch for his shop.
Those of you that understand the nature of the credit business, will see how really odd this is.
Issue #5: Management lacks Knowledge
While on the phone, I pointed out the dangers of targeting the sharp forum crowd, if you do not have the square players data base to offset the action.
Mr. Montanaro said they were BIG on search engines.
"Pay-per-click?" I asked
"Yes" he said.
"Didn't the S.E. close all gambling bids on pay-per-clicks campaigns?" I asked
"I meant to say just S.E.... no pay-per-clicks" he said
"Like ORGANIC S.E.?" I asked
"Exactly" he answered
"Could you please point one keyword submitted to ANY search engine by OSB?" I asked
"I don't know of any right now" he said
SBR HAS NO INTEREST ON SEEING THIS BOOK FAIL. BUT OUR PRIMARY OBLIGATION IS TO THE PLAYERS:
AT THIS POINT IN TIME, SBR DOES NOT BELIEVE THAT OSB IS A PROFITABLE BUSINESS MODEL.
Maybe they're filthy rich and extravagant enough to just be eager to give their money away like that. But that's NOT good business... hence:
SBR Rating for OSB is D
Players funds at this operation could be at higher risk than the current SBR rating of D would indicate.
