Interested?

To: [A bunch of hedge funds]
Subject: Arbitrage Investment

Greetings: I am professional sports arbitrageur. I am investigating the formation of my own offshore hedge fund that would fund my arbitrage activities, and I thought I would concurrently contact exisiting hedge funds to see if they would be interested in investing in this fantastic, risk free concept, saving me the time, effort and expense of establishing my own fund.

I am engaged in the practice of sports arbitrage, that is, simulataneous wagering on both sides of a sporting event when a market inefficency occurs and the two seperate bookmakers set the wager lines such that a guranteed profit can be made by this simultaneous wager. The outcome of the match is irrelevant, as the profit is made because the books set the odds differently. There is nothing illegal about it (in every country in the world, except the USA; therefore, the fund and it’s operation would be domiciled offshore) – it’s a perfectly legitimate way to take advantage of the high number of sports bookmakers in the world while making a guaranteed profit. I have designed a proprietary system for instant review of over 100 online bookmakers and recognition of any and all arbitrage opportunities; these opportunities usually exist for only a few minutes, so immediate recognition and action on the arbitrage is required.

I would envision the fund having a cap of probably $1-2 million US. Any more than that and I would start running into problems making sure the bookmakers would accept my wagers. This money would be spread across at least 50 bookmakers. I should have no trouble returning at least 4% per month (48% per year) to my investors with no real risk, after my fees and expenses. I would hope to be able to get closer to returning 6% per month (72% per year), but the compelling thing to remember is – there is no risk. No money is wagered/invested, until the existence of an arbitrage opportunity occurs, rendering the outcome of the sporting event irrelevant.

I am not aware of what specific criteria your fund has, but from what I can tell, a $1-2 million investment in a concept like this that has no risk and returns nearly 50% per year would be a wise investment. Please let me know if you would like to discuss this further. Email or call anytime.

Conversely, if you are not interested, would you mind telling me why not? Is it too small of an investment for your fund? Does this concept not seem believeable to you? Any input would be helpful?

130 comments (hidden to protect delicate sensibilities)
Show all comments ↓

Comments (130)

  1. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 6:54 PM

    could work, too small

    -guy who has thought of this and abandoned sports betting models for more hedgefundy ones

  2. Posted by Anonymous | June 27, 2011 at 6:57 PM

    He’s basically a bookie who’s looking for new, wealthy, clients.

  3. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 6:57 PM

    I’m in.  Sign me up.

    –Gary Foster

  4. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 6:59 PM

    How many times can he say “no risk” in a single email?  

  5. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 7:00 PM

    not sure why you included this story?  looks like a typical hedge fund marketing presentation to me except he forgot to say 2 & 20.  i’d probably give him money over 90% of the harvard & yale lads with no socks and loafers up in ny

  6. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 7:02 PM

    because it’s amusing?

  7. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 7:02 PM

    let’s see…because it’s NOT a typical hedge fund presentation? any other brain busters?

  8. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 7:04 PM

    I like the sound of this. Risk free, you say? Guaranteed profits? I’d like to invest in this strategy, no questions asked.

    – Fred Wilpon

  9. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 7:05 PM

    did you eat a lot of paint chips as a kid?

  10. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 7:05 PM

    knock knock…who’s there…scarcasm…sarcasm who?  sarcasm who?  i don’t get it.

  11. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 7:06 PM

    totally agree. this is basically a carbon copy of my pitch, except I usually say “no risk” at least 5 more times.

    -SAC

    (PS: in case it wasn’t abundantly clear…you’re an idiot.)

  12. Posted by Novak Djokovic | June 27, 2011 at 7:06 PM

    If you’re going to cover tennis, please call me.

  13. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 7:07 PM

    Is that you, Nails?

  14. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 7:11 PM

    This kid never remembered Porter’s Five Forces.  He forgot that there are no barriers to entry on this idea.  Any quant out there can set up a spreadsheet or a program that links to all the bookies, and then spits out the “arbitrage.”

  15. Posted by MM | June 27, 2011 at 7:12 PM

    I already tried this. Al Pacino screwed me up before I could get going.

    Matthew McConaughey

  16. Posted by Texashedge | June 27, 2011 at 7:16 PM

    This actually wouldn’t be a terrible idea if it weren’t for, you know, the vig.

  17. Posted by WallStreetFatCat | June 27, 2011 at 7:20 PM

    When I put all of my money into mortgage backed securities in 2006 all of the guys at lehman told me they were risk free too… I think they forgot to mention that their model assumed that housing prices would never go down.

  18. Posted by HFguy | June 27, 2011 at 7:24 PM

    better than most shit i see everyday. only thing he forgot is the initial 100000 – 200000 to set up the firm that would be a 10% drag. and too small. 

  19. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 7:28 PM

    no

  20. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 7:28 PM

    no

  21. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 7:30 PM

    Is this like writing insurance coverage on loans that cannot possibly fail?  If so,where do I send my check?

  22. Posted by Mknuckles | June 27, 2011 at 7:34 PM

    “I should have no trouble returning at least 4% per month (48% per year)”

    Interesting math.

  23. Posted by Confucius | June 27, 2011 at 7:39 PM

    Total disregard for counterparty risk = green shoots

  24. Posted by Rational | June 27, 2011 at 7:40 PM

    Right, it’s also a snap to get the online bookies to send you a check for your winnings, so at least that isn’t an issue

  25. Posted by in love with pmco avatar | June 27, 2011 at 7:40 PM

    i am sure a few “families” will have issue with his new business venture

  26. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 7:44 PM

    Only suckers reinvest profits

  27. Posted by Complete fucking idiot | June 27, 2011 at 7:44 PM

    Hahahahahahahahaha

  28. Posted by AIG Quant | June 27, 2011 at 7:45 PM

    I caught it it too.  4 * 13 = ~ 50.  Idiot.

  29. Posted by Love Bean | June 27, 2011 at 7:49 PM

    I am engaged in the practice of Beanie Baby arbitrage, that is, simulataneous wagering on both sides of a Beanie Baby when a market inefficency occurs and the two seperate Ebay bidder set the wager lines such that a guranteed profit can be made by this simultaneous wager. The outcome of the match is irrelevant, as the profit is made because the bids set the odds differently. There is nothing illegal about it (in every country in the world, except the USA; therefore, the fund and it’s operation would be domiciled offshore) – it’s a perfectly legitimate way to take advantage of the high number of Beanie Babies listed in the world while making a guaranteed profit. I have designed a proprietary system for instant review of over 100 online bidder and sellers of any and all arbitrage opportunities; these opportunities usually exist for only a few minutes, so immediate recognition and action on the arbitrage is required.  I would envision the fund having a cap of probably $1-2 million US. Any more than that and I would start running into problems making sure the sellers would accept my wagers. This money would be spread across at least 50 bids. I should have no trouble returning at least 4% per month (48% per year) to my investors with no real risk, after my fees and expenses. I would hope to be able to get closer to returning 6% per month (72% per year), but the compelling thing to remember is – there is no risk. No money is wagered/invested, until the existence of an arbitrage opportunity occurs, rendering the outcome of the sporting event irrelevant.  I am not aware of what specific criteria your fund has, but from what I can tell, a $1-2 million investment in a concept like this that has no risk and returns nearly 50% per year would be a wise investment. Please let me know if you would like to discuss this further. Email or call anytime. Conversely, if you are not interested, would you mind telling me why not? Is it too small of an investment for your fund? Does this concept not seem believeable to you? Do you just hate Beanie Babies? Any input would be helpful? -Karl MaloneBeanie Baby Arbitror

  30. Posted by DownWithOPM | June 27, 2011 at 7:50 PM

    Yes, yes, and same.

  31. Posted by DownWithOPM | June 27, 2011 at 7:51 PM

    Fail.

  32. Posted by DownWithOPM | June 27, 2011 at 7:52 PM

    In places like the UK and Germany they’ll send you a bank wire same-day. Hence the repeated references to ‘offshore.’

    I know, I know, Ireland’s not a real country. But think of the hooker parties we can have as the biggest sports-betting arb fund in all of GERMANY!

    [Wait till you see the girls with the cerulean bracelets]

  33. Posted by Gues | June 27, 2011 at 7:53 PM

    1-2 million, really?

    that’s less than what Phil spends in grooming products for me each year

    – Sent from Wilbur´s IPAD

  34. Posted by Roomykhan | June 27, 2011 at 7:53 PM

    too long, didnt even get past fucking engaged…

  35. Posted by Joey55 | June 27, 2011 at 7:54 PM

    this is far from risk free.  he has credit exposure to a bunch of dodgy offshore gambling sites and one default would blow out years of money made on the small spreads that these trades would pick up.  bad idea.

  36. Posted by Anonymous | June 27, 2011 at 7:54 PM

    Do bookies provide FIX feeds?

  37. Posted by DownWithOPM | June 27, 2011 at 7:55 PM

    Except the complete opposite. Cf. Mark Cuban being pitched and pitching the same idea years ago. It works, it just doesn’t scale.

  38. Posted by Brian1284 | June 27, 2011 at 7:56 PM

    So his strategy is to bet against Wilpon and the Mets.  84 games left in the season and a simple mix of some money lines and run lines would give you at least a 48% return.  No way the mets go over .500 for the rest of the season.

  39. Posted by Cliff ASSness | June 27, 2011 at 7:56 PM

    yes, but you need to incorporate both value AND momentum into your model.  and talk a lot about using common sense and not just math…that’s how it’s done

  40. Posted by Cosmo | June 27, 2011 at 7:56 PM

    It can’t be done Newman.  I’ve worked the numbers and there’s no way it can be done.  Forget it.

  41. Posted by L3X_Luthor | June 27, 2011 at 7:57 PM

    Just wait until I start arbitraging different wholesale prices for Light^2 and GPS data transmission.

  42. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 7:57 PM

    “this is far from risk free.”

    get out of town.

  43. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 7:58 PM

    +1

  44. Posted by Moody's Summer Intern Analyst | June 27, 2011 at 8:05 PM

    You’re doing it backwards.  He started with 48 and divided by 12, of course.

  45. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 8:06 PM

    not enough, other than that I have no concerns.

  46. Posted by ahahah | June 27, 2011 at 8:07 PM

    Not too mention the fact that he’s asking investors to give him cash that he’ll deposit in an offshore bank account, that he controls, which he may or may not use to gamble on sports….

  47. Posted by Anonymous | June 27, 2011 at 8:11 PM

    cf LAD LN [equity] — the bookies are major, legitimate companies in places like Britain: you’re not dealing with Vinnie and Big Al from Bensonhurst.

    (edit- this was meant to be in response to Rational)

  48. Posted by Chuddy | June 27, 2011 at 8:20 PM

    This passes our due diligence test……..where do we wire the funds?

    ~ The Wilpons

  49. Posted by Swallow my goo | June 27, 2011 at 8:21 PM

    Can I get $20 on the Rays tonight?
    Thanks,

    ~ Nails

  50. Posted by guest | June 27, 2011 at 8:21 PM

    Have you read any of our investor presentations?

    – UBS VP of Investor Relations

  51. Posted by guest | June 27, 2011 at 8:23 PM

    PS can we scale it to about 100M instead?  I have to pay off some jackass in 3 years.  Thx!  

  52. Posted by guest | June 27, 2011 at 8:23 PM

    c/o Joe Casano
    Greenwich, CT

  53. Posted by guest | June 27, 2011 at 8:25 PM

    You’re hired!

    – UBS risk management

  54. Posted by Les Grossman | June 27, 2011 at 8:26 PM

    Texashedge, f-face. First, take a big step back… and literally, F YOUR OWN FACE

  55. Posted by 25th Hour Trader | June 27, 2011 at 8:28 PM

    Disclaimer: Instead of cash, we intend to pay our investors “in kind” and by “in kind” we mean assorted sports memorabilia such as bobble heads, jockstraps, etc.

    P. Falcone, Chief Risk Officer
    Two For The Money, LLC

  56. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 8:29 PM

    I am pretty sure I know who this is.

  57. Posted by Texashedge | June 27, 2011 at 8:31 PM

    You’re allowed to say fuck here, Les

  58. Posted by Lord Humongous | June 27, 2011 at 8:39 PM

    Is that you Bovery?

    – guy who would like his money back someday

  59. Posted by Lord Humongous | June 27, 2011 at 8:39 PM

    Is that you Bovery?

    – guy who would like his money back someday

  60. Posted by Jim Bob | June 27, 2011 at 8:42 PM

    That’s what she said.

  61. Posted by Jim Bob | June 27, 2011 at 8:42 PM

    That’s what she said.

  62. Posted by Fund McFundson | June 27, 2011 at 8:45 PM

    No thank you.

    -a bunch of hedge funds

  63. Posted by Fund McFundson | June 27, 2011 at 8:45 PM

    No thank you.

    -a bunch of hedge funds

  64. Posted by AAAardvark1 Trading | June 27, 2011 at 8:53 PM

    Greetings,
    I arbitrage stock options, and recently, I discovered that the same options are traded at DIFFERENT EXCHANGES at the same time!  (Shhhhhh!). And the guys in New York don’t realize that the guys in Chicago are doing the same things at different prices and vice-versa (dummies) so I am raising all the $$ I can toreallystart tradingthesethingsalot tomaketonsof$$$$

    Send checks here:
     214 S. Canal St.  Unit 328
    Chicago Il  60605

  65. Posted by AAAardvark1 Trading | June 27, 2011 at 8:53 PM

    Greetings,
    I arbitrage stock options, and recently, I discovered that the same options are traded at DIFFERENT EXCHANGES at the same time!  (Shhhhhh!). And the guys in New York don’t realize that the guys in Chicago are doing the same things at different prices and vice-versa (dummies) so I am raising all the $$ I can toreallystart tradingthesethingsalot tomaketonsof$$$$

    Send checks here:
     214 S. Canal St.  Unit 328
    Chicago Il  60605

  66. Posted by RU Kidding Me? | June 27, 2011 at 9:09 PM

    Is everyone high today on this board? What the fuck kind of comments are these? REALLY? THIS MIGHT NOT BE A GOOD INVESTMENT? Do you think Bess put this story up here because it really is a hot tip?

  67. Posted by RU Kidding Me? | June 27, 2011 at 9:09 PM

    Is everyone high today on this board? What the fuck kind of comments are these? REALLY? THIS MIGHT NOT BE A GOOD INVESTMENT? Do you think Bess put this story up here because it really is a hot tip?

  68. Posted by ExtraOrdinaryPopularDelusions | June 27, 2011 at 9:11 PM

    Obvious scam. Everyone knows a street and a canal are two different things.

    UBS Director

  69. Posted by ExtraOrdinaryPopularDelusions | June 27, 2011 at 9:11 PM

    Obvious scam. Everyone knows a street and a canal are two different things.

    UBS Director

  70. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 9:23 PM

    So am I.

    –Pete Rose

  71. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 9:23 PM

    So am I.

    –Pete Rose

  72. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 9:26 PM

    Look who made it to class today!

  73. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 9:26 PM

    Look who made it to class today!

  74. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 9:30 PM

    Enhance

  75. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 9:30 PM

    Enhance

  76. Posted by Anonymous | June 27, 2011 at 9:36 PM

    Seems like a gig for STAR…beep…boop…trrr…beep.  I hope he sent his email to those guys. They would be the right size for this too.

  77. Posted by Anonymous | June 27, 2011 at 9:36 PM

    Seems like a gig for STAR…beep…boop…trrr…beep.  I hope he sent his email to those guys. They would be the right size for this too.

  78. Posted by Series 7 | June 27, 2011 at 9:36 PM

    Pretty sure you’re not allowed to promise returns and advertise things as risk free.  Not to mention, keeping an acquatic mammal, for domestic you know, within the city limit, that ain’t legal either.

  79. Posted by Series 7 | June 27, 2011 at 9:36 PM

    Pretty sure you’re not allowed to promise returns and advertise things as risk free.  Not to mention, keeping an acquatic mammal, for domestic you know, within the city limit, that ain’t legal either.

  80. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 9:43 PM

    Drinking Game!

  81. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 9:43 PM

    Drinking Game!

  82. Posted by Jimmy | June 27, 2011 at 9:51 PM

    I am pretty sure selling nickel SPX puts is at max margin is a better and more scalable strategy.

  83. Posted by Jimmy | June 27, 2011 at 9:51 PM

    I am pretty sure selling nickel SPX puts is at max margin is a better and more scalable strategy.

  84. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 10:27 PM

    counterparty credit risk ! what happens when a bookie comes to break your legs?

  85. Posted by Guest | June 27, 2011 at 10:27 PM

    counterparty credit risk ! what happens when a bookie comes to break your legs?

  86. Posted by Shawn | June 27, 2011 at 10:36 PM

    Where was this e-mail sent from? 1998?

    –Guy who knows all the sweet sports arbs disappeared ten years ago

  87. Posted by Series 63 | June 27, 2011 at 10:54 PM

    I’m pretty sure that you were referring to me.

  88. Posted by Series 63 | June 27, 2011 at 10:54 PM

    I’m pretty sure that you were referring to me.

  89. Posted by Bored quant | June 28, 2011 at 12:31 AM

    someone tell him that 1.04^12=1.601

    which is a 60% return per year.

    stupidity, modesty, and dangerous overconfidence. COUNT ME IN.

  90. Posted by Bored quant | June 28, 2011 at 12:31 AM

    someone tell him that 1.04^12=1.601

    which is a 60% return per year.

    stupidity, modesty, and dangerous overconfidence. COUNT ME IN.

  91. Posted by Guest | June 28, 2011 at 2:31 AM

    Shut the fuck up, Donny

  92. Posted by Guest | June 28, 2011 at 2:31 AM

    Shut the fuck up, Donny

  93. Posted by guest | June 28, 2011 at 2:39 AM

    I will say that I have used this concept many times using various online sites and you CAN turn a profit betting this way without a doubt.

    But with that being said, this type of situation where you can guarantee profit mostly arises for props, and most books have extremely low limits on props.

    This is coming from a guy who used to have 15 different accounts (between me and two friends) spread across the same network in order to exceed the betting limits. You are suggesting all of this under one name. It just isn’t going to work out.

  94. Posted by guest | June 28, 2011 at 2:39 AM

    I will say that I have used this concept many times using various online sites and you CAN turn a profit betting this way without a doubt.

    But with that being said, this type of situation where you can guarantee profit mostly arises for props, and most books have extremely low limits on props.

    This is coming from a guy who used to have 15 different accounts (between me and two friends) spread across the same network in order to exceed the betting limits. You are suggesting all of this under one name. It just isn’t going to work out.

  95. Posted by Wilshire Consulting | June 28, 2011 at 12:46 PM

    Interesting first analysis.  Do you have an updated CV?

  96. Posted by Wilshire Consulting | June 28, 2011 at 12:46 PM

    Interesting first analysis.  Do you have an updated CV?

  97. Posted by Wilshire Consulting | June 28, 2011 at 12:46 PM

    Interesting first analysis.  Do you have an updated CV?

  98. Posted by Wilshire Consulting | June 28, 2011 at 12:46 PM

    Interesting first analysis.  Do you have an updated CV?

  99. Posted by DownWithOPM | June 28, 2011 at 2:27 PM

    Completely false and idiotic. Keep pretending up there in Wilton.

  100. Posted by DownWithOPM | June 28, 2011 at 2:27 PM

    Completely false and idiotic. Keep pretending up there in Wilton.

  101. Posted by DownWithOPM | June 28, 2011 at 2:27 PM

    Completely false and idiotic. Keep pretending up there in Wilton.

  102. Posted by DownWithOPM | June 28, 2011 at 2:27 PM

    Completely false and idiotic. Keep pretending up there in Wilton.

  103. Posted by DownWithOPM | June 28, 2011 at 2:27 PM

    Completely false and idiotic. Keep pretending up there in Wilton.

  104. Posted by Guest | June 28, 2011 at 2:28 PM

    Interesting. What’s your home address again?

    Vinnie (Not your cousin)

  105. Posted by Guest | June 28, 2011 at 2:28 PM

    Interesting. What’s your home address again?

    Vinnie (Not your cousin)

  106. Posted by Guest | June 28, 2011 at 2:28 PM

    Interesting. What’s your home address again?

    Vinnie (Not your cousin)

  107. Posted by Guest | June 28, 2011 at 2:28 PM

    Interesting. What’s your home address again?

    Vinnie (Not your cousin)

  108. Posted by Guest | June 28, 2011 at 2:28 PM

    Interesting. What’s your home address again?

    Vinnie (Not your cousin)

  109. Posted by Guest | June 28, 2011 at 2:28 PM

    Interesting. What’s your home address again?

    Vinnie (Not your cousin)

  110. Posted by Guest | June 28, 2011 at 2:28 PM

    Interesting. What’s your home address again?

    Vinnie (Not your cousin)

  111. Posted by L3X_Luthor | June 28, 2011 at 2:30 PM

    Profits don’t come mostly from props. Like the flash traders, they come from taking the better price as the market moves. On big events each major book will take 50-100k or more, M casino says they’ll take 100-500k in live bets [run by Cantor]. Plus you have the various signup and deposit bonuses.

    15 acc’ts spread among 3 guys is ludicrously, laughably low. That’s like a HF mgr saying he talks to a whole five guys on Wall St to trade stocks and bond and FX.

    Try 40-50 per next time…whenever you get out of HS.

  112. Posted by L3X_Luthor | June 28, 2011 at 2:30 PM

    Profits don’t come mostly from props. Like the flash traders, they come from taking the better price as the market moves. On big events each major book will take 50-100k or more, M casino says they’ll take 100-500k in live bets [run by Cantor]. Plus you have the various signup and deposit bonuses.

    15 acc’ts spread among 3 guys is ludicrously, laughably low. That’s like a HF mgr saying he talks to a whole five guys on Wall St to trade stocks and bond and FX.

    Try 40-50 per next time…whenever you get out of HS.

  113. Posted by L3X_Luthor | June 28, 2011 at 2:30 PM

    Profits don’t come mostly from props. Like the flash traders, they come from taking the better price as the market moves. On big events each major book will take 50-100k or more, M casino says they’ll take 100-500k in live bets [run by Cantor]. Plus you have the various signup and deposit bonuses.

    15 acc’ts spread among 3 guys is ludicrously, laughably low. That’s like a HF mgr saying he talks to a whole five guys on Wall St to trade stocks and bond and FX.

    Try 40-50 per next time…whenever you get out of HS.

  114. Posted by L3X_Luthor | June 28, 2011 at 2:30 PM

    Profits don’t come mostly from props. Like the flash traders, they come from taking the better price as the market moves. On big events each major book will take 50-100k or more, M casino says they’ll take 100-500k in live bets [run by Cantor]. Plus you have the various signup and deposit bonuses.

    15 acc’ts spread among 3 guys is ludicrously, laughably low. That’s like a HF mgr saying he talks to a whole five guys on Wall St to trade stocks and bond and FX.

    Try 40-50 per next time…whenever you get out of HS.

  115. Posted by L3X_Luthor | June 28, 2011 at 2:30 PM

    Profits don’t come mostly from props. Like the flash traders, they come from taking the better price as the market moves. On big events each major book will take 50-100k or more, M casino says they’ll take 100-500k in live bets [run by Cantor]. Plus you have the various signup and deposit bonuses.

    15 acc’ts spread among 3 guys is ludicrously, laughably low. That’s like a HF mgr saying he talks to a whole five guys on Wall St to trade stocks and bond and FX.

    Try 40-50 per next time…whenever you get out of HS.

  116. Posted by Anonymous | June 28, 2011 at 4:11 PM

    This is common sports betting practice. When looking solely at the bets placed, it is risk free; however, not when adding external variable circumstance to the equation. For example, bookmaker #1 might have made a mistake in their posted line, cancel the price, and you’re left holding a non-risk free one-side bet. Or, one of the 50 bookmakers that you’re spreading your $2m around becomes insolvent and you lose your deposit.

    But the major issue involves scalability of arbitrage sports betting. You’ll be shut down by the sports books far faster than you can spread the bet amounts needed to make a worthwhile return.

  117. Posted by Anonymous | June 28, 2011 at 4:11 PM

    This is common sports betting practice. When looking solely at the bets placed, it is risk free; however, not when adding external variable circumstance to the equation. For example, bookmaker #1 might have made a mistake in their posted line, cancel the price, and you’re left holding a non-risk free one-side bet. Or, one of the 50 bookmakers that you’re spreading your $2m around becomes insolvent and you lose your deposit.

    But the major issue involves scalability of arbitrage sports betting. You’ll be shut down by the sports books far faster than you can spread the bet amounts needed to make a worthwhile return.

  118. Posted by Anonymous | June 28, 2011 at 4:11 PM

    This is common sports betting practice. When looking solely at the bets placed, it is risk free; however, not when adding external variable circumstance to the equation. For example, bookmaker #1 might have made a mistake in their posted line, cancel the price, and you’re left holding a non-risk free one-side bet. Or, one of the 50 bookmakers that you’re spreading your $2m around becomes insolvent and you lose your deposit.

    But the major issue involves scalability of arbitrage sports betting. You’ll be shut down by the sports books far faster than you can spread the bet amounts needed to make a worthwhile return.

  119. Posted by Anonymous | June 28, 2011 at 4:11 PM

    This is common sports betting practice. When looking solely at the bets placed, it is risk free; however, not when adding external variable circumstance to the equation. For example, bookmaker #1 might have made a mistake in their posted line, cancel the price, and you’re left holding a non-risk free one-side bet. Or, one of the 50 bookmakers that you’re spreading your $2m around becomes insolvent and you lose your deposit.

    But the major issue involves scalability of arbitrage sports betting. You’ll be shut down by the sports books far faster than you can spread the bet amounts needed to make a worthwhile return.

  120. Posted by Anonymous | June 28, 2011 at 4:11 PM

    This is common sports betting practice. When looking solely at the bets placed, it is risk free; however, not when adding external variable circumstance to the equation. For example, bookmaker #1 might have made a mistake in their posted line, cancel the price, and you’re left holding a non-risk free one-side bet. Or, one of the 50 bookmakers that you’re spreading your $2m around becomes insolvent and you lose your deposit.

    But the major issue involves scalability of arbitrage sports betting. You’ll be shut down by the sports books far faster than you can spread the bet amounts needed to make a worthwhile return.

  121. Posted by Anonymous | June 28, 2011 at 4:11 PM

    This is common sports betting practice. When looking solely at the bets placed, it is risk free; however, not when adding external variable circumstance to the equation. For example, bookmaker #1 might have made a mistake in their posted line, cancel the price, and you’re left holding a non-risk free one-side bet. Or, one of the 50 bookmakers that you’re spreading your $2m around becomes insolvent and you lose your deposit.

    But the major issue involves scalability of arbitrage sports betting. You’ll be shut down by the sports books far faster than you can spread the bet amounts needed to make a worthwhile return.

  122. Posted by guest | June 28, 2011 at 7:56 PM

    Clearly someone has a hard time understanding. The 15 accounts I spoke of was in regards to one specific ONLINE SPORTSBOOK network, not casinos. Online sportsbooks are where most of the line errors arise. Go try and get 15 different accounts on the SAME sportsbook/playersonly network and lemme know how it ends up.

  123. Posted by Guest | June 28, 2011 at 8:38 PM

    He did say that the market would only bear about $1-2mm before bookies would stop taking his bets. Presumably the remainder can be profitably side-pocketed in LightSquared equity.

    When he says risk free I don’t think he has fully considered the fat tail risk of finding two Jamaican guys with machetes in his living room (sorry, World Headquarters*).

  124. Posted by Lbz360 | June 29, 2011 at 1:01 AM

    All you guys are IDIOTS no one has asked him what the Beta is on the betting fund. How can you even consider this investment without that most important figure. 

  125. Posted by DownWithOPM | June 29, 2011 at 8:40 PM

    I was talking about online sportsbooks *in addition* to offline ones, n00b. The one who clearly misunderstands is still you.

    Tell me again how ‘most of the profits come from propz?’ roflmao.

  126. Posted by Hedge This | June 30, 2011 at 5:23 PM

    He should work with the guys who wrote about before..numberFire or something. They were ridiculously accurate in terms of their picks in the playoffs.

  127. Posted by Brendan Poots | September 12, 2011 at 5:22 AM

    how do i contact you

  128. Posted by Bristol Airport Hotels | April 19, 2012 at 5:42 AM

    KPaKPr I really enjoy the blog.Much thanks again. Fantastic.

  129. Posted by cheap oem software | May 2, 2012 at 11:55 PM

    LL9bbd Great, thanks for sharing this blog article.Really thank you! Want more.

  130. Posted by Daniel | May 18, 2012 at 10:17 AM

    Hi,

    How can I subscribe to the Elite membership?

    Great post, keep up the good work ;)

    Kind regards,
    Daniel