Stop calling them "prediction markets" and start calling them what they really are: corporatized bookies.

abecedarius 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Bookies determine the odds and typically refuse to take bets from skilled bettors.

A market is open to all, with the odds influenced by all participants. In established betting markets such as for stocks, pros dedicate their careers and their organizations to improving the public estimates emerging from the market (though not for the sake of that improvement).

General prediction markets might turn out bad, but the above isn't an argument why, it's namecalling.

▲

mathgeek 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

They're also heavily, heavily fixed of course. There's nothing stopping anonymous folks from betting on things they control/influence.

	▲	woah 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		That's the point. To surface non-public information as a price signal.

▲

vultour an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I just can't take anyone who uses that term seriously. Just because a billionaire CEO told you it's not gambling doesn't mean it's true.

▲

_DeadFred_ 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

At least in gambling they don't let the sports referees and players gamble.

This is just another racket for those in power to continue making the world worse for just a little bit more gain for themselves.

Edit: Throttled like always, you guys hate me (and reality/law in this instance) https://www.nbcnews.com/sports/sports-gambling/20-charged-ba...

▲

bluecalm 6 hours ago | parent [-]

>>At least in gambling they don't let the sports referees and players gamble.

Oh c'mon now. This is completely impossible to police. Players and referees are not under constant supervision. They have families, friends, partners. Some of them got caught but you can be certain most weren't because it's just very difficult to catch.

There are always multiple people who know about key players' injuries, illness, other factors. The game is negative sum and additionally insiders take a a chunk for themselves. It's worse then roulette which at least doesn't pretend to be fair.

	▲	skippyboxedhero 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It isn't impossible to police. Players and referees are under supervision...I am not sure why you think this isn't the case. Regulated gambling companies i.e. not Polymarket, maintain lists of people who are connected to sports inc. through family. And they maintain systems that monitor unusual betting activity that is shared across the industry, it is quite easy to detect this activity because most of the flow that bookmakers see is uninformed. So if you see a customer that doesn't bet regularly put down $10k, line moves in their favour...that is obviously extremely suspicious because that won't happen with 95% of the volume you take. As an example, there was a football player in England who had a friend that bet on a transfer market (a market that is extremely prone to inside information). It was detected immediately (despite being a relatively small bet of $10k, I have heard anecdotally that insiders have been detected in this market down to $500 bets), the player was banned, fined $500k, etc. Btw, the reason these systems exist is because there are certain sports that are too lucrative not to make a market in but the economics/nature of the game mean that matches are easily fixed: 99.99% of this activity is low-ranked professional tennis, and surveillance has been very effective (all of this is funded, not by professional tennis, but by gambling companies). Generally, this isn't as prevalent with US sports because none of those preconditions exist for the major sports.