SERIOUS ?/SERIOUS ANSWERS

[thedevil]

Would you pay approx. $14.00 per $1000 per year for a sort of insurance policy to safeguard your money in an offshore sportsbook or casino. A policy that would return 100% of your funds in the event of a listed company folding due to bankrupcy or even government pressure.

Would like your thoughts please.

Thanks, The Devil

[reno]

devil, I would do it with certain sportsbooks. But some books are so big, solid and reputable that I wouldn't bother doing it with them.

[bsky2]

What a great idea. Instead of the player paying, the books should pay and add real credibility instead of just claiming the players accounts are insured. Who offers this insurance?

[thedevil]

Bsky2

I don't think the books would pay for it.

I've put together a group of investors with a capitol startup of approx 1.5 millon. Want to see if there is enough interest before I go any further.

Reno

One policy would cover ALL the books that we deem worth taking a risk on. All the major books would be included. We would visit many of the smaller books and if we felt the were reputable would add them to our list. We're thinking in the lines of maybe 100-120 books total.

[Boomer]

I would purchase that insurance in a nannosecond. To have a list of 100-120 books that I could play into without fear of being stiffed would be worth the 1.4% on my bankroll I would have to pay annually.

An insurance policy such as this would go a long way to straighten up the industry also. Books that offered this policy would be more desirable even to people that didn't purchase the insurance.

[bsky2]

Devil, keep going forward because I am sure between the books and the players this product would have a huge demand. What type of return would the investors being looking at?

[thedevil]

Boomer

Your fiasco with Action Sports actually started me thinking about this a couple of months ago. Your problem with AS would have been covered, then I would have informed everyone of my clients to either take their money out of said book or they would no longer be coved at that book.

For arguments sake, lets say you have a $10000 policy and $5000 in each of 20 books and they all fold. You would only recieve $10000 but if one went belly up you would get back the $5000 you had on deposit.

Devil

[wolfman]

would the insurance pay for disputes between the player and the book, such as boomer's with action sports? or only kick in when book actuallly folded?

thanks devil, beat me to it.

[This message has been edited by wolfman (edited 05-30-2000).]

[Mikes1212]

boomer, aren't all the starnet and unified gaming sportsbooks insured? Wasn't there a case where a starnet book didn't pay, but starnet still picked up the tab?

[Boomer]

Wolfman, there was no dispute with Action Sports. He was a no pay with me as he was with two other guys for over ten dimes apiece. There was no dispute.

[thedevil]

Wolfman

I really can't answer that as I would have to know the type of dispute. Boomers would be handled as I said above. When a book out and out says your not getting you money because you won to much that part is covered. But on a who's right or wrong on a particular bet, I don't know the answer yet. I'm not ready to open the doors yet. That's why I threw it out here to get the feedback.

Devil

[thedevil]

Bsky2

I don't have a clue. It would depend if it takes off. A couple of hundred policys would make a very small return, however it this mushrooms, well who knows.

Devil

[Boomer]

I can't speak for Starnet, but I was assured early on that Unified Gaming books had adequate reserves in case one ever got into trouble, that no gamblers would ever lose a dime.

I was assured this by the owner of Unified Gaming and up to now, that has been the case. I don't know of anyone who has lost any money because a Unified Gaming book didn't pay.

I would still purchase an insurance policy from a reputable company to insure my funds. It makes good business sense.

[sportshobby]

What a cool idea - kinda' like the FDIC

But I think the books should pay. Weaker ones would have to pay more, stronger ones less.

This would also make books try and self-regulate more (to cut the cost of the "insurance").

[Cons]

Devil, are you sure this makes business sense? I thought that people would pay to insure their deposit at one particular book. This part makes sense.

But if I have $5000 in each of a DOZEN books, and I just want one insurance policy worth $5000, then it doesn't matter which one folds, and I still get back the five grand?

This basically means that I only need to insure the maximum amount that I currently have at any one particular sportsbook, as it's highly unlikely that more than one will fold simultaneously.

It's like buying a single car insurance while owning 12 cars, and having it apply to whichever one is involved in the accident. This might make sense if only one car is being driven at a particular time, but with sportsbooks the risk is constant with all accounts (not including the top industry giants or course).