Really want to recommend InTrade to LWers next election cycle. I put in $2000 and am up about $1200. Obviously if you follow politics intensively (or Nate Silver) you can make lots of smart bets against people betting on what they want or on the popular media narrative. But the markets were illiquid enough in this cycle that you can grind out more modest profits on arbitrage. For instance, even after it was clear Romney was the nominee, I could pick up 1 share Romney win + 1 share Obama win for about $8.20 and one of those bets was going to pay out $10.
Nothing. I put my money in by check (10 day processing lag but no fees) and will withdraw it by wire transfer (no fees on InTrade’s end, last time I checked, and, at my bank, incoming wire transfers are free). InTrade just made money on the float from me.
InTrade doesn’t charge fees anymore and just makes their money off the float? Hm. Maybe my old verdict ‘too expensive for small players’ needs revising.
Ah, so it hasn’t changed. That still makes long-term bets there infeasible for people with small bankrolls (I’ve believed Obama had 60% odds since well before the primaries, but I’d find it hard to profit on Intrade with as much as 5% of my tolerable investment disappearing each month...)
I made money at this too, but I’m starting to wonder whether it’s morally superior to running a casino, or a lottery. I made thousands of dollars off of a pack of fools who bet with their hopes instead of the evidence, and at the time I felt very clever, but now...I don’t know.
One way to think of it is: when you wager on Intrade because you think the price is inaccurate, are you more like
a pundit being paid to bloviate, cheerlead, and mislead ordinary people (one thinks of the more right-wing writers who up until election day were confidently predicting an Obama victory and trashing Silver or polls in general), who even if one’s motives are pure still contribute to the blinding white noise of media and is wasting people’s time and leaving behind false ideas, delusions, questionable datapoints etc.
or a polling firm who, while motivated by profit, still seeks to add in real data to the race and which profit is ethically justifiable by the value-added of better data about how the race is going
one thinks of the more right-wing writers who up until election day were confidently predicting an Obama victory and trashing Silver or polls in general
I know Obama and Romney have similar political positions, but they aren’t that hard to tell apart! :P
I dunno, all you monkeys look the same to me with your wrinkly skin and weird little noses and disturbingly lengthy forepaws.
...Not that there’s anything wrong with looking like you could have bits snapped off you at any moment—I mean, my best friend is a monkey, you know? (We get along great, I bring him bananas every time I go over; he says they’re a good source of potassium and fiber, and I suppose you guys’d know eh?)
I think the high barriers to entry for the US crowd mean I’m unlikely to be betting against gambling addicts, who have much easier options. I’d assume that InTrade skews well-educated and well-off. They can afford to lose a few hundred dollars to me.
I made a comment about this a few days ago and was seriously contemplating funding an account. It was too close to election day and was nervous I wasn’t going to be able to get my account funded in time while the edge was still high so I decided not to. I believe I will wait to fund because the other products on InTrade lack either market depth of bid/ask or overt mis-pricing, it wouldn’t make any sense to fund now. Some Senate and gubernatorial contracts literally have no market depth.
Really want to recommend InTrade to LWers next election cycle. I put in $2000 and am up about $1200. Obviously if you follow politics intensively (or Nate Silver) you can make lots of smart bets against people betting on what they want or on the popular media narrative. But the markets were illiquid enough in this cycle that you can grind out more modest profits on arbitrage. For instance, even after it was clear Romney was the nominee, I could pick up 1 share Romney win + 1 share Obama win for about $8.20 and one of those bets was going to pay out $10.
How much did you pay in fees to Intrade?
Nothing. I put my money in by check (10 day processing lag but no fees) and will withdraw it by wire transfer (no fees on InTrade’s end, last time I checked, and, at my bank, incoming wire transfers are free). InTrade just made money on the float from me.
The fee is $20 for processing a wire withdrawal and 4 Euros for a check withdrawal.
Looks like that changed at some pt. Ah well, I’ve got plenty of margin for a 4 euro fee.
InTrade doesn’t charge fees anymore and just makes their money off the float? Hm. Maybe my old verdict ‘too expensive for small players’ needs revising.
Their website suggests just a $5 monthly fee.
Ah, so it hasn’t changed. That still makes long-term bets there infeasible for people with small bankrolls (I’ve believed Obama had 60% odds since well before the primaries, but I’d find it hard to profit on Intrade with as much as 5% of my tolerable investment disappearing each month...)
If Nate Silver or the equivalent is making public predictions, it might be a lot harder to find people to take the other side of the bet.
I made money at this too, but I’m starting to wonder whether it’s morally superior to running a casino, or a lottery. I made thousands of dollars off of a pack of fools who bet with their hopes instead of the evidence, and at the time I felt very clever, but now...I don’t know.
One way to think of it is: when you wager on Intrade because you think the price is inaccurate, are you more like
a pundit being paid to bloviate, cheerlead, and mislead ordinary people (one thinks of the more right-wing writers who up until election day were confidently predicting an Obama victory and trashing Silver or polls in general), who even if one’s motives are pure still contribute to the blinding white noise of media and is wasting people’s time and leaving behind false ideas, delusions, questionable datapoints etc.
or a polling firm who, while motivated by profit, still seeks to add in real data to the race and which profit is ethically justifiable by the value-added of better data about how the race is going
I know Obama and Romney have similar political positions, but they aren’t that hard to tell apart! :P
I dunno, all you monkeys look the same to me with your wrinkly skin and weird little noses and disturbingly lengthy forepaws.
...Not that there’s anything wrong with looking like you could have bits snapped off you at any moment—I mean, my best friend is a monkey, you know? (We get along great, I bring him bananas every time I go over; he says they’re a good source of potassium and fiber, and I suppose you guys’d know eh?)
I’m somewhat amused that the focus is on the lengthy forepaws, when the aftpaws are distinctly longer in almost every specimen. ;)
Sure they are longer, but you ever try snapping one of those thick boney aftpaws on a monkey? On second thought, don’t answer that.
Sadly, it’s easier than we monkeys would prefer.
I think the high barriers to entry for the US crowd mean I’m unlikely to be betting against gambling addicts, who have much easier options. I’d assume that InTrade skews well-educated and well-off. They can afford to lose a few hundred dollars to me.
Betting against US gambling addicts. There are gambling addicts all over the world.
I made a comment about this a few days ago and was seriously contemplating funding an account. It was too close to election day and was nervous I wasn’t going to be able to get my account funded in time while the edge was still high so I decided not to. I believe I will wait to fund because the other products on InTrade lack either market depth of bid/ask or overt mis-pricing, it wouldn’t make any sense to fund now. Some Senate and gubernatorial contracts literally have no market depth.