APAT Staking Exchange - Discussion

[Fluence]

In principle I think staking here would be a good thing.

[SirPercival]

I have staked APAT players in the past and also been staked myself. (The former being more profitable than the latter   )

I think having a board on here would only add to the existing APAT spirit.

The Blonde community have the experience of the Blatch case. Did this have a negative effect on Blonde? I personally dont think it did I"m not really in a position to say. APAT do need to consider the risk of damage to the brand but I think it is minimal bearing in mind the Blatch thing wasn"t really even about poker. My thought would be stick to poker stakes only and lets not get out of hand with other type stakes.

[Honeybadg]

Has to be a good idea ...

... I have staked a few people for NIL return!

I have also been staked for NIL return.

Staked players play weird(er) - hence encourage the market - then look to profit from the weird play ...

Alt - buy lottery tickets.

L

[Swinebag]

I like this idea. I stake a fair bit and sell the odd slice now and then as well. It would be great for the APAT community and would create some excellent sweats.

Jason makes a good point about post count. IMO anyone should be allowed to put up a staking request. If its some chancer with 2 posts wanting $10K for the WSOP then the silence on that thread will speak volumes. Conversely, "known" players will get staked by people they know, no matter how much they contribute to the forum.

Obviously people with less posts may have difficulty selling out but they should not be discouraged from asking

[thinsy147]

I think its a great idea. I joined the blonde site when searching for staking possibilities but felt I would never reach the required targets before being able to apply for staking! However, with APAT I would feel confident in staking members. I don"t know many members that well to be honest and when I have played live APAT events I"ve probably walked straight past people who I"ve had conversations with online (this is probably my own fault for not being bold enough to introduce myself!) despite this I would still stake them.

I would also like to think that other members would have confidence in me!

As far as who should/shouldn"t be allowed to offer stakes my thoughts are that a member should have at least 419 posts  

Seriously though, I think there should be a minimum but nothing out of reach of new/occasional members. As someone said in an earlier post  "If its some chancer with 2 posts wanting $10K for the WSOP then the silence on that thread will speak volumes. Conversely, "known" players will get staked by people they know, no matter how much they contribute to the forum."

[WYoung83]

Great idea. Gives people a chance to play higher buyins than they normally would. Also gives people a nice sweat if their horse make a ukipt etc final table.

[Des]

There seems to be a lot of positive response to the staking board idea and offering a free service along the lines of those offered elsewhere would be a relatively straight forward process, but I"d like to get your feedback to a managed option that would be revenue generating for APAT.

With the managed verison:-

- APAT would validate the identity of players requesting staking via Facebook / Forum / Pocket Fives / Hendon Mob as appropriate, before issuing a license which will enable that person to post requests via the staking board. 

-  This would enable players to request staking on the forum even if they have not been prolific posters in the past.

- APAT would maintain a Licensed Player Directory, containing the identity (real and forum) and hendon mob link for all licensed players. 

- APAT would manage the distribution of funds to and from stakers.  This will lessen the administration on licensed players who book a win and it will remove the requirement for stakers having to issue their banking / payment details to players they may not know well.

-  APAT will also offer a syndicate service to allow players to pool resources together to invest in higher value staking opportunities (WSOP / EPT, etc).

-  APAT would charge players looking for staking a one off license fee of £10 plus 1% of any prize money won in the staked tournament.  So if for example a staked player sold 50% of his / her action and went on to win £3,000, the amount going back to stakers would be £1,500, while the staked player would also return £30 to APAT. 

-  The service would be free to stakers.

With regards to the charges, it is my opinion a one off license fee of £10 would deter time wasters and act as a form of identity check.  In addition, the 1% of prize money, while unlikely to provide any meaningful revenue for APAT, would justify our investing some resource into ensuring the service is managed and publicised in such a way that would encourage as many of the members as possible to give staking a try. 

The above said, this would remain a "buyer beware" service.  Ultimately if a licensed player won £3,000 and decided to not honour their committment to pay the stakers and APAT, we would publicise the theft and ban them for life, but it would need to be understood in advance that APAT would not be held responsible for payment of any outstanding monies to stakers.  We would be acting as an intermediary between the transacting parties.

So with the above in mind, would members prefer a free or managed staking service?

[dwh103]

On a personal note, I"d prefer a free service with strict guidelines (specified templates, forum rules etc). I"m a control freak and prefer the responsibility of the money to lie with me. If there"s a time limit and the staker is a little slow transferring, how does the player know if/when they"ve transferred?

However, the licencing idea is interesting. It"s a USP and could bring more traffic to APAT long term, along with added revenue. Wouldn"t say I wouldn"t use it either if that"s the route you chose to go.

It would be nice to have a licenced player list, but it doesn"t really remove any risk and I"d just prefer to do the admin myself.

[SirPercival]

I think its an excellent idea Des.

I particularly like the thought of a pool of APAT players hitting the WSOP/EPT/UKIPT etc backed by APAT stakers with pooled prize monies. Would make a great forum update. But maybe I"m getting ahead of myself...

Players who are experienced at staking can always continue with their existing methods. This idea brings staking to the people who perhaps wouldn"t have tried it before - bang in line with the APAT values etc.

I have been staked before and I always said I wouldn"t do it again, but under this arrangement I probably would. I would stake others for sure as it gives me an added intrest in events I can"t attend and doing it through APAT just adds to the feel good factor.

I"m in - let me know how to ship the £10  

[lucasj37]

I like this idea. I stake a fair bit and sell the odd slice now and then as well. It would be great for the APAT community and would create some excellent sweats.

Jason makes a good point about post count. IMO anyone should be allowed to put up a staking request. If its some chancer with 2 posts wanting $10K for the WSOP then the silence on that thread will speak volumes. Conversely, "known" players will get staked by people they know, no matter how much they contribute to the forum.

Obviously people with less posts may have difficulty selling out but they should not be discouraged from asking

This

I have staked people in the past both live & online.

I have also been staked myself a few times for live events that are slightly outside of my bankroll. Strict bankroll management would require 100x buy in for a MTT £200 events would therefore be out of my reach.

In my experience the standard at these events are no higher than an APAT one.

I don"t think amount of posts should officially be a criteria for being staked as backers will be able to judge for themselves any risk involved.

Also juice on stake should be allowed as once again it is up to the backer to assess the value of the "bet".

I think it would enhance the forum and increase the spirit (if that is possible).

In short 100% yes. The licensed idea with APAT getting a cut sounds perfect.

[Sugar_Free]

Some bits and pieces I like, some I don"t.

I like the idea of the licencing and £10 fee although I think that the APAT take should be a percentage of the percentage sold, if you follow me, rather than a set percentage of the whole.

- APAT would manage the distribution of funds to and from stakers.  This will lessen the administration on licensed players who book a win and it will remove the requirement for stakers having to issue their banking / payment details to players they may not know well.

This bit sounds like you"ll be requiring the equivalent of a "client account" and trust me, you don"t want to be involved in all the rules, regulations and admin that will entail.

[mylesfdo]

There seems to be a lot of positive response to the staking board idea and offering a free service along the lines of those offered elsewhere would be a relatively straight forward process, but I"d like to get your feedback to a managed option that would be revenue generating for APAT.

With the managed verison:-

- APAT would validate the identity of players requesting staking via Facebook / Forum / Pocket Fives / Hendon Mob as appropriate, before issuing a license which will enable that person to post requests via the staking board. 

-  This would enable players to request staking on the forum even if they have not been prolific posters in the past.

- APAT would maintain a Licensed Player Directory, containing the identity (real and forum) and hendon mob link for all licensed players. 

- APAT would manage the distribution of funds to and from stakers.  This will lessen the administration on licensed players who book a win and it will remove the requirement for stakers having to issue their banking / payment details to players they may not know well.

-  APAT will also offer a syndicate service to allow players to pool resources together to invest in higher value staking opportunities (WSOP / EPT, etc).

-  APAT would charge players looking for staking a one off license fee of £10 plus 1% of any prize money won in the staked tournament.  So if for example a staked player sold 50% of his / her action and went on to win £3,000, the amount going back to stakers would be £1,500, while the staked player would also return £30 to APAT. 

-  The service would be free to stakers.

With regards to the charges, it is my opinion a one off license fee of £10 would deter time wasters and act as a form of identity check.  In addition, the 1% of prize money, while unlikely to provide any meaningful revenue for APAT, would justify our investing some resource into ensuring the service is managed and publicised in such a way that would encourage as many of the members as possible to give staking a try. 

The above said, this would remain a "buyer beware" service.  Ultimately if a licensed player won £3,000 and decided to not honour their committment to pay the stakers and APAT, we would publicise the theft and ban them for life, but it would need to be understood in advance that APAT would not be held responsible for payment of any outstanding monies to stakers.  We would be acting as an intermediary between the transacting parties.

So with the above in mind, would members prefer a free or managed staking service?

Most of this sounds great at first glance and great ideas there Des.

Are you looking for this to be mainly for live events or the majority of it online?

Live events are obviously much bigger buy-ins and usually only run at weekends so having an online option would generate more stakes being created and more revenue for APAT.

The Liscensed Player Directory is a great idea and would help stakers know who they are backing etc etc and generate more confidence.

Will backers be able to offer certain stakes and request applications from horses?...e.g I offer a $110 stake to play 10x$11 45 mans on Stars and request horses to apply with stats etc OR will it be just for horses to request backing?  Again if you have the option for backers to offer stakes then more stakes will be generated etc etc.

Leading on from the above think the APAT controlling fund distrbution is not the way forward tbh.....say I offer a stake for horse to run set of mtt"s one night starting at 7/9pm and I get back from work at 6pm and spot an ideal applicant who has stated that they are ready and waiting to go.......will there be time for the $$ to be shipped to APAT account and then onto Horse?......surely it would just be easier and quicker for me to ship on Stars and have any winnings sent back on there also.......with the Player Directory in place I should feel confident in sending money and receiving winnings back if the correct initial checks have been made to allow horse to apply for my stake.

"APAT will also offer a syndicate service to allow players to pool resources together to invest in higher value staking opportunities (WSOP / EPT, etc)".......can you explain a bit more how this would work?

If you are going to offer a staking service then defo APAT have to be making some revenue out of this and like you say the £10 initial fee would deter hit and runnners and timewasters but with the 1% from winnings APAT will not generate huge amounts of revenue.......why not charge players requesting backing in form of buy a piece request a set up fee of say £3-5 to be paid before the BAP is opened and made live on the site and then the additional 1% of any winnnings?......Im sure most players requesting backing would be happy to pay this fee if they know they have a great chance of selling all shares and getting the $$ to play in their specified events etc.

Great ideas though and cant wait to see this get off the ground.

[Honeybadg]

Agree that it should be a % of the % sold and not the whole win ...

Happy enough with fees.

I like the idea of syndicates to allow people to enter larger events and fly the flag.

Out of interest what would APAT do with the monies of a massive win?

(Who owns APAT?)

L

[TightEnd]

I investigated the "commercial" aspects a while ago

The advice I received was the Financial Services Authority licencing might be an issue to be an intermediary holding third party funds

I stopped at that point!

[Des]

Agree that it should be a % of the % sold and not the whole win ...

Happy enough with fees.

I like the idea of syndicates to allow people to enter larger events and fly the flag.

Out of interest what would APAT do with the monies of a massive win?

(Who owns APAT?)

L

APAT is owned by some private investors. Guys like me who had an interest in poker at a recreational level and who each brought some skill to the party prior to or since our launch. Tikay and Tighty are shareholders for example.

Given the perilous state of the sponsorship market at the moment, I am driving several initiatives that will generate revenue, with the goal of ensuring that APAT does not become overly dependent on the online operators. For example I have a call lined up to discuss a big initiative with Pocket Fives next week and we will launch two new products in July.  This is a do or die market at the moment and I want APAT to be amongst the doers.