Staker Exchange - Rules & Definitions

[Des]

Welcome to the APAT Staker Exchange

Firstly, before we introduce the rules of the Staker Exchange, here are some definitions to ensure we are all using the same common language.

"Staking":  Where one player invests funds in another to allow him to play an event he may otherwise be unable to play, in return for an agreed percentage of his winnings.

"Staker":  An individual member of the APAT community who is willing to buy a stake in a Licensed Player in return for a percentage of any profits that the Licensed Player may make.

"Licensed Player":  Players who have sought and received APAT's approval to utilise the Staking Exchange to seek Staking.  Licensed Players will be required to pay APAT a one off £10 license fee and 1% of the total value returned to Stakers.

"Premium":  The factor that determines the cost of the Staking.  For example, if a player is willing to sell a 50% Stake in a £1,000 event at a premium of 1.1, then he is looking to raise £550.  The calculation works as follows: £1,000 x 1.1 = £1,100 x 50% = £550.  In our example, to invest in the Licensed Player, Stakers will have to pay the following price:

1% = £11
10% = £110
50% = £550

"Staker Exchange":  The only board on the APAT forum where Staking is allowed between Stakers and Licensed Players.

"Staker Request":  A detailed proposal posted on the Staker Exchange by a Licensed Player.

[Des]

The rules of the APAT Staker Exchange are as follows:-

1 ) Only Licensed Players are allowed to request Staking within the APAT Staker Exchange.  Players will be Licensed once APAT has taken steps to verify their identity.  APAT will review the applicant"s APAT posts, PayPal name and address, Facebook profile, Hendon Mob record where deemed necessary.  Licensed Players will feature a "Staking Exchange License" title under their Forum name, on forum posts.  Players who request Staking and do not have this title should be reported to a moderator.

2 ) If you would like to apply to become a Licensed Player, then please do so in Staker Licensed Player application thread.

3 ) Licensed Players should post their proposal on the Staking Exchange board using the Staking Request form.

4 ) Stakers should not offer to Stake Licensed Players unless they are able to transfer funds prior to event taking place.

5 ) Neither Stakers nor Licensed Players should be influencing each other as a result of affiliate agreements with third parties.

6 ) APAT will not become involved in any disputes.  Please note that verification checks are not a guarantee that Licensed Players are who they say, and will complete their Staking commitments.  The Staker Exchange is a "buyer beware" service and Stakers must agree to take responsibility for their investment directly with Licensed Players and vice versa.

It is expected that the above rules will be amended and updated from time to time.

[Des]

Stakeback in staking requests

This has been mentioned in a few staking requests and I fancy posting something on this.

Firstly, for the grandmothers, a lesson on how to suck eggs

A stake request that offers stakeback is one where the staker gets their money back for the stake before profits are shared out.

(names are made up to protect the innocent)

e.g.1 Ger wants staking into the WSOP main event ($10K buyin) with a 30/70 cut in favour of the backer (he is a fish!!) with no stakeback. Scouse decides he"s having that and ships Ger the $10K. Ger runs like a god for 3 days and makes the money before getting "coolered" with A5 on 58T board against villains 88. He min cashes for $20K. He ships 70% of this to Scouse who is ecstatic at his $14K return. He made $4K, while Ger walks off with $6K having invested only his time and skill.

e.g.2 George is staked into the WSOP Main event with a 30/70 cut in favour of the backer. He"s a great player but only ever seems to "min cash" in live donkaments these days, so he offers stakeback. Before (insert blonde pro) can say "rest", the BCPC consortium snap it up costing them $10K. George runs normal, bursts the bubble then goes out the very next hand for a $20K min cash. He pays the BCPC their $10K back plus 70% of the $10K profit ($7K) meaning the BCPC have made 7K from their 10K sweat, whilst george makes 3K for his time and effort and zero cash investment.

The second example is considered a much fairer staking arrangement as the staker is investing with no guarantee of a return but ends up with more than the player when he cashes. If both players do a bink and win $1mill+ then in relative terms, the returns for both examples will roughly be the same.

This is an example of where the horse is not putting any of their own money up. These deals should always be made with stakeback.

A lot of the staking deals so far on this board are examples where the horse has actually put up a fair bit of the money themselves and are selling percentages. In these examples the risk is shared equally between the backer and the horse so there is little need for stakeback to be included here.

Thanks to swinebag22 for the above contribution.

[Paulie_D]

Makeup in staking (aka Cake in some places)

Now, I"m not Rob - but I"ll briefly touch on this and hopefully if I"m wrong, someone more knowledgeable will be able to correct me.

The basic premise of makeup is where the stakee agrees to play a number of tournaments for the staker(s) on the premise that should the stakee win money, the cost of all tournaments will be repaid before the remainder of the profit is chopped. Makeup is the money used to enter stakee into tournaments.

Example:

Staker and stakee agree a deal where staker plays a schedule consisting of 10 tournaments totalling $100 every night for 6 months on a 50/50 deal with makeup. Stakee does not cash until day 6 where he wins $3000. Stakee sends $600 back to staker and they chop the remaining $2400 as profit. Staker still continues to send $100 daily from day 7.

What happens at the end of the deal if the stakee does not turn a profit?

There are a few options and they depend on what both staker and stakee wish to do. Staker can cancel the makeup and eat the cost. If the staker doesn"t want to continue backing the stakee, they can sell the makeup at a reduced price (to be agreed privately) to the stakee"s new backer. The stakee can buy himself out should he wish to go alone. There are other options, but these are the main.

Now I"ve only really seen makeup applied to long term agreements - and I was surprised to see it mentioned here. I don"t believe it"s the norm for makeup to be added to single stakes and I wouldn"t want it myself.

Thanks to sharplea for the above.