Two types of Exchange Client...

[Adonis First]

Punters
Need the presence of multiple other Punters, but of opposite betting intentions, and awareness of the currently fair probabilities of success or failure in the part of the Market which interests them. This ready availability of opposite intentions is what a Punter typically regards as "Liquidity".
Want to minimise the overheads which exist whether they win or lose!.
Want to maximise the average efficiency of their betting at all times.
Insist on maximum levels of Betting Integrity in terms of impeccable refereeing and active, ongoing elimination of all forms of fraud.
Tend to believe that Traders contribute nothing except inefficiency and reduced Betting Integrity to their goals.

Traders
Carve out an income from the existence of Punters seeking matches. This has now muddied into a dog-eat-dog scenario where "smarter" Traders make their income from the whole market (Punters AND less-effective Traders).
Generally believe that they ARE "the Market" and it will die without them.
Generally believe that their presence bestows "liquidity" to the Market.
Have very low regard for Punters, but loath to call their meal-ticket a "mug", publicly.
Will exploit every aspect of funds abstraction from the process of betting, which the Exchange (and the Regulator) will allow. These funds will become Destination Invariant (go only into their pockets) at the first opportunity (e.g. via "greening up"), ideally before the Event being wagered on has even begun.
If they could, as an example of their mindset, circumvent the delays used to avoid Time Fraud, they would, and they would see nothing wrong in doing that.
Typically hide behind the phrase "Caveat Emptor".


Which Client type predominates here, I wonder?

[Adonis First]

One might be forgiven for feeling that the GC see their loyalty lying with the people who write out cheques to them. They are perhaps completely disconnected with the Public who form the source of that revenue stream.
Whatever the bookies and exchanges cough up, it is their Customers (us!) who enable it and not the providers of their cosy, expensed, "busines" lunches.
"There is no such thing as a free lunch"..... an expression which will become brutally obvious to the current "The Voting Public? Who Cares!" regime at our first opportunity.
(we have a PM who we've never voted for, half a cabinet-full of unelected peers, a Gambling Commission who haven't even intiated a Discussion Board on the web where Public belief and sentiment on matters GAMBLING can be seen by all. Worse still, I think they BELIEVE, like Flash Gordon, that they're doing a great job.... for us!!!!)

[Gordon McIvor Wilson]

Interesting stuff, save to read with the care it deserves, s/b a Discussion topic?
Have yet to find anyone who has a good word for the Gambling Commisssion - why is it in the UK we make our regulators enemies rather than partners of the system. They all spend their time creating hurdles and elephant traps, rather than clear, authoritative rules and sound advice and cooperation with the people that make things happen. Collaboration not confrontation.

[Adonis First]

....more disturbingly however, in the UK we have a Gambling Commission that allows these practices to continue. IMHO they have failed abysmally in analysing the underlying Betting Integrity problem: Time Fraud is rife, and always has been!
Adding delays merely to the acceptance of bet or lay offers into the matching queue cannot and will not stop such fraud. In some cases it can actually make such fraud easier!!!
Full realisation of the underlying crime renders simple and easy-to-implement safeguard obvious. But that doesn't suit the purposes of those (virtual monopolies) holding the reins of power. And buying the cosy lunches to maintain the (lucrative) status quo, I suspect!
Lesson #1: When you want to eliminate mugging, by all means listen to an experienced mugger. but do NOT follow any advice he may give!!!!!!

[Adonis First]

In the fullness of Time, we can rely on the Law: distorting Time or taking advantage of its existing distortion, for the purposes of taking money from others is definitely fraud. Years ago there was a famous case of a "punter" in North Wales who was convicted of defrauding William Hill. In those days, Hills would accept bets by post (up to about £20) provided that the bet envelope was sealed and postmarked BEFORE the start time of a race. This "punter" found a way to add the bet to the postmarked envelope AFTER he knew the Result!
Absolutely no doubt, but you would think not if you read some of the historic "it's legal" claims on a certain exchange's forum! Parasites generally see themselves a "complimentary" to theire Host's welfare. Well, as was once said famously.. they would say that, wouldn't they?

[Brian Ford]

Unbelievably both Racing UK & ATR have parent operations that market products specifically at betfair punters who are looking to bet in running against people with slower pics. They even delay the ATR & RUK coverage so that their subscribers are financially disadvantaged when they bet. They then employ presenters to actively promote In Running as a betting medium. These presenters are inducing people to bet on a game where they are being scalped.

You really couldn't make it up. The irony is that racing treats its everyday punter who pays the levy with utter contempt and then can't understand why the game is dying.