While InTrade CEO John Delaney is deceiving the journalists to sell his wares, Tom Snee of the Iowa Electronic Markets is telling them the truth: BEWARE THE VP-CANDIDATE PREDICTION MARKETS, THEY JUST AGGREGATE RUMORS.

No Gravatar

BBC News:

According to Tom Snee of the Iowa Electronic Market, at Iowa University, futures markets need more hard information than they get in the veepstakes, to reliably predict a result.

Markets are very good at predicting elections, he says – but not choices being made inside Barack Obama&#8217-s or John McCain&#8217-s head.

Thank God for the BBC.

Thank God for the Iowa Electronic Markets.

Shame on John Delaney &#8212-over 3 generations of Delaneys.

Other than Tom Snee (the IEM spin doctor), Chris Masse and Justin Wolfers are the only prediction market analysts to have sent out warnings about the VP-candidate prediction markets.

ENDLESS VEEPSTAKES: Why you should never trade on VP prediction markets, and why their probabilistic predictions are as stochastic as Paris Hiltons daily dress picks.

No Gravatar

As I explained in early June 2008, the VP speculations that appear in the Press should never be taken seriously. Most of them (and you don&#8217-t know which ones) are a big orchestration of pure lies aimed at creating publicity, or wicked lies in the form of trial balloons. The aims of the political campaigns are to:

  • creating suspense (sometimes false) so as to generate free publicity-
  • sending a positive message to the supporters of each VP candidate-
  • letting the Press do the vetting of the VP candidates-
  • flattering the political journalists by leaking to them-
  • sending out false leaks so as to preserve the surprise for the scheduled announcement day-
  • sometimes, buying time to impose the head of the VP search committee as the most serious VP candidate (remember Dick Cheney in 2000). [Psstt… Funny enough, in the 2008 election, Michael Moore is pulling for Caroline Kennedy. :-D ]

All that means that there are no good primary indicators for the prediction markets on the Democratic and Republican VP-candidate selections.

I want to offer 6 remarks:

  1. Not all prediction markets are created equal. Some have good primary indicators (e.g., the prediction markets on the presidential elections, thanks to polls), while some other prediction markets have unreliable primary indicators (e.g., the prediction markets on who will be on the ticket).
  2. The prediction exchange executives (like InTrade-TradeSports CEO John Delaney) will never tell you that, because their job is to sell their wares, of course.
  3. The public needs prediction market analysts, who can judge the quality of the primary indicators of one particular prediction market, so as to separate the grains from the shaft &#8212-reliable prediction markets from unreliable prediction markets. (A prediction market analyst has also other functions, which I will blog about later on.)
  4. A prediction market analyst should have a dual competency &#8212-in a vertical (in our example, US politics), and in prediction markets.
  5. The expertise in the vertical (here, politics) should be a major, and the expertise in prediction markets should be a minor. Take a look at these 2 mainstream media news stories: the one written Jack Shafer in Slate (which I linked to at the top of this post), and the one written by Justin Wolfers in the Wall Street Journal. Obviously, the one that shows the most mastering is the one written by Jack Shafer, an American professional journalist who follows US politics for a living.
  6. The consequence of that for prediction market journalism is that the writer should be an expert in a vertical, and the editor should be an expert in prediction markets &#8212-and not the other way around.

That said, I wish the very best of luck to our good friends Caveat Bettor (who is betting on Tim Kaine) and Nigel Eccles (who is predicting Joe Biden). :-D

UPDATE: My (informal) Democratic VP-candidate bet is on Kathleen Sebelius. Hint, hint.

UPDATE: Gawker says that Joe Biden would be a horrible choice. I agree. Plus, he has denied to be the pick. He could have lied to reporters, though.

UPDATE: New York Times publishes portraits of all VP candidates.

DEVELOPING&#8230-

NEXT: While InTrade CEO John Delaney is deceiving the journalists to sell his wares, Tom Snee of the Iowa Electronic Markets is telling them the truth: BEWARE THE VP-CANDIDATE PREDICTION MARKETS, THEY JUST AGGREGATE RUMORS.

Share:

Arbitrage in the InTrade Dem VP Market

No Gravatar

There has been an unexploited arbitrage opportunity in the Intrade Democratic VP market (&#8221-2008 Democratic VP Nominee (others upon request)&#8221-). As the attachment shows, you can sell the slate of candidates for 123.2 (just sum the bids) while you will only have to payout 100. This possibility has existed for at least three weeks, and is particularly puzzling now given that the announcement is likely to occur this week.

What is also a bit odd is that Intrade has another market (&#8221-2008 Democratic Vice-Presidential Nominee (with Field contract)&#8221-) on the same outcome which includes a catch-all field contract which does not have the same arb&#8211-again see the attachment below. It is substantially cheaper to buy the field contract in the second market than the omitted candidates (Kaine, Sebelius, Hagel, Schweitzer, Gephardt, Kerry, and others) in the first market.

Any thoughts on why this is occurring?

attachment: intradedemvp_summedbidsexceed100.pdf

Presumptuous

No Gravatar

Jed Christiansen will never be a cheerleader for the prediction market industry as long as he holds those wrong views about betting on sports.

InTrade-TradeSports CEO John Delaney and HubDub CEO Nigel Eccles might be seen as &#8220-prediction market gurus&#8221-, at least by some &#8212-I doubt very strongly that many industry people will add Jed in the list, after they have read the conformist bullshit that he sent to the CFTC.

We are still waiting Jed&#8217-s reaction on Sean Park&#8217-s comment. Cat got your tongue, Jed? At other times, we couldn&#8217-t stop you.

Why the HubDub model is superior to the InTrade, TradeSports, BetFair, HSX and NewsFuturess ones

No Gravatar

Because HubDub is the only prediction exchange whose prediction market webpages are indexed highly by Google.

That query leads to that prediction market webpage.

That query leads to that prediction market webpage.

That query leads to that prediction market webpage.

That query leads to that prediction market webpage.

In the 4 cases above, you can spot HubDub in the top 10 Google results.

I speculate that HubDub is going to harvest hundreds of thousands of Google visits in the next 12 months.

Which is probably higher that the BetFair blog will get from Google &#8212-and there is a low conversion rate (from the BetFair blog to the BetFair prediction market webpages), probably. With the HubDub model, the conversion rate is always 100%.

Nigel Eccles, this time, I am impressed.

Previous blog posts by Chris F. Masse:

  • Testing the new HubDub chart widgets
  • Why InTrade CEO John Delaney, TradeSports acting CEO John Delaney, BetFair CEO David Yu, HubDub CEO Nigel Eccles and NewsFutures CEO Emile Servan-Schreiber should supplicate me to develop my prediction market journalism project
  • The John Edwards Non-Affair: How on Earth did they get this photo, what does this photo prove, and which prediction markets should we trade on to profit from this alledged scandal?
  • Nick Davis’ effort to clean up British horse racing
  • Free Money On The Table At InTrade
  • Google Web Search shows that I am the only blogger in the world to talk about “prediction market journalism”.
  • Marginal Revolution vs. Freakonomics vs. Overcoming Bias vs. Midas Oracle

How does InTrade deal with insider trading?

InTrade CEO John Delaney (in 2007):

Insider trading is one of the wicked problems, perhaps. Intrade is about providing the best predictive information. If insiders have information, then getting that information reflected in the market increases the quality of the information. I know this is not the conventional view concerning insider trading, and I am not arguing wholesale adoption or acceptance of insider trading. But we all know that, in the real world, insiders trade on inside information. We have even had markets on insider trading. Our view is to get the best information available into the market while we make sure there is some fair protection for outsiders.

As I said, the problem is that this view is very unpopular among event derivative traders.

APPENDIX: Economic arguments in favor of insider trading.

How InTrade CEO John Delaney tried to undo the great damage done to the prediction market industry by Bobs little minions (among them, Robin Hanson and Justin Wolfers)

No Gravatar

John Delaney (CEO of InTrade) – (InTrade PDF file – CFTC PDF file):

Nearly all leading academics, not known for their attraction to unanimity, have publicly supported event markets. A great majority of these academics have been supplied with Intrade market data in the past, a service that Intrade intends to continue, for all study leads to an increase in transparency and understanding of event markets. It seems that the leading event market academics make no distinction between the benefits derived from academic owned markets like Iowa Electronic Markets and commercial market platforms like Intrade.

Yet many academics, with some notable exceptions, do temper their policy prescription to suggest a “safe harbor” for academic sites where research might be more generally available. As noted above Intrade has gladly supplied its event market data, typically free of charge to most of the leading prediction market academics and their students, and we are committed to encouraging the future study of event markets by continuing to supply our event market data free of charge or at very deep discounts. The academics that study event markets do a great service in developing our understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of event markets. Some commentators suggest that market liquidity and breadth typically benefit all event market stakeholders. Thus far commercial platforms like Intrade seem to be providing the greatest depth and breadth in event markets.

As Intrade has been a staunch supporter of event market academic study, and supplies greater depth and liquidity in its event markets than any other platform, it seems strange not to be a preferred purveyor. Perhaps the predominant reason many academics have held back from advocating and treating all event markets alike is a sense that initiatives to clarify or unwind the legislation restraining the optimal development of event markets is unlikely to be achievable. It seems many academics and commentators suggest a slow bureaucratic and pragmatic caution rather than focus on the optimal result. While the optimal result may be more challenging to achieve, for consistency, for better price discovery for the benefit of all, as well as for the development of Intrade, we encourage CFTC to apply common goals, objectives and standards for all participants.

This discourse should be given to read to children in public and private schools, all over the world.