Pages:
Author

Topic: 🌟🎲🌟 MoneyPot.com (Read 119082 times)

legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
January 02, 2017, 10:36:57 PM
The thanks belong to Crazycraig, our lead dev. 

And we're back!
legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
January 02, 2017, 10:14:33 PM
Currently have a hiccup in our database as we crossed a certain data threshold.

We are working on it to get it back up as quickly as possible.
legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
December 31, 2016, 04:41:34 PM


New App Rules:

No luring players to or from other apps



I thought I will report this because he didnt ask us if he can promote his site in our chat

btw I like his HE

Dec 31 16:55 SlimxaQ: 0.001% House Edge Bits Fast Betting site: http://youboost.me/
Dec 31 16:55 SlimxaQ: 0.001% House Edge Bits Fast Betting site: http://youboost.me/
Dec 31 16:55 SlimxaQ: 0.001% House Edge Bits Fast Betting site: http://youboost.me/

He will be banned shortly.

The minimum house edge will be in effect either tonight or tomorrow.
legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
December 27, 2016, 02:46:58 PM
All site owners should know how stressful this job is.  I feel ours is a bit more stressful because we deal with app owners, players, and investors.

Hehe, yeah. You'll never be able to win that fight.  I remember once I put the commissions to 0%, and had both app owners and investors complaining to me at the same time they were getting the short end of the stick.  I guess you know when you've struck a good compromise is when both sides are equally unhappy  Tongue

It's really a thankless job.  I don't think many people will get how bad it really is and it is honestly why I get frazzled sometimes when you pick points to correct because you've been through some of it before.  

To everyone else, I do apologize for all of the constant drama in the thread, I just don't want people thinking the wrong way.

---

Moneypot is doing everything in our power to create a proper balance for players, investors, app owners, and the owners.  

Moneypot is aiming to be much more than just a gaming wallet.  We want to show you rather than just talk.  

While we sometimes get a little bit backed up on deadlines, it does not mean we aren't doing anything.  We are putting in HARD work almost every day and I hope to show you with our actions soon.



legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
December 27, 2016, 02:15:13 PM
@Rhavar

Yes, I admit sometimes I get ridiculous.  I will do a much better job of keeping my composure.  I am sorry.

It's hard because I've said it before and I'll say it again, I am absolutely tired of other sites coming in and try to put the site and our efforts down.  

There's been plenty of criticism before and it's mostly never been on the offensive.  But I feel other site owners should know better.  I don't see why any other major site owner should stir up trouble in another major site's thread.  Let them do their own thing.

If the real aim is to help, reach out and do it.  Don't try and make them look like fools in public.  I'm more than open to collaborating with other sites so that we can all work together and help each other out, but it's always bickering and jabs.

I respect all the other major site owners.  I have vouched for them several times even though they are competition.  It gets a little tiring when it's not mutual and we find public posts or people talking behind our backs in their chat rooms constantly.


@Alex

I apologize.  I do admit that it got way out of hand quickly on my end.  Please see above.

---
All site owners should know how stressful this job is.  I feel ours is a bit more stressful because we deal with app owners, players, and investors.  We should have a better understanding of what the others are going through and yet the attacking comes mostly from the very people that are going through the same fight.  
legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
December 27, 2016, 01:33:49 PM
Alex, you are incorrect. The difference is that the big wins on BitDice and BetKing came from players risking a significant amount of Bitcoin, whereas the big wins on MoneyPot primarily occurred from users betting what is essentially dust. One of our largest investors pulled out specifically citing this has his biggest beef.

I understand you are also salty that a large portion of your userbase switched to MoneyPot (primarily Bit-exo.com), but you need to refrain from trolling.

Actually, I've never trolled anyone on the forum. Even with BitExo situation, which I think you are aware of, I decided not to start a storm in a teacup, and I have all the rights to do it. You do agree that for business owners only wager counts, not people being online? Let's forget it, I really do not care about it.

I've left my comment with another reason. I rarely participate in discussions as unfortunately, I do not have time to be on the forum. But when I strongly disagree - I think I have a right to left such comment. People are free to accept or deny it or discuss. The least I wanted with it is a brag like we or someone else is better. Based on MP's stats I really do not understand why parties who risks the most earns the less. In economic terms risks always pays out. And if that investor would be paid based on his risk, I think he wouldn't divest, but again HE of 0.1 and even 0.5% is too low for all participants.

Regards,
Alex.

If you're not trolling, you are stating on a public forum under your public company's image bold facts that you are writing and believe to be true.  We would like to challenge you on this.

We are not bragging or using any statistics to take a shot at you.   You claimed that our costs are almost non existent and we are explaining to you why.  

For business income, yes, wagering/volume is the most important factor, but we have explained (even in the post that you quoted) that our high number of bets is a big reason for our high costs.

I honestly believe and could make a great argument for why out of all the parties, Moneypot takes the most risk.  

It's probably best that you don't participate in discussions often.  I think it's quite foolish as the head of an official company to write damaging statements in public that you are not well informed of.



I was thinking that my comment was a part of a discussion on your business model, and even suggestion to optimize it. Never thought it was "damaging". Seems you over-reacting and rather than explain and discuss you attack.

Regards,
Alex.

I'd consider attacking as posting damaging bold statements that you haven't researched into.  I have made no mention of your site other than giving you an idea of scale of our bets.  

Other than that, I am trying to contact your public company.  Am I not correct that you are a public company in Costa Rica?

The following Costa Rican law has me wondering why you are failing to disclose the information we are requesting through the e-mail you have provided:

"The essence of the law is that Costa Rica corporations must disclose their shareholders and any beneficial owners.   The law creates a shareholder registry database which will be under the custody of the Central Bank of Costa Rica (BCCR).   All Costa Rica corporations and foreign corporations that have a registered subsidiary in Costa Rica must disclose and submit the names of the beneficial owners and shareholders of  those corporate entities."

edit; just to give a little bit of context as to why I'm upset -- you are clearly writing that we have little to no costs and perform little to no services, yet in reality I work full time on support and planning (currently unpaid), we have a paid high level developer, a paid high level graphics designer, and other paid freelance developers.  Moneypot's commission is 20% (which is lower than BitDice's 30%) and yet you try to insinuate that we do nothing and take everything and that we are lying about our setup.
legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
December 27, 2016, 01:12:44 PM
Alex, you are incorrect. The difference is that the big wins on BitDice and BetKing came from players risking a significant amount of Bitcoin, whereas the big wins on MoneyPot primarily occurred from users betting what is essentially dust. One of our largest investors pulled out specifically citing this has his biggest beef.

I understand you are also salty that a large portion of your userbase switched to MoneyPot (primarily Bit-exo.com), but you need to refrain from trolling.

Actually, I've never trolled anyone on the forum. Even with BitExo situation, which I think you are aware of, I decided not to start a storm in a teacup, and I have all the rights to do it. You do agree that for business owners only wager counts, not people being online? Let's forget it, I really do not care about it.

I've left my comment with another reason. I rarely participate in discussions as unfortunately, I do not have time to be on the forum. But when I strongly disagree - I think I have a right to left such comment. People are free to accept or deny it or discuss. The least I wanted with it is a brag like we or someone else is better. Based on MP's stats I really do not understand why parties who risks the most earns the less. In economic terms risks always pays out. And if that investor would be paid based on his risk, I think he wouldn't divest, but again HE of 0.1 and even 0.5% is too low for all participants.

Regards,
Alex.

If you're not trolling, you are stating on a public forum under your public company's image bold facts that you are writing and believe to be true.  We would like to challenge you on this.

We are not bragging or using any statistics to take a shot at you.   You claimed that our costs are almost non existent and we are explaining to you why.  

For business income, yes, wagering/volume is the most important factor, but we have explained (even in the post that you quoted) that our high number of bets is a big reason for our high costs.

I honestly believe and could make a great argument for why out of all the parties, Moneypot takes the most risk.  

It's probably best that you don't participate in discussions often.  I think it's quite foolish as the head of an official company to write damaging statements in public that you are not well informed of.

legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
December 27, 2016, 12:59:39 PM
I do not see the point in limiting maximum multiplier to 9900x , other dice sites allow multiplier of up to 990000x (for example betking).
You probably should ask investors at what kelly they want to use its nicely implemented at new dice site.

New changes will prevent big percentage of bankroll to be won at once however it will also limit growth rate.



We will soon be allowing users to choose their own kelly multiplier.

Investors have expressed a strong disinterest in backing bets where they risk several bitcoin to win 1 Bit and many other similar scenarios.  

Huge jackpot wins often lead to unwarranted speculation and panic.  Big wins also sometimes result in big investors pulling out which causes a domino effect of more investors pulling out.

Moneypot also accrues high expenses for processing and storing all the bets.  

In the end, it just doesn't make sense to allow for high multipliers.  It's much easier for many of the parties involved to just keep it simple.


You are wrong here. None of the investors from BitDice or BetKing when there were huge wins pulled out, they did exactly opposite - invested more. And we are talking of wins from 500-1000BTC, not 100.

Mathematically there's no difference between very low chance multiplier and very high ones for casino ( and investors ) in the long run.

What you had wrong is very low HE and huge cut on investors. No wonder they aren't satisfied as MP has economically inadequate terms biased for owners who risk nothing and staff who do "close to" nothing ( you do not do marketing, and have no costs except staff )

Regards,
Alex.

Since you are a public company with a legal team behind your site, can you please private message me your details so our legal team can get in contact with yours about what we may believe to be libel?  Thanks.
legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
December 27, 2016, 12:47:50 PM
We have several thousand dollars of infrastructure with cost ever increasing

Then you need to optimize code, as it's way over normal price, even if you use whole AWS stack and not dedicated servers which are like x10 lower in running costs.

Regards,
Alex.

Maybe you don't realize the costs because you rarely crack 1/10th of our daily bets.  It costs a lot to process and store millions of bets a day.  We moved away from Amazon Web Services a long time ago as we don't feel it's secure.
legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
December 27, 2016, 12:45:19 PM
I do not see the point in limiting maximum multiplier to 9900x , other dice sites allow multiplier of up to 990000x (for example betking).
You probably should ask investors at what kelly they want to use its nicely implemented at new dice site.

New changes will prevent big percentage of bankroll to be won at once however it will also limit growth rate.



We will soon be allowing users to choose their own kelly multiplier.

Investors have expressed a strong disinterest in backing bets where they risk several bitcoin to win 1 Bit and many other similar scenarios.  

Huge jackpot wins often lead to unwarranted speculation and panic.  Big wins also sometimes result in big investors pulling out which causes a domino effect of more investors pulling out.

Moneypot also accrues high expenses for processing and storing all the bets.  

In the end, it just doesn't make sense to allow for high multipliers.  It's much easier for many of the parties involved to just keep it simple.


You are wrong here. None of the investors from BitDice or BetKing when there were huge wins pulled out, they did exactly opposite - invested more. And we are talking of wins from 500-1000BTC, not 100.

Mathematically there's no difference between very low chance multiplier and very high ones for casino ( and investors ) in the long run.

What you had wrong is very low HE and huge cut on investors. No wonder they aren't satisfied as MP has economically inadequate terms biased for owners who risk nothing and staff who do "close to" nothing ( you do not do marketing, and have no costs except staff )

Regards,
Alex.

That's a pretty bold statement.

Pretty low Alex imo.

You're going to try and take jabs on top too now eh?  There are plenty of investors that are satisfied and the things that they think could be done better we are working with to get done.

We also take the time to listen to them.  We know that mathematically it doesn't make a difference, but if it's a preference for them, we are going to hear them out.

The apps are like our referral system.  We (Moneypot) take less commission than you.  

We also have a bunch lined up for Moneypot.  Where are all your misguided comments even coming from?


legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
December 27, 2016, 12:09:39 PM
Huge jackpot wins often lead to unwarranted speculation and panic.  Big wins also sometimes result in big investors pulling out which causes a domino effect of more investors pulling out.

Moneypot also accrues high expenses for processing and storing all the bets.  

In the end, it just doesn't make sense to allow for high multipliers.  It's much easier for many of the parties involved to just keep it simple.

If you ask me, it will be very hard to stop those bets with the way moneypot is set up. You don't even need chained bets (which MP said that they would disable apps that do that, or might), just create a bet like this:

0.01BTC bet

99.99999% (or whatever chance) to lose 10 satoshi
0.00001 (or whatever chance) to win 1 Bitcoin

It would only need a 100 multiplier, technically and still is basically the same as high multiplier bets, except a higher edge is paid so more commission for app owners and MP.


In this case, the user would still be wagering .01 Bitcoin so that expected value is -0.0001 btc a bet.  It's a much better setup for investors and Moneypot than bets where several bitcoin are risked for an expected value bet of -0.0000000001.
legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
December 27, 2016, 11:54:43 AM
@QS Yes, we are just having it so that the system will reject bets that attempt a multiplier higher than 9900x.  We won't be going through it app by app for this purpose.

@Kolloh Yes, The kelly multipliers will be 0.5x, 1x, 2x, 3x (we are still weighing opinions on whether or not to have higher multipliers involved)

@JackPotRacer We didn't have an exact stated time.  We are working hard, but the holidays are a tricky time to plan around.  We are doing what we can and will keep people notified on the matter.

@JackpotRacer Yes, Moneypot has a partial stake in WheelPot, but that does not mean that it gets some type of pass.  It too will need to have the system re-worked.  It is a minor app in the Moneypot space and just because it had a low house edge in the past does not mean that we encourage others to do the same.  SharpDice (my personal app)  was taken down because the house edge was too low.
legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
December 27, 2016, 11:45:05 AM
I do not see the point in limiting maximum multiplier to 9900x , other dice sites allow multiplier of up to 990000x (for example betking).
You probably should ask investors at what kelly they want to use its nicely implemented at new dice site.

New changes will prevent big percentage of bankroll to be won at once however it will also limit growth rate.



We will soon be allowing users to choose their own kelly multiplier.

Investors have expressed a strong disinterest in backing bets where they risk several bitcoin to win 1 Bit and many other similar scenarios. 

Huge jackpot wins often lead to unwarranted speculation and panic.  Big wins also sometimes result in big investors pulling out which causes a domino effect of more investors pulling out.

Moneypot also accrues high expenses for processing and storing all the bets. 

In the end, it just doesn't make sense to allow for high multipliers.  It's much easier for many of the parties involved to just keep it simple.
legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
December 25, 2016, 09:44:25 AM
Merry Christmas everyone.

Support will be a little slow today and tomorrow (as all of the Moneypot team is celebrating the holidays).  We apologize for that but will try to check in from time to time if there are any issues.

A lot of good points were brought up and I will address them after the holidays (or if I can sneak in some time).  @Fiscorcle, there will be optional kelly multipliers in the future Wink
legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
December 23, 2016, 04:37:50 PM
We won't bring the multiplier live until we have fully figured it out and give a thorough explanation of what it means.
legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
December 23, 2016, 10:07:38 AM
New Rules are going live in the immediate future:

Maximum win 0.5% of bankroll (once commission is changed, will be closer to 1x kelly -- kelly options will be added at a later date)
Minimum house edge of 0.5% (bets below will be rejected by system).


New Measures:

Apps will be cleaned up in preparation for new app levels.  Seriously inactive and broken sites will be deleted.

In the new year, the investor credit plan and personal statistics will be available on each player's profile page.

Any usernames deemed to imitate an other account will be banned (for example: using an upper case ' i ' to act as a lower case ' l ' )


legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
December 20, 2016, 11:09:05 PM

At the end of the week they pay 10% of their profit to the apps, and 10% to MP; that's 0.5 BTC to each.

Get it now?

You mean to say only at the end of each week profit and losses are distributed to investors, app developers and owners?

What happens if any investors withdraw their investment in the middle of the week? Whether they will get money based on last weeks calculations?

We are still working out all the details.  The thought right now is that the commission on profit will apply when investors divest but is subject to change.
legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
December 20, 2016, 10:32:15 PM

We are re-balancing things.

I think people vastly under estimate the costs that both app owners and Moneypot owners have to take on.

App Owners and Moneypot Owners both took a cut in the new changes that will take place.  It will be also be made that for the period of the announcement going backward, all the investors invested at that point will stand to have made bitcoin from their past investment.

I honestly don't know what else investors could ask for.  If Moneypot wasn't expanding our services and focusing on development all while committing ourselves to the people who are part of Moneypot, we would have already taken the bankroll private because it is a great position to be in.

With Moneypot, you get multiple sites that you are invested into with many more to come in the next year not to mention several new products that should lead to increased traffic and volume.

Moneypot Owners take on a great deal amount of risk that goes beyond just bitcoin and we end up with one of the lowest cuts in the industry.  I'd also argue that our costs are higher than most sites as well.


Again thanks for your explanation and somehow I'm not convinced with your explanation that owners only come forward to take the cut when investors make money but when investors lose money don't want to take part of it.

Anyway, you're the owner of the site, and you can decide the rules, and I can decide whether want to invest or not.

Nothing is personal here....

I don't take your comments personally either.  It's all good.

There was quite a few investors that made money.  And for those investors that didn't, we have gone out of our way to make it so that they will, out of our own pockets.  I don't think your comment on 'not taking part in it' really applies anymore.
legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
December 20, 2016, 10:12:52 PM
Can somebody explain to me how profit and losses sharing will works here?

Case one - player wins 1 BTC from any moneypot app in single bet.

What I know is -

40% to app owners ( 40% of the house edge) equals to - 0.004 BTC
10% to Mp ( 10% of the house edge) equals to - 0.001 BTC

Investors need to pay - 1BTC+ 0.004+0.001 = 1.005BTC in total will disappear from the investors account.

Case two - player losses 1 BTC in any moneypot app in single bet.

What I know is -

40% to app owners ( 40% of the house edge) equals to - 0.004 BTC
10% to Mp ( 10% of the house edge) equals to - 0.001 BTC
40% to investors - ( 40% of the house edge) equals to - 0.004 BTC

All together is 0.009 BTC

If we deduct this 0.009 BTC from 1 BTC = 0.991 BTC

Please explain to me who will take this 0.991 BTC and how it will be distributed

I know my understanding is not correct. Thanks

40% of the house edge goes to app owners
10% of the house edge goes to MP
so 50% of the house edge is going to the investors

of the profit investors make from their 50% of the house edge, app owners and MP each get 10%; that represents a further 5% of the house edge for each

so the investors end up getting 40% of the house edge

---

For your specific examples:

when the player wins a 1 BTC bet (at 2x) the app gets 0.004, MP gets 0.001, and the investors pay 1.005
when the player loses a 1 BTC bet the app gets 0.004, MP gets 0.001, and the investors get 0.995

but then, at the end of the week, the investors pay 20% of their net profit: 10% to the apps, and 10% to MP.

So suppose there were 1000 bets in the week. All of them were for 1 BTC at 2x, with a 49.5% chance of winning. A house edge of 1%.
Suppose 495 of them won and 505 of them lost. That's the expected result.

On each of the 495 winning bets the investors pay out 1.005; they pay a total of 1.005 * 495 = 497.475
On each of the 505 losing bets the investors earn 0.995; they earn a total of 0.995 * 505 = 502.475
Their net profit is 502.475 - 497.475 = 5 on a total amount wagered of 1000. That's 50% of the house edge.

At the end of the week they pay 10% of their profit to the apps, and 10% to MP; that's 0.5 BTC to each.
They are left with a profit of 4. That's 40% of the house edge.

Get it now?

It is a good explanation, and everyone can easily understand this simple maths.

Just want to get more understanding on last part. Why do investors need to pay 10% to both MP and App owners if they make a profit at the end of each week? Any specific reason for that?

If that is applicable, then you should also consider implementing MP and App owners need to pay investors 10% each, if Investor loses money for any particular week then I think it is a balanced formula otherwise it is biased to help only MP and App owners.

Investors are always losers in this investment and it is just my feeling because I too lost my money in this investment and if you come up with better profit sharing then I would like to re-enter again.

I hope everyone will support for this logic if you think it without biased mindset.

We are re-balancing things.

I think people vastly under estimate the costs that both app owners and Moneypot owners have to take on.

App Owners and Moneypot Owners both took a cut in the new changes that will take place.  It will be also be made that for the period of the announcement going backward, all the investors invested at that point will stand to have made bitcoin from their past investment.

I honestly don't know what else investors could ask for.  If Moneypot wasn't expanding our services and focusing on development all while committing ourselves to the people who are part of Moneypot, we would have already taken the bankroll private because it is a great position to be in.

With Moneypot, you get multiple sites that you are invested into with many more to come in the next year not to mention several new products that should lead to increased traffic and volume.

Moneypot Owners take on a great deal amount of risk that goes beyond just bitcoin and we end up with one of the lowest cuts in the industry.  I'd also argue that our costs are higher than most sites as well.



legendary
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
December 19, 2016, 01:33:30 PM
I think this is how it breaks down assuming investors run at neutral ev.

App Owners: 40% house edge+10% of the 50% investor profit(5% house edge)= 45% house edge
Money Pot: 10% house edge+10% of the 50% investor profit(5% house edge)= 15% house edge
Investor: 50% house edge-20% of the 50% investor profit= 40% house edge

Oh yes, that makes sense.

So the expected total commission has dropped from 70% (50+20) to 60% (45+15).

I hadn't realized before that you can't calculate the expected commission by simply summing the 'on house edge' and 'on profit' percentages.

For example, BetKing used to take 25% up front (on the house edge) and another 25% of the actual profits. I always assumed that represented a 50% expected commission (25+25), but now it seems like it was 'only' 25 + (0.75*25) = 43.75%. Do I have it right now?

This is how we believe the math works out.  We asked Ryan to assist us with the math and he believes this is correct as well.

The commission of investor profit will work much like other sites where if there is no profit, no commission will be made at that time.

Like Ranlo stated before, this is a move with the long term in mind.  

We don't plan to go anywhere, and we want to show that we are fully committed to our product and believe in it.  It will be much more than just a gaming wallet.

While we didn't need to credit any investors, we wanted to.  There's no hiding the fact that the investor profit has dropped significantly over the last few months (it's started to rise again a bit in the last week).  Over the last year, there are a lot of things that we honestly could have done better and we are taking action now to try and re-balance things even if it means giving up a significant amount of bitcoin out of pocket to do so.  

We want to try and establish ourselves as a company that tries to do right by everyone, listen, observe, and adjust as necessary.  

We see the big picture and it is bright.  In our minds, this type of 'insurance policy' to make sure that we are able to easier reach where we want to be is more than worth it.
Pages:
Jump to: