Topic: PRCDice.eu - Largest Dice invest site - Open since 2013! Chat, Play, Invest! - page 28. (Read 89243 times)

why no bonus now

You're smart enough to know how misleading that is. Expected return is the same; the investors are just giving PRC free insurance to dampen the volatility in the site's commissions.

If Dean needs consistent income to operate the site, then so be it. People can divest if they don't want to take on the (slight) extra risk.

Under the old system if the site had an unlucky week where the players made a profit overall, the investors would take the loss and not have to pay any commission to the house.

Under the new system the investors have to pay commission to the house whether they win or lose.

The new system is much fairer because the site owner is guaranteed to get coins from the investors whether they win or lose.

I can't say exactly but generally the house edge for BJ is more than 1% so if Dean is only taking 0.1% of the wagered he's the one missing out.

Oh I never invested. I am just bringing it to people's attention. To which you might say, investor's are responsible for their own decisions, but my argument to that would be that maybe, I should have done the same in DB's case then, maybe I didn't like they were scamming people, so I should not gamble, but let people gamble and lose and not post about it.

Plus a lot of people don't really understand the maths of it. The so called smart guy Bazza was arguing with ruru, that the new system made no difference, but he never understood the math behind it.   seuntjie sums it up pretty much right. To add to that, 95% of the dice sites are currently running below the 1% house edge, so it clearly means, this system ends up being much more unfair to the investors. But again, its their money.

And another thing to add ,to which  I made an edit above. Wouldn't it be a little unfair for investment profits from BlackJack? BJ has a house 0.28% edge(http://wizardofodds.com/gambling/house-edge/), and you are supposedly taking 0.1% anyways, which probably means that  the new system is not fair to the investors for BJ. Am I wrong on this?
EDIT: Based on that site's calculator Dean said its 0.9%. so still 10% short.

wow up 200btc profit. congrats





I my have to and try to win AK bitcoins back

If you're not happy you can divest

summary of what the new system brings to the table (IMO):

If the site does bad (profitif the site does very bad (profit<0) investors pay extra
If the does does as expected (profit = edge) the two systems are the same with respect to the investors.
If the site does better than expected (profit> edge) the investors get paid more and PRC makes less.

Whichever way the profit goes, PRC gets a more stable income allowing it to cover costs and attract more players (via raffles and advertising etc).

Although I am not a fan of the new system, I understand why it was implemented. servers are expensive and a developers time is as well. Dean needs to eat after all. I hope that the change is temporary, but even if it is not, PRC seems to be one of the most profitable investments currently available.

There was discussions on it in the chat. Investors had the time to get all the info and dean was mostly willing to explain it all. Some protested, more seemed to be in favour of it. The email was sent in time so that investors would be able to protest it if wanted.

Quote from: suchmoon on September 29, 2014, 10:14:31 AM

And how do you "save" an e-mail address to the account? I just looked at the account page and can't see anything about that. There is an e-mail field on the registration form, clearly marked as optional.

I see your point, I could not find a place to add an email address besides registration. This is probably something to take up with Dean. I did not notice that it was not possible to add/update an email address post registration

Well I don't know about that. dreama's stats show that 5K BTC has been wagered on 29th, since the new commission system started. Since you got less commission on his loss , maybe its Karma. But nevermind you got the seeds
Anyways, my post was not about Road or his loss. My question was regarding what I posted in the last post written again below.

I am not sure how the change was implemented. Did Dean change the system after voting or by simply informing the investors?
 Because as an investor, I would have definitely been against the change. Because, right now I would be paying Dean 0.1% irrespective of a win or a loss for the gambler. Meaning, if the site was in a loss or below the expected, then I am actually losing more , than what I would have if I just paid commission on profits for me.  
So even though Dean claims its equivalent, it is only in the case if the site comes close to profits of 1% of wagered. Otherwise, its rather a loss to the investors. But it seems investors don't understand this.

and Dean, please don't change the topic like always by giving an example how by coincidence the new system was good today. My argument/question was on the unfairness to the investors. Since you don't understand stuff I will make it simple for you.

If your new system was implemented from the start(start of Dice), then currently the site is around 400 bitcoins below the 1% expected. Now doesn't that mean investors would be down another 40 BTC because of your so called equivalent system?

EDIT: Also wouldn't it be a little unfair for investment profits from BlackJack? BJ has a house 0.28% edge, and you are supposedly taking 0.1% anyways.

Haven't done the complete maths, but it seems it is actually bad for the investors. Basically, site used to earn only when players(gamblers) lost before, now site makes profit for the amount wagered irrespective of it being a win or a lose. (Read the last paragraph for most of the maths - If I understand it correctly).
ruru said something about it being different, not sure what he meant. But like someone pointed out in the chart it is not always good for the investors.
So the old system gave the investors a 1% edge , but it works out only over a long term. The new system is to maximize the Dean's(not investors) profits over the short term .
 For example someone pointed out that according to the site's charts, around 5000 btc was wagered today , so even if the site had lost money, Dean would still have made 0.1% of that 5000 btc which is 5 BTC. So basically Dean now makes profits to run the site irrespective of the site winning or losing.

The argument ruru posted was something that all of the dice sites are much below the expected 1% edge(profit), and some are negative, so the only one's making big profits with this 0.1% of the wagered would be the site owners, which might not seem right to the investors and even might it seems to be the same, the investor's only get that 1% edge over the long term.

I am not sure how the change was implemented. Did Dean change the system after voting or by simply informing the investors?
 Because as an investor, I would have definitely been against the change. Because, right now I would be paying Dean 0.1% irrespective of a win or a loss for the gambler. Meaning, if the site was in a loss or below the expected, then I am actually losing more , than what I would have if I just paid commission on profits for me.  
So even though Dean claims its equivalent, it is only in the case if the site comes close to profits of 1% of wagered. Otherwise, its rather a loss to the investors. But it seems investors don't understand this.

And one more thing.
That guy Bazza is Smart.

Please scroll up to find the third post above your post or click https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.9014729 and read it.

How does the new system different from previous one?

And how do you "save" an e-mail address to the account? I just looked at the account page and can't see anything about that. There is an e-mail field on the registration form, clearly marked as optional.

He definitely emailed investors, but only those with an email saved to their account. Let me guess, you never registered an email address or used a temp/fake one?

blablabla

http://blog.pocketrocketscasino.eu/2014/09/changes-to-investment-model/

Apparently PRC made a change in the commission system and claims to have emailed the investors last week. Do you not think Dean a post on this would be wise here?

If you want zoomable graphs you can also use this link...
https://sites.google.com/site/prcdicestats/dynamic

Yeah it is a bit hard to find.

I've started work on a new version of the site written and designed from the ground up so everything will be easier to use and much faster and stable.

There will be a test version open to public soon so bugs/issues can be resolved before the current site switches over to the new one.

Thanks a lot for dooglus' details stats and NLNico's links.

My bad, I never noticed PRC was publishing those daily stats (the page was a bit hard to find TBH, I need to click "Account", "Investments" and then click the link in the first line).