jsearles and Chinamaniac debate about the value of his WSOP pieces

[jsearles22]

Can you or Druff please explain the difference between your offer here and his offer? To my untrained eye it seems like Druff is selling pieces of himself and you are actually running a BAP or staking agreement.

For example, lets say you and Druff enter the same $3000 limit event, #48. Druff is marking this up and selling 1% for $37/share. The backers then get 1% of all profit from this event. China is selling the same event dollar for dollar with no markup but is doing so on a 65/35 staking agreement. Therefore if Druff and China both cash for $10,000 in this event and you owned 10% of each you would get back $1000 from Druff for your $370 investment ($630 profit) whereas you would get back $755 from China for your initial $300 investment ($455 profit)

In the above scenario, assuming i have done all of the math correctly, you would make a 38% greater return on your investment with only a 23% increase in risk.

Druff seemingly is the better play here considering he has a better history, has won a WSOP limit bracelet, and seems to be a lower risk.

[chinamaniac]

Can you or Druff please explain the difference between your offer here and his offer? To my untrained eye it seems like Druff is selling pieces of himself and you are actually running a BAP or staking agreement.

For example, lets say you and Druff enter the same $3000 limit event, #48. Druff is marking this up and selling 1% for $37/share. The backers then get 1% of all profit from this event. China is selling the same event dollar for dollar with no markup but is doing so on a 65/35 staking agreement. Therefore if Druff and China both cash for $10,000 in this event and you owned 10% of each you would get back $1000 from Druff for your $370 investment ($630 profit) whereas you would get back $755 from China for your initial $300 investment ($455 profit)

In the above scenario, assuming i have done all of the math correctly, you would make a 38% greater return on your investment with only a 23% increase in risk.

Druff seemingly is the better play here considering he has a better history, has won a WSOP limit bracelet, and seems to be a lower risk.

Your math is most likely off because mine includes stakeback and druffs is direct buy a piece with no stakeback. But I am not going to take the time to break down the exact #s between the 2 offers because his has nothing to do with mine.

What I can tell you is my BAP is 65-35 backers favor for MTTS + cash game action with stakeback

Now please stop trying to ruin this thread. TIA

[limitles]

Can you or Druff please explain the difference between your offer here and his offer? To my untrained eye it seems like Druff is selling pieces of himself and you are actually running a BAP or staking agreement.

For example, lets say you and Druff enter the same $3000 limit event, #48. Druff is marking this up and selling 1% for $37/share. The backers then get 1% of all profit from this event. China is selling the same event dollar for dollar with no markup but is doing so on a 65/35 staking agreement. Therefore if Druff and China both cash for $10,000 in this event and you owned 10% of each you would get back $1000 from Druff for your $370 investment ($630 profit) whereas you would get back $755 from China for your initial $300 investment ($455 profit)

In the above scenario, assuming i have done all of the math correctly, you would make a 38% greater return on your investment with only a 23% increase in risk.

Druff seemingly is the better play here considering he has a better history, has won a WSOP limit bracelet, and seems to be a lower risk.

You have to calculate the cost of advertising.....Druff is obv getting some advertising dollars from China for this......so China must charge more......lol?

[jsearles22]

Can you or Druff please explain the difference between your offer here and his offer? To my untrained eye it seems like Druff is selling pieces of himself and you are actually running a BAP or staking agreement.

For example, lets say you and Druff enter the same $3000 limit event, #48. Druff is marking this up and selling 1% for $37/share. The backers then get 1% of all profit from this event. China is selling the same event dollar for dollar with no markup but is doing so on a 65/35 staking agreement. Therefore if Druff and China both cash for $10,000 in this event and you owned 10% of each you would get back $1000 from Druff for your $370 investment ($630 profit) whereas you would get back $755 from China for your initial $300 investment ($455 profit)

In the above scenario, assuming i have done all of the math correctly, you would make a 38% greater return on your investment with only a 23% increase in risk.

Druff seemingly is the better play here considering he has a better history, has won a WSOP limit bracelet, and seems to be a lower risk.

Your math is most likely off because mine includes stakeback and druffs is direct buy a piece with no stakeback. But I am not going to take the time to break down the exact #s between the 2 offers because his has nothing to do with mine.

What I can tell you is my BAP is 65-35 backers favor for MTTS + cash game action with stakeback

Now please stop trying to ruin this thread. TIA

I apologize if you feel I am trying to ruin this thread in any way. I like how you angrily respond to me saying "your math is most likely off" when in fact my math is 100% accurate, but you dont ask people posting retarded gifs to quit fagging up the thread. Im trying to help potential investors better understand the *ahem* opportunity you are proposing.

[Dan Druff]

Your math is most likely off because mine includes stakeback and druffs is direct buy a piece with no stakeback. But I am not going to take the time to break down the exact #s between the 2 offers because his has nothing to do with mine.

What I can tell you is my BAP is 65-35 backers favor for MTTS + cash game action with stakeback

Now please stop trying to ruin this thread. TIA

I apologize if you feel I am trying to ruin this thread in any way. I like how you angrily respond to me saying "your math is most likely off" when in fact my math is 100% accurate, but you dont ask people posting retarded gifs to quit fagging up the thread. Im trying to help potential investors better understand the *ahem* opportunity you are proposing.

He is explaining that your math is "off" in the way that it's not as simple as just breaking down what you get when either of us wins $10,000 in the same event, because his includes stakeback (which has some value), and mine has no stakeback.

I'm not sure how to calculate stakeback value, and won't bother trying, but these are just two very different offers and are hard to compare.

[jsearles22]

I apologize if you feel I am trying to ruin this thread in any way. I like how you angrily respond to me saying "your math is most likely off" when in fact my math is 100% accurate, but you dont ask people posting retarded gifs to quit fagging up the thread. Im trying to help potential investors better understand the *ahem* opportunity you are proposing.

He is explaining that your math is "off" in the way that it's not simple to the point of just breaking down what you get when either of us wins $10,000 in the same event, because his includes stakeback (which has some value), and mine has no stakeback.

I'm not sure how to calculate stakeback value, and won't bother trying, but these are just two very different offers and are hard to compare.

Anyway, jsearles, you made your point, and I think everyone understands it. Please don't disrupt this thread further. If you would like to raise an issue with China, please do it in a different thread.

Stakeback is of no real value. The only feasible way you can calculate value of a stake, BAP, or piece buying is to say if I invest X dollars and you cash for Y, whats my return on investment. In these two scenarios Druffs return is higher. I dont know how thats even disputable.

[chinamaniac]

I apologize if you feel I am trying to ruin this thread in any way. I like how you angrily respond to me saying "your math is most likely off" when in fact my math is 100% accurate, but you dont ask people posting retarded gifs to quit fagging up the thread. Im trying to help potential investors better understand the *ahem* opportunity you are proposing.

He is explaining that your math is "off" in the way that it's not as simple as just breaking down what you get when either of us wins $10,000 in the same event, because his includes stakeback (which has some value), and mine has no stakeback.

I'm not sure how to calculate stakeback value, and won't bother trying, but these are just two very different offers and are hard to compare.

Anyway, jsearles, you made your point, and I think everyone understands it. Please don't disrupt this thread further. If you would like to raise an issue with China, please do it in a different thread.

Yes his math is off because of the stakeback plus I am adding in cash games where I am only taking a 35 % cut so that adds a bonus to it as well considering right now I am running a cash stake and I am getting a 70% cut!!!!

[jsearles22]

He is explaining that your math is "off" in the way that it's not as simple as just breaking down what you get when either of us wins $10,000 in the same event, because his includes stakeback (which has some value), and mine has no stakeback.

I'm not sure how to calculate stakeback value, and won't bother trying, but these are just two very different offers and are hard to compare.

Anyway, jsearles, you made your point, and I think everyone understands it. Please don't disrupt this thread further. If you would like to raise an issue with China, please do it in a different thread.

Yes his math is off because of the stakeback plus I am adding in cash games where I am only taking a 35 % cut so that adds a bonus to it as well considering right now I am running a cash stake and I am getting a 70% cut!!!!

My math is off because of stakeback? So if you finish at $10,000 and someone invested $300 then you wont ship them back $755, meaning they profited $455? How the fuck can you keep spewing that my math is wrong when its not?

[chinamaniac]

Yes his math is off because of the stakeback plus I am adding in cash games where I am only taking a 35 % cut so that adds a bonus to it as well considering right now I am running a cash stake and I am getting a 70% cut!!!!

My math is off because of stakeback? So if you finish at $10,000 and someone invested $300 then you wont ship them back $755, meaning they profited $455? How the fuck can you keep spewing that my math is wrong when its not?

Druff has no stakeback in his share selling. I do.

Druff has no cash games as part of his stake and I do as mine is cash and stake combined.

2 different things

[jsearles22]

My math is off because of stakeback? So if you finish at $10,000 and someone invested $300 then you wont ship them back $755, meaning they profited $455? How the fuck can you keep spewing that my math is wrong when its not?

Druff has no stakeback. I do. Druff has no cash games I do.

2 different things here

Excellent job of dodging the fact that my math is correct after you have said multiple times that it wasnt. Do you not realize that I understand you include stakeback when i am saying you will ship them back $755 so they profit $455? Thats a $300, oh my god could it be stakeback? DING DING DING

Druff, please move all of my posts and Chinas replies to a new thread so he doesnt have to look like a fucking retard in his WSOP Bap thread. It honestly wasnt my intention to flame him, I was originally confused when he said he was selling pieces and you said you were selling pieces. China is more offering a stake and I was trying to clarify that. Then China just went full retard, and everyone knows you should never go full retard.

[chinamaniac]

Druff has no stakeback. I do. Druff has no cash games I do.

2 different things here

Excellent job of dodging the fact that my math is correct after you have said multiple times that it wasnt. Do you not realize that I understand you include stakeback when i am saying you will ship them back $755 so they profit $455? Thats a $300, oh my god could it be stakeback? DING DING DING

Your math is off bro.

Also how do you calculate in cash games with backers 65 % cut? Figure that one out too while your at it.

[jsearles22]

Excellent job of dodging the fact that my math is correct after you have said multiple times that it wasnt. Do you not realize that I understand you include stakeback when i am saying you will ship them back $755 so they profit $455? Thats a $300, oh my god could it be stakeback? DING DING DING

Your math is off bro.

Also how do you calculate in cash games with backers 65 % cut? Figure that one out too while your at it.

Here is how you calculate a cash game cut at 65%. You take the the profit, ship back the stake amoun, then multiply the profit by .65. Its actually the exact same way you figure tourney profit! Im sure people are going to want to invest with you when you cant even calculate payouts.

You are implying that you are giving overlay because you are offering cash at the same cut to justify your horrible offer.

[jsearles22]

Druff has no stakeback. I do. Druff has no cash games I do.

2 different things here

Then China just went full retard, and everyone knows you should never go full retard.

I will offer cash via paypal to the first person to ship a quality photoshop with a Ben Stiller from Tropic Thunder .gif but with Chinas face. It must include the painted face and all though.

Templar? Vwls? Anyone?

[chinamaniac]

Put the stakeback part of the stake aside for a second and his math is off just for the fact that I added in cash games.

I am giving a 65 % cut to backers for cash as PART OF THE STAKE AS A WHOLE. You can't just buy pieces of my events and not the cash games. They are both added together for a total value of $10,000.

I probably could prob run a cash stake on the side and got up to 70% ( I am getting 70 for an online stake now) and a low of 50 % no problem but I am only asking for 35 %. That changes the dynamics of the math entirely because the cash game and events are combined which I feel was a nice bonus for backers considering I am giving up equity there on the %.

So comparing my WSOP events with druffs is like comparing apples and oranges.

Druffs events are sold separate and you can only buy select amounts for every event.


My cash games and WSOP events are sold as 1 lump sum. You can't just buy cash and buy some pieces of my events. it is all lumped together

Heading out for the evening. Enjoy your night spinning like a top Jason

[chinamaniac]

One other thing before I go Jason, I never was mad once (you were the one swearing and ranting), just laughing at what a pure moron you are.

[jsearles22]

Put the stakeback part of the stake aside for a second and his math is off just for the fact that I added in cash games.

I am giving a 65 % cut to backers for cash as PART OF THE STAKE AS A WHOLE. You can't just buy pieces of my events and not the cash games. They are both added together for a total value of $10,000.

I probably could prob run a cash stake on the side and got up to 70% ( I am getting 70 for an online stake now) and a low of 50 % no problem. That changes the dynamics of the math entirely because the cash game and events are combined which I feel was a nice bonus for backers considering I am giving up equity there on the %.

So comparing my WSOP events with druffs is like comparing apples and oranges.

Druffs events are sold separate and you can only buy select amounts for every event.


My cash games and WSOP events are sold as 1 lump sum. You can't just buy cash and buy some pieces of my events. it is all lumped together

Heading out for the evening. Enjoy your night spinning like a top Jason

This was actually your first coherent response.

I will agree that you are giving a fair amount of equity in the cash games. I feel that you are giving a poor number for the MTTs though. You yourself admitted to only offering 70% in the past and that it ended up being -ev for the investors. Now you are moving it down to 65% even though 55% of your BAP is two tourneys, which makes this offer vary high variance. To offset that variance you should be offering better terms, ala Dan Druff!

Cash games = nice cut
Tournies = bad cut

Since there is no option to take one or the other you are stuck with both. Therefore you cant trumpet one side and ignore the other when proclaiming how good of a deal you are offering.

If you profit $10,000 total on your investment opportunity and Druff profits $10,000 total on any one tournament that someone invests in, then you make more money off of Dan Druff. Its that simple. Spewing towards your "troll" and saying correct math is incorrect isnt going you any favors sir.

Have a nice week Mark.

[jsearles22]

One other thing before I go Jason, I never was mad once (you were the one swearing and ranting), just laughing at what a pure moron you are.

Who said you were mad?

[chinamaniac]

Another way to look at the stakeback is let's say I whiff the 3k and then say I cash for 20k in the 2500 and someone had all the 10k buyin. They get stakebacked for both events before profit comes in.

They would get back 100% of their buyins for both events returned (because it is lumped) + they would take 65 % of the profits

It's apples and oranges what you are trying to compare. Especially with the 65 % cash game return factored in.

[hutmaster]

China,

I am putting this here because I don't want to douche up your main WSOP thread....but I have a question for you. Why add your cash games into same stake as your tournament action. I would trust you and Druff to honestly report your results but realistically there is no way to verify any of your cash game play. Your online play can be tracked and tournament play can be tracked but live cash games cant. If you are able to sell out shares to people that know you and your character really well, I suppose it's not a problem, but if you need folks that don't know you as well to buy, I think it's a legit concern and they would be more likely to just buy tournament action.

[Serial Fail]

The math of jsearles is wrong because of the stake back. It's also not your place to go into a thread where China is selling pieces (An extremely common thing in the poker world.) and try ton convince people to think twice.

In other words, stop being such a faggot.