Posted on 10/18/2016 12:17:51 PM PDT by C19fan
Irish bookmaker Paddy Power has paid out its customers who backed Hillary Clinton to win next month's presidential election.
With less than three weeks to go until polling day, the firm declared that Donald Trump's White House bid had imploded and had very little chance of moving into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue in January.
The bookmaker claimed customers had been lumping on the former First Lady in the past week as Donald Trump's campaign became embroiled in a succession of scandals over his conduct.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Exactly...at 2:11 for hILLary, you look at the total wagers and compare them to the bets for Trump at 9:2 and see where the lowest risk is before you end up losing your shirt.
If I had bet Trump I would be very angry that they paid out before it was over. Especially, if Trump wins. It amounts to theft.
You took my bet, declared a winner before it was over, paid them out, and stiffed me who actually won. How is that not theft?
They paid out those who bet on a Hillary win. If trump wins, those who bet on a Trump win would also be paid out, the contract is not cancelled.
Read Paddy Power’s article on their website, it’s actually fairly balanced. Says they’ve gotten decisions wrong before and if Trump wins it will trigger the biggest payout in political betting history and leave very expensive pie on their faces.
This is a free publicity move to attract more gamblers for their much more lucrative sports book. Paddy could have also insured themselves against a Trump win as well given the low odds.
Nuts.
That’s just too odd, and another reason I don’t gamble.
One assumes that like any bookie they pay the actual winners and the loser gets zilch.
It’s the short money, so they won’t have to pay out on the longshot.
I also do not gamble for the same reason.
This isn’t about betting.
It’s about making it seem like Hillary is winning when she’s losing.
“They pay out early for the publicity, and No, they don’t get it wrong.”
Except for Brexit....
Looks to me like they are still taking bets...
http://www.paddypower.com/bet/politics/other-politics/us-politics?ev_oc_grp_ids=791149
hmmm...welll I guess I assumed that the Trump bets remained open, and that the early pay outs for her were sort of optional (ie, both parties to the bet have to agree to get paid now, thus giving both parties something now...though they might get more later depending on how the bet played out....sort of like early retirement).
I confess though that I didn’t look too closely at the particulars.
If in fact they paid out to ALL “winners” of the bet, and kept the money from those who bet on our guy....you are so right. How could that be legal? Doesn’t make sense (unless of course in the context of the contract pursuant to which the better makes the bet, the house always has an option to close it down when it looks like their exposure is getting out of control.....note that there are no default swaps in the betting world...which probably shows why banking crises are limited to large banks, not comparatively legitimate operations like betting houses!).
If the returns out to be wrong and it has already been paid out, does the bettor have an option to go back and claim their winnings?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.