Ad by goggle

Showing posts with label betting. Show all posts
Showing posts with label betting. Show all posts

Monday, October 26, 2020

NAIRABET ONE GAME CUT YOUR TICKET

Nairabet insures your accumulator bets. If one game of your ticket doesnt come through you will get a refund. If you’ve read some of our articles including our Nairabet review, you’ll know that we love bookies that provide punters with some sort of insurance, and Nairabet’s ‘one game cut your ticket’ is one of such promos besides its Nairabet bonus for accumulators. As the name indicates, it is a promo that enables punters to get a fraction of their supposed earnings even if one game on the ticket doesn’t come through. As always, the promo has minimum requirements that must be met. one cut refund nairabet © NairaBet ONE GAME CUT YOUR TICKET TERMS AND CONDITIONS For a ticket or bet slip to qualify for the promo, it must have at least ten games on the ticket and all the games or legs on the ticket must have at least 1.2 odds. If the games or legs on your bet slip are more than 10, please note that all of the games must have 1.2 odds as a minimum. That is, if you have 15 games on your ticket and one of the games has 1.1 odds, the ticket no longer qualifies for the promo even if the other games on the bet slip meet the 1.2 odds requirement. How the Nairabet One Game Cut Your Ticket PayOut or Winnings is Calculated Let’s take a practical example to illustrate this. Imagine you placed a bet with 15 games based on some football betting tips and your calculated earnings amounted to NGN300,000 including an accumulation Nairabet bonus of NGN 50,000. Let’s assume the game that “cut the ticket” has 1.4 odds, then your potential earnings are calculated using the following steps: The NGN50,000 bonus included in the winning is first subtracted, leaving NGN250,000. Next, the 1.4 odds game is excluded by dividing NGN250,000 by 1.4 to give NGN178,571. This NGN178,571 is divided by the number of games on the ticket; 15 in this example. (NGN178,571/15 = NGN11,904.) Furthermore, the stake unit is subtracted from the value calculated in step 3. A stake unit is defined as the money you wagered divided by the number of games on the ticket. Assuming we wagered 500 on the betslip, then the stake unit is NGN33.33. The potential payout is then NGN11,870.67 (NGN11,904 – NGN33.33)

Monday, October 19, 2020

Don't Bet On Your Politics


Whatever your political beliefs, no matter how confident you are in them, do not invest according to those beliefs. You will lose money. The reason for this is that the political opinion becomes the ideological basis for an economic theory which, because it is based on an opinion, is by definition biased and leads to wrong conclusions. This is true whether you are on the right, on the left, or somewhere in between; it also applies if you identify yourself as far away from that spectrum entirely.

In short, political bias is an investment bias that can and does lead people astray; to demonstrate the risks of this way of thinking, I want to highlight two very bad mistakes I have seen in my time active in equity markets, and how the political biases of these mistakes resulted in massive underperformance.

The Mistake on the Right

The best example of this at play was in 2008. At the time, libertarian thinkers believed that quantitative easing would lead to hyperinflation that would wreck the U.S. economy throughout the 2010s. The theory behind this argument is that an increase in the monetary base would cause hyperinflation, and the only proper response was austerity and leaving the market to sort itself out. This theory was based on the political belief that markets have a natural, healthy force guiding them and that intervention is bad.

Some of the people who spouted this nonsense were highly respected. Bryan Caplan remains a revered economics blogger and thinker, despite sounding like a crackpot at the time. This blog post has not aged well:

Normatively, I still favored the privatization of money. … Bernanke and company ignored their own research, got predictably bad results, and pleaded impotence. Instead of playing the voice of reason, they acted like they'd believed in bailouts and fiscal stimulus all along. I expected better. I was wrong."

None of this is true or even remotely accurate; not only did Bernanke follow his research quite well (and learned significantly from Japan's lost decade), but he also used a monetary stimulus program that worked somewhat well to help the economy recover - and would have worked better had it been bigger. So successful was QE that the Federal Reserve's decisive response to COVID-19 by offering liquidity, opening loan programs, and other actions has become applauded by serious thinkers on the left and right, and dismissed only by a very tiny crackpot minority.

Caplan gets it very wrong because of his libertarian bias; fine, professors get things wrong all the time (it seems to be a favorite pastime of the cohort if not part of the job description). But what's really worrisome is if you invest according to this political view.

Unfortunately, many people have made this mistake in the past, and bizarrely, the people helping them lose money have had long high-profile careers. Peter Schiff warned of hyperinflation in 2009; he was wrong. That didn't stop him from urging investors to buy gold; while this worked for a couple of years, thanks to a broader delusion and the market's ignorance about the impact of QE on the market, it's been a terrible investment since.

The reason is simple: that hyperinflation never came.

Not only did inflation stay below 3% over the decade, but the average rate of CPI growth underperformed the long-run average. Gold underperformed even long-term Treasury bonds over the decade, because that libertarian-view of market intervention causing an apocalypse was silly and wrong.

That hasn't stopped people from buying Schiff's mutual funds (and underperforming at best, or losing money at worst); the guy has even guested on Joe Rogan several times, making predictions that never came true. Meanwhile, investors who listen to him are poorer as a result.

So the libertarian ideology, whether it has moral or logical principles that are superior to other ideologies or not, was clearly a bad guide for making an investment decision. Libertarians may be right when they say, as Caplan did, that the Fed's acts "set a long list of dangerous precedents, and pushed the U.S. and the world down the road to serfdom." You can believe that, and think this underperformance is temporary and one day the chickens will come home to roost.

How long will you wait? 20 years? 50 years? In the long run, we're all dead, and do you want to be poorer and right? If a sense of moral superiority matters to you more than money, maybe you should just donate everything you own.

The Mistake on the Left

The mistake on the left is equally easy to demonstrate and dismiss, and it all comes down to Donald Trump. Your feelings of the man and his followers can be whatever they are, but if you invest according to those feelings you're going to make a mistake.

I had friends call me shortly after the election and ask if they should sell everything due to Trump's surprise victory. I obviously laughed, but at the time it was a serious position. Check out this Politico article titled "Economists: A Trump win would tank the markets." Of course, that didn't happen.

Immediately after Trump's victory the market went up, because politics and markets aren't connected in the way some people think they are. The media should have known this; the clickbait-addicted pundits warned just a few months before Trump's victory that another ideological event was on the cusp of destroying the world. Namely, Brexit.

While Brexit did cause a short-term blip in markets as seen above, markets recovered in two weeks' time, and in the longer-term chart above that short-term period is unnoticeable.

Of course, well-meaning liberals investing on their conscience would have sold both after Trump's victory and again following Brexit. If they read through from their convictions to the conclusion that the world is about to turn into an apocalyptic nightmare, they would have missed out on these returns.

Furthermore, as we have seen from 2020, an actual global catastrophe like the pandemic has a very different implication for financial markets than what seems most plausible. This is the problem with investing according to your political beliefs: it can blind you to the subtle and counter-intuitive implications of the facts and cause you to underperform as a result.

So What Should I Do?

If you want my advice, being less political is a good idea; you'll be happier, healthier, and have more friends. But if a strong political belief is very important to you, the better course of action would be to ignore your political beliefs when investing.

The stock market is a mechanism whereby the market can price the value of future earnings (and sales). There's very little politics involved, and when people invest according to their beliefs and not based on the fundamentals of sales and earnings, that becomes a market opportunity for someone to profit off that politically biased person buying or selling. Your best course of action should be to logically analyze the value of a business, the growth (or lack thereof) of the market in which that business operates, the quality of management and the potential effectiveness of their strategy, and whether the market has overestimated or underestimated the value of those things.

Of course, that takes a lot of time, energy, and work, which is why you're probably better off just buying a high quality closed-end fund managed by people who spend their time doing just that

Ballot breakdown: Amendments and Sports Betting Proposition


Voters consider seven constitutional amendments and a sports betting proposition in the Nov. 3 election.Amendment #1There is no specific mention of “abortion” in the Louisiana Constitution. A vote for Amendment #1 would change that, adding language that the right to an abortion is not protected in the state. A vote against it leaves the law as is.Abortion is protected by federal law. Unless the Supreme Court overturns the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, this amendment is largely symbolic. If justices allow the ruling to stand, Louisiana’s constitutional amendment could create legal battles that might ultimately involve the Supreme Court.Amendment #2Local property taxes on oil and gas wells have been a contentious point for parish assessors, who’ve battled with industry over whether their value should be based on their output or the value of the actual equipment. Assessors largely feel a newer producing well should be valued higher than one that’s abandoned or offline.Amendment #2 would allow the output to be factored into valuations and has the support of oil and gas interests, although an exact formula for these calculations is still in the works. Louisiana law only allows severance taxes to be collected on oil and gas. The new property valuation method would be, in effect, a new tax, which requires a change to the constitution. Opponents say this is one example of many why Louisiana’s state charter needs a total overhaul.Amendment #3Louisiana has a Budget Stabilization Fund to tap into when revenue for the state budget hits lean times. It’s commonly called a rainy fay fund, and backers of Amendment #3 want to be able to use it whenever the federal government declares a natural disaster. Their argument is that access to the fund would allow the state to spend money during these emergencies immediately with the guarantee that Washington will reimburse it.Opponents say the fund was created to address fiscal crises in Louisiana, which aren’t as frequent as weather-related ones. The concern is that using the stabilization account too frequently could deplete it. Plus, opponents point out that any revenue shortfall that occurs as a result of a devastating storm can already be handled through the rainy day fund.Amendment #4The Louisiana Legislature has to approve a balanced budget every year, meaning the state can’t spend more money than it makes. That won’t change, but Amendment #4 would limit how much more the state could spend from year to year, in an attempt to force budgetary belt tightening that hasn’t really taken place in the past.The problem with the amendment, according to opponents, is that it doesn’t apply to constitutionally protected portions of the budget. That means higher education and health care will continue to be most vulnerable to resource cuts. Plus, there’s already a limiting formula in place for the state budget, and there’s no guarantee the version in Amendment #4 would be lower.Amendment #5Tax breaks are the typical enticement governments use to attract businesses and manufacturers. Amendment #5, if allowed, would add another lure to Louisiana’s economic development tackle box. It would allow local governments to expand their use of payments in lieu of taxes (PILOT). Instead of paying property taxes over a set period, a business would make regular payments to the local government – typically less than they would have paid in taxes.Supporters of the amendment say it puts more decision-making power in local hands, letting them negotiate a front-loaded PILOT that could address immediate fiscal needs. Opponents worry that the 25-year maximum period allowed under the law could ultimately be too costly in terms of tax revenue. Plus, a law that’s still fairly new already allows local authorities to negotiate advance property tax payments.Amendment #6Amendment #6 would raise the income ceiling to qualify for a homestead exemption on property taxes in Louisiana to $100,000. It’s currently around $77,000, meaning any household making more than that cannot have their valuation frozen for the sake of calculating their taxes. Homeowners 65 and older, the disabled and spouses of military veterans killed in duty also currently qualify for the freeze, provided they fall below the income limit.Nine out of 10 Louisiana residents who’ve had their assessments frozen are 65 and older, and amendment proponents age 65 is no longer an accurate retirement threshold. They want working seniors in dual income households to get the same tax break. Opponents say the existing exemption is already benefiting the people who need it; expanding the homestead exemption would deny additional tax revenue from local governments.Amendment #7The state treasurer manages an Unclaimed Property Program, which is where money from utility deposits, forgotten bank accounts and insurance payments lands when their rightful owner can’t be found. So much unclaimed property has amassed over decades that when less is claimed than the state collects, the treasurer can move the excess to meet other state needs.The current treasurer expects higher claims from the public, thanks to technological improvements, which would in turn limit the amount put into the state’s general fund. Amendment #7 would create an Unclaimed Property Fund for excess collections, and interest from the account could go into the state general fund. It should be noted that the Unclaimed Property Program has never paid out more than it's collected in its 50 years of existence. Opponents fear pulling what’s been reliable money from the general fund could lead to budget cuts.Proposition to allow sports bettingThe proposition to allow sports betting does not change the state Constitution. It does allow any parish in which the majority of voters approve the proposition to expand legal gambling to include sports betting. According to the Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana, retail and online gambling companies could net up to $330 million in new revenue each year if the proposition passes. PAR also notes that the expansion would allow betting inside of private homes and online, which it said runs the risk of getting young people hooked. It said sports betting would not be immediately available, even in Parishes where the proposition passes. State laws and regulations would still have to be created, including how the new revenue is taxed.

Voters consider seven constitutional amendments and a sports betting proposition in the Nov. 3 election.

Amendment #1

There is no specific mention of “abortion” in the Louisiana Constitution. A vote for Amendment #1 would change that, adding language that the right to an abortion is not protected in the state. A vote against it leaves the law as is.

Abortion is protected by federal law. Unless the Supreme Court overturns the landmark Roe v. Wade decision, this amendment is largely symbolic. If justices allow the ruling to stand, Louisiana’s constitutional amendment could create legal battles that might ultimately involve the Supreme Court.

Amendment #2

Local property taxes on oil and gas wells have been a contentious point for parish assessors, who’ve battled with industry over whether their value should be based on their output or the value of the actual equipment. Assessors largely feel a newer producing well should be valued higher than one that’s abandoned or offline.

Amendment #2 would allow the output to be factored into valuations and has the support of oil and gas interests, although an exact formula for these calculations is still in the works. Louisiana law only allows severance taxes to be collected on oil and gas. The new property valuation method would be, in effect, a new tax, which requires a change to the constitution. Opponents say this is one example of many why Louisiana’s state charter needs a total overhaul.

Amendment #3

Louisiana has a Budget Stabilization Fund to tap into when revenue for the state budget hits lean times. It’s commonly called a rainy fay fund, and backers of Amendment #3 want to be able to use it whenever the federal government declares a natural disaster. Their argument is that access to the fund would allow the state to spend money during these emergencies immediately with the guarantee that Washington will reimburse it.

Opponents say the fund was created to address fiscal crises in Louisiana, which aren’t as frequent as weather-related ones. The concern is that using the stabilization account too frequently could deplete it. Plus, opponents point out that any revenue shortfall that occurs as a result of a devastating storm can already be handled through the rainy day fund.

Amendment #4

The Louisiana Legislature has to approve a balanced budget every year, meaning the state can’t spend more money than it makes. That won’t change, but Amendment #4 would limit how much more the state could spend from year to year, in an attempt to force budgetary belt tightening that hasn’t really taken place in the past.

The problem with the amendment, according to opponents, is that it doesn’t apply to constitutionally protected portions of the budget. That means higher education and health care will continue to be most vulnerable to resource cuts. Plus, there’s already a limiting formula in place for the state budget, and there’s no guarantee the version in Amendment #4 would be lower.

Amendment #5

Tax breaks are the typical enticement governments use to attract businesses and manufacturers. Amendment #5, if allowed, would add another lure to Louisiana’s economic development tackle box. It would allow local governments to expand their use of payments in lieu of taxes (PILOT). Instead of paying property taxes over a set period, a business would make regular payments to the local government – typically less than they would have paid in taxes.

Supporters of the amendment say it puts more decision-making power in local hands, letting them negotiate a front-loaded PILOT that could address immediate fiscal needs. Opponents worry that the 25-year maximum period allowed under the law could ultimately be too costly in terms of tax revenue. Plus, a law that’s still fairly new already allows local authorities to negotiate advance property tax payments.

Amendment #6

Amendment #6 would raise the income ceiling to qualify for a homestead exemption on property taxes in Louisiana to $100,000. It’s currently around $77,000, meaning any household making more than that cannot have their valuation frozen for the sake of calculating their taxes. Homeowners 65 and older, the disabled and spouses of military veterans killed in duty also currently qualify for the freeze, provided they fall below the income limit.

Nine out of 10 Louisiana residents who’ve had their assessments frozen are 65 and older, and amendment proponents age 65 is no longer an accurate retirement threshold. They want working seniors in dual income households to get the same tax break. Opponents say the existing exemption is already benefiting the people who need it; expanding the homestead exemption would deny additional tax revenue from local governments.

Amendment #7

The state treasurer manages an Unclaimed Property Program, which is where money from utility deposits, forgotten bank accounts and insurance payments lands when their rightful owner can’t be found. So much unclaimed property has amassed over decades that when less is claimed than the state collects, the treasurer can move the excess to meet other state needs.

The current treasurer expects higher claims from the public, thanks to technological improvements, which would in turn limit the amount put into the state’s general fund. Amendment #7 would create an Unclaimed Property Fund for excess collections, and interest from the account could go into the state general fund. It should be noted that the Unclaimed Property Program has never paid out more than it's collected in its 50 years of existence. Opponents fear pulling what’s been reliable money from the general fund could lead to budget cuts.

Proposition to allow sports betting

The proposition to allow sports betting does not change the state Constitution. It does allow any parish in which the majority of voters approve the proposition to expand legal gambling to include sports betting. According to the Public Affairs Research Council of Louisiana, retail and online gambling companies could net up to $330 million in new revenue each year if the proposition passes. PAR also notes that the expansion would allow betting inside of private homes and online, which it said runs the risk of getting young people hooked. It said sports betting would not be immediately available, even in Parishes where the proposition passes. State laws and regulations would still have to be created, including how the new revenue is taxed

The United States Mission to Nigeria has celebrated Dr Onyema Ogbuagu, for his role in the development of a COVID-19 vaccine.

The United States Mission to Nigeria has celebrated Dr Onyema Ogbuagu, for his role in the development of a COVID-19 vaccine. . Ogbuagbu, wh...