Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg Have Blown Up on Twitter, and in Betting Markets

readypipe.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 192 posts

Re: Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg Have Blown Up on Twitter, and in Betting Markets

#51

Post by azernik »

ham_sandwich wrote: post #46

Looking at that odds chart got me in a betting mood. I think those Yang odds in the article could be steep given the exuberance of some in his online following, however there could be interesting arb plays with an outsider like Yang like going long presidency+short nomination paired with going short presidency+long nomination with someone more establishment like Biden. If prediction markets had more depth, I’m sure w…

PredictIt, at least, has fairly steep transaction fees to prevent arbitrage except in cases of very high mismatches.

Re: Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg Have Blown Up on Twitter, and in Betting Markets

#53

Post by suby »

gringoDan wrote: post #47

I'm bullish on Yang's and Buttigieg's chances in general. I also think that their chances of winning the nomination (and election) are much lower than the odds indicated in betting markets. There is a huge betting market selection bias in that the only people using these betting platforms are young and tech-savvy (i.e. the type of people who are in these candidates' base). Additionally, you can place nominally small…

You'd then be biasing it towards the opinions of people who can afford a 10,000 dollar bet. I'm not sure that that's any better.

Re: Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg Have Blown Up on Twitter, and in Betting Markets

#54

Post by azernik »

scott_s wrote: post #40

Who is participating in the betting markets? Are these people perhaps more likely to personally like certain candidates more than others? When the market is relatively small, this question matters. I'm skeptical of the betting markets for this reason, as I think the participants skew heavily to a particular demographic.

If you need any indication of the irrationality of the betting markets, look for the Q conspiracy theorists betting on indictments on people like James Comey and Hillary Clinton.

Re: Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg Have Blown Up on Twitter, and in Betting Markets

#56

Post by brm »

scott_s wrote: post #40

Who is participating in the betting markets? Are these people perhaps more likely to personally like certain candidates more than others? When the market is relatively small, this question matters. I'm skeptical of the betting markets for this reason, as I think the participants skew heavily to a particular demographic.

weight of money has an effect on odds but the bookmakers are still the ones setting them.

Re: Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg Have Blown Up on Twitter, and in Betting Markets

#57

Post by jkestner »

dev_dull wrote: post #6
yumraj wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, didn't we just elect another business person and see where we are. Like it or not, we need politicians who can work across the aisle and actually get things done.

A booming economy with low inflation and low unemployment?

The rewards of which largely go to executives and shareholders, not rank-and-file employees? Sure, sounds like a business.

Re: Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg Have Blown Up on Twitter, and in Betting Markets

#58

Post by bilbo0s »

gringoDan wrote: post #47

I'm bullish on Yang's and Buttigieg's chances in general. I also think that their chances of winning the nomination (and election) are much lower than the odds indicated in betting markets. There is a huge betting market selection bias in that the only people using these betting platforms are young and tech-savvy (i.e. the type of people who are in these candidates' base). Additionally, you can place nominally small…

Yang's chances are small, Buttigieg's chances are about equal to Beto's, and better than any other candidate's outside of Biden. (And it's an open question as to whether Biden is actually serious.)

Re: Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg Have Blown Up on Twitter, and in Betting Markets

#59

Post by dondon1 »

losvedir wrote: post #50

As an Andrew Yang fan myself, I was shocked to see that PredictIt has him as the third most expensive (read likely) candidate after Bernie and Biden, at least when I checked. This is in stark contrast to his 0-1% polling rate in the most recent polls. So, are they just very leading indicators? It got me thinking that it's a relatively cheap campaign strategy since people like to refer to those as some sort of "market…

I guess the predcitit market assumes a faster growth in Yangs popularity and is pricing this in.

Re: Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg Have Blown Up on Twitter, and in Betting Markets

#60

Post by dragonwriter »

losvedir wrote: post #50

As an Andrew Yang fan myself, I was shocked to see that PredictIt has him as the third most expensive (read likely) candidate after Bernie and Biden, at least when I checked. This is in stark contrast to his 0-1% polling rate in the most recent polls. So, are they just very leading indicators? It got me thinking that it's a relatively cheap campaign strategy since people like to refer to those as some sort of "market…

> So, are they just very leading indicators?

AFAIK, there is no evidence that early standing in prediction markets is any better a predictor than early polling; prediction markets tend to converge to the ultimate result close to the election, but so do polling numbers.

Post reply on HN