Skybet mistake making the news :p

[Casino2014man]

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

 

[Valhalla]

Sky Bet = Betfair

 

[cncas123]

Pretty poor for anyone who backed PSG based on those odds, but on the plus side it must have cost Skybet a few quid as anyone thinking of having a bet wouldnt have made a bet with any other bookie. Some odds compiler in Skybet has made a mess and this is their way of getting out of it. It will be interesting to see if the licensing bodies will have anything to say on this.

 

[Mark_32Red (retired acct)]

I am obviously in the industry so may see things different than most, but the fact that has made the newspapers to me is just a joke. What's next 'Morrisons sells £3 discounted chicken for £5 by mistake'?

Bookmakers have to protect themselves against human error by putting these rules in place. I myself have made such mistakes in a previous job and this rule has protected me. Just because someone typed in the wrong price does that mean the company has to suffer financially?

When these things happen, it's amazing how many 'innocent punters' will find out about the mistake and escalate the problem. There are apps that track errors like this and liabilities can build up very quickly. Most of the time it's not an option to take the mistake on the chin. The fact Skybet let this get this far must mean it's a significant amount of cash to lose.

I know most will disagree with me, but in the spirit of a discussion forum I thought I'd add the opinion of someone who has worked on the 'other side'

Mark

 

[cncas123]

I am obviously in the industry so may see things different than most, but the fact that has made the newspapers to me is just a joke. What's next 'Morrisons sells £3 discounted chicken for £5 by mistake'?

Bookmakers have to protect themselves against human error by putting these rules in place. I myself have made such mistakes in a previous job and this rule has protected me. Just because someone typed in the wrong price does that mean the company has to suffer financially?

When these things happen, it's amazing how many 'innocent punters' will find out about the mistake and escalate the problem. There are apps that track errors like this and liabilities can build up very quickly. Most of the time it's not an option to take the mistake on the chin. The fact Skybet let this get this far must mean it's a significant amount of cash to lose.

I know most will disagree with me, but in the spirit of a discussion forum I thought I'd add the opinion of someone who has worked on the 'other side'

Mark

I understand what you are saying, but how many punters would have placed a bet based on the 25/1 only because of the price and the amazing value of the price? On this occasion, it worked in the punters favour and the bets won, but they get their odds drastically reduced. Would Skybet have refunded all bets placed at 25/1 if PSG had failed to score the second goal? Is that written into their T&C's ? And what happens in future if they advertise a better price than other bookmakers? If they decide to trim a few points of the price can they now do that with no comeback? I think it is quite right that this should be highlighted - if Morrison selle me my chicken at a price other than the advertised price, I am entitled to a refund, will Skybet compensate for their error?

 

[Mark_32Red (retired acct)]

I understand what you are saying, but how many punters would have placed a bet based on the 25/1 only because of the price and the amazing value of the price? On this occasion, it worked in the punters favour and the bets won, but they get their odds drastically reduced. Would Skybet have refunded all bets placed at 25/1 if PSG had failed to score the second goal? Is that written into their T&C's ? And what happens in future if they advertise a better price than other bookmakers? If they decide to trim a few points of the price can they now do that with no comeback? I think it is quite right that this should be highlighted - if Morrison selle me my chicken at a price other than the advertised price, I am entitled to a refund, will Skybet compensate for their error?

That's the thing. These people backing the outcome because of the 'amazing price' are exactly those who know the price is wrong. I don't know what Sky's rules state but I have seen these bets refunded when they lose.

As per compensation, Mr Morrison will refund the difference - e.g. Give you the correct price. That's what Sky have done.

Mark

PS: edited to add, 9/2 to 25/1 is hardly trimming a few points. This would have been paid if anything near 9/2 I suspect.

 

[cncas123]

That's the thing. These people backing the outcome because of the 'amazing price' are exactly those who know the price is wrong. I don't know what Sky's rules state but I have seen these bets refunded when they lose.

As per compensation, Mr Morrison will refund the difference - e.g. Give you the correct price. That's what Sky have done.

Mark

PS: edited to add, 9/2 to 25/1 is hardly trimming a few points. This would have been paid if anything near 9/2 I suspect.

And thats why I shop at Tesco, when they charge me the wrong price I get double the difference!!

 

[spintee]

Error as was only on for 3 minutes, Either this or so many bets was being placed it bought up a red flag, They said it was 9/2 in the shops but I though the apps had specials?

Yes, mistakes are made but why not honour it? If they can get away with it than who's to say any bookmakers can follow suite and do the same, I do not really bet on this sort of stuff & only spins on machines but 25/1 is not really out of the ordinary as was in extra time and they were down to 10 men,

Now time to test UKGC

 

[Captain Chaos]

Most if not all shops will follow the same policy though. The sale will not be honoured in such circumstances. There are exceptions of course. But let's put the boot on the other foot for a second. Let's assume we put a bet on and accidentally put £200 instead of £20. Would you expect them to honour it or refund the bet? Whilst I don't whole heartedly agree with what they have done there has to be some sort of protection in place. The bets have been paid out for the correct price. Unlike Betfair. That scenario was just appalling. They absolutely should have taken that one on the chin.

If it had been the punter who had made the mistake and bet too much, would the bookmaker be crying foul and demanding they be paid according to their correct bet size? Of course not!

 

[jetset]

If a complaint is made Skybet may also face censure by the Advertising Standards Authority.

It's a pity the Daily Mail involved a politician - especially with an election coming up - they are always keen to shout the odds (pun intended)!

Seriously though, in instances such as this, where the potential for financial damage is present, shouldn't a major bookmaker have a double or even triple checking system on odds that are about to be offered?

 

[Valhalla]

I think a company the magnitude of Sky should suck it up and pay out.
What's to stop them doing this again if they take a hammering on a long-shot? "Oh sorry, the 10/1 we offered was an error, the price was supposed to be 5/2"

And while I think about it - it's not like 9/2 looks anything like 25/1, so it's not a bloody typo. What a joke.

 

[Casino2014man]

See for me..

I am not a massive sports betting person..

If I had seen the 25/1, with Chelsea ahead, in extra time, with an extra man, for me I would not have actually been surprised at those odds, I mean there are about 20 minutes left of extra time, less men, away from home, PSG should have had some fairly high odds.

So I would have bet in complete stupidity not knowing these odds were too high, when it won celebrated and been on a high, then logged in to sky and gone utterly crazy.

I think they should have taken the hit, because lets be serious. If the odds mistake had been the other way around, and should have been longer do you think they would have corrected it? Hell No.

I see what Mark is saying that for the person whose mistake it is, it will be quite painful and there is a degree of human error. If it was me I would be mortified (and it probably would be me ) But it is not the player's fault either.

They could even as a goodwill gesture have given these people a bonus with 1x wagering for the amount of the winnings on top of the actual funds. I think this just stinks of crap customer service from Sky because it is always one rule one way, but not the other.

I for the record love skyvegas, but this stuff is not good.

 

[dunover]

Look, it's plainly obvious PSG with 10-men basically to score ONE goal and hang in there for a 2-2 draw was not of a 25-1 magnitude. I don't bet but as a soccer fan I can see it's a ridiculous price. Their terms (as with ANY casino/bookies have provision for this sort of error.)

The people who took this 25-1 were the same as the people who all ordered the iPad from Tesco Online:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Tell the truth people - those who took the 25-1 and those that bought the iPad for £49.99 KNEW in their heart of hearts they weren't going to get it, they were just chancing their arm.

Tesco likewise had provisions in their online terms for such an error. Humans make mistakes, and people who input data onto dynamic or live website feeds can easily make a typo or error. That's why they have protective terms...

The results and publicity are embarrassing for the said companies, but that's as far as it goes. The 'innocent buyer' hasn't a leg to stand on.

So, if BMW's website has an error where say a £29,999 new M2 is advertised for £2,999 you'd all expect the company to bankrupt themselves selling their stock at a 90% loss?

Come on!

 

[paul7388]

All bookies have it in their terms to award the correct price on settlement if wrong price is quoted.

Maybe its right or wrong but the term covers it so sky have done nothing legally wrong.

But anyone that bets on football would know that it was an incorrect price. If you were watching the game PSG were by far the best team so no way would you get odds on 25/1 for them to equalize and win the tie. Even if there had been 3 minutes left just the price would not have been that high.

 

[Valhalla]

Look, it's plainly obvious PSG with 10-men basically to score ONE goal and hang in there for a 2-2 draw was not of a 25-1 magnitude. I don't bet but as a soccer fan I can see it's a ridiculous price. Their terms (as with ANY casino/bookies have provision for this sort of error.)

The people who took this 25-1 were the same as the people who all ordered the iPad from Tesco Online:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Tell the truth people - those who took the 25-1 and those that bought the iPad for £49.99 KNEW in their heart of hearts they weren't going to get it, they were just chancing their arm.

Tesco likewise had provisions in their online terms for such an error. Humans make mistakes, and people who input data onto dynamic or live website feeds can easily make a typo or error. That's why they have protective terms...

The results and publicity are embarrassing for the said companies, but that's as far as it goes. The 'innocent buyer' hasn't a leg to stand on.

So, if BMW's website has an error where say a £29,999 new M2 is advertised for £2,999 you'd all expect the company to bankrupt themselves selling their stock at a 90% loss?

Come on!

Thing is, in the examples you've given, the errors have been typos. The decimal point or comma was in the wrong place.
But someone at SkyBet has consciously added a price of 25/1 instead of 9/2 (not remotely a typo). A company of that size with that many punters; there would/should be far more stringent checks to make sure everything was as it should be before a price goes live.

 

[Mark_32Red (retired acct)]

Thing is, in the examples you've given, the errors have been typos. The decimal point or comma was in the wrong place.
But someone at SkyBet has consciously added a price of 25/1 instead of 9/2 (not remotely a typo). A company of that size with that many punters; there would/should be far more stringent checks to make sure everything was as it should be before a price goes live.

A 'typo' in this case isn't always an obvious one. Traders use tools to help with in-running prices to update all markets based on something being input. E.g. In this case the trader may have told the 'odds machine' the score was different. As it happens, I posted this on an industry forum and apparently they had a whole range of markets priced up wrong as the trader had incorrectly told the machine it could go to penalties when that wasn't possible!

 

[zaalouk29]

I hardly add my 2 cents but in those times of high speed modern technology , books should have softwares that either raise red flags in a second when line is supposedly off or pay off the bets. period , because when results are in their favor they never refund you . Anyone (like mark 32red) think the book shouldnt pay because it is a mistake and suppose that punter is aware and trying to cheat the book is WAAAY OUT OF LINE!!!

 

[Mark_32Red (retired acct)]

I hardly add my 2 cents but in those times of high speed modern technology , books should have softwares that either raise red flags in a second when line is supposedly off or pay off the bets. period , because when results are in their favor they never refund you . Anyone (like mark 32red) think the book shouldnt pay because it is a mistake and suppose that punter is aware and trying to cheat the book is WAAAY OUT OF LINE!!!

Sorry that you think I am out of line, just adding my 2p based on my experience. That's what forums are for after all.

Mark

 

[miso]

Look, it's plainly obvious PSG with 10-men basically to score ONE goal and hang in there for a 2-2 draw was not of a 25-1 magnitude. I don't bet but as a soccer fan I can see it's a ridiculous price. Their terms (as with ANY casino/bookies have provision for this sort of error.)

The people who took this 25-1 were the same as the people who all ordered the iPad from Tesco Online:

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Tell the truth people - those who took the 25-1 and those that bought the iPad for £49.99 KNEW in their heart of hearts they weren't going to get it, they were just chancing their arm.

Tesco likewise had provisions in their online terms for such an error. Humans make mistakes, and people who input data onto dynamic or live website feeds can easily make a typo or error. That's why they have protective terms...

The results and publicity are embarrassing for the said companies, but that's as far as it goes. The 'innocent buyer' hasn't a leg to stand on.

So, if BMW's website has an error where say a £29,999 new M2 is advertised for £2,999 you'd all expect the company to bankrupt themselves selling their stock at a 90% loss?

Come on!

Actually by EU laws retailers must honour the marked price. My wife is a shop asst. manager and yes, they need to be careful with pricing, because mistakes cost them money. But I guess it must be different for different types of businesses. Some of you might remember this from last Christmas

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Once the items have been marked as dispatched, they were gone for 99p. And that cost some people fortune. The pricing company was from Derry if I remember well, wonder if they're still in business.

You're right, the pundits knew it couldn't be right and took a chance, the question is whether Skybet is obliged to pay by the law or not, since they accepted the bets.

 

[Valhalla]

Actually by EU laws retailers must honour the marked price.

Thanks miiisooo.

Sadly, when it comes to the online gambling world, it is almost always the customer/punter who is expected to bend over and take it up the tailpipe

 

[cncas123]

I think most bookies have a clause that goes along the lines of " palpable error " which they use as a get out clause on occasions like this.
Many years ago I was in a betting shop and saw the price of a horse that I fancied advertised at 12/1, when in all the trade papers and adverts I could see it was around 3/1. I asked the manager if this was the correct price, and I was told yes, so I had a healthy each way bet at 12/1. Within 5 minutes the price on screen was reduced to 7/2 so I asked if my 12/1 would be honoured and I was told yes as I had queried the price before the change, and I had also got the manager to sign the betting slip to confirm the price. The horse duly won that day and I was paid in full.
My real query is this, if PSG hadnt scored the equaliser and went through, would any punters who had taken the 25/1 been refunded as they had been given the wrong price?

 

[SpinUk]

The best analogy is the stock market. If a market maker makes a mistake and pitches a share at say 3.35 rather than 5.35, and the market moves because if this (to invest), then the market maket must honour the price and swallow the loss. The individual is then required to "trade the loss up" from their other clients from their own profit.

As Mark says yes mistakes do happen, however many punters would be laying at this price rather than their usual bookmakers, so Skybet get the benefit of liquidity movement to them without having to honour anything. Its just wrong, you make a mistake like that as a company, your business model should have contingency allowances built into it to compensate human error.

The inference that "only people trying to take advantage" lost out here also stinks somewhat of hating your own customers.

As for the skybet terms and conditions "if there is an OBVIOUS error, then we dont have to honour it". I predict a Skybet U-turn on this. Maybe when all the gambling companies were all based in Malta with no UK jurisdiction you could get away such nonsense, now not so much....

 

[dunover]

I think most bookies have a clause that goes along the lines of " palpable error " which they use as a get out clause on occasions like this.
Many years ago I was in a betting shop and saw the price of a horse that I fancied advertised at 12/1, when in all the trade papers and adverts I could see it was around 3/1. I asked the manager if this was the correct price, and I was told yes, so I had a healthy each way bet at 12/1. Within 5 minutes the price on screen was reduced to 7/2 so I asked if my 12/1 would be honoured and I was told yes as I had queried the price before the change, and I had also got the manager to sign the betting slip to confirm the price. The horse duly won that day and I was paid in full.
My real query is this, if PSG hadnt scored the equaliser and went through, would any punters who had taken the 25/1 been refunded as they had been given the wrong price?

No, they wouldn't and shouldn't have been refunded had they lost - irrespective of the odds, their choice of outcome was incorrect.

My guess at what happened here was that at 2-1 down and with ten men with minutes left, the 25-1 was the price for PSG to actually win the MATCH say 3-2 and the operative entered these odds in the wrong portal, i.e. to win the TIE overall which only needed a single-goal equalizer to 2-2.

Comparing it to a retail shop is different - should a shop price something wrong, then their exposure is limited to a few quid for each item of which there are a finite amount which is a tiny proportion of the items they stock in total. Plus these items are likely to hang about until someone notices the error or there is a rush of customers which tips them off.

In an online betting situation, the potential for serious financial loss is massively greater and would take place via tens of thousands of purchases in literally seconds - therefore protective terms are needed.

As for people 'taking advantage' I think most were - these punters aren't daft and know it was an unrealistic price and an 'obvious' error. If it's too good to be true...etc...etc.

For now SkyBet are embarrassed, no doubt some poor desk-jockey there won't be able to sit down for a week as a result of their error. Those who took the bet have still won at a respectable 9/2 despite their hollow shouts of protest.

 

[SpinUk]

Thats easily solved with a limiter that suspends bets once a certain gross income for a market is met. Same as any other real time market you care to mention. The fact that these odds remained open to buyers for three minutes show that something was seriously amiss at Skybet, but why should the punter lose out for their negligence?

 

[cncas123]

And in these days of betting exchanges, what if a punter backs at 25/1 with Skybet and then lays at 20/1? Is he going to say to the exchange I was only paid 9/2 so I am only going to pay 4/1?

 

[syntynyt]

So, if BMW's website has an error where say a £29,999 new M2 is advertised for £2,999 you'd all expect the company to bankrupt themselves selling their stock at a 90% loss?

is not the best comparison giving the numbers.
'In this case a wrong price was displayed for around three minutes, and a small number of customers bet at the incorrect odds.'

on 23 november shortly after Black Friday the biggest online company from Romania, Amazon alike made a mistake in Resealed category all products having a value of 20 cents - 2 euro.
Galaxy S4 worth 325e at that time was bought for 20 cents
LED Smart TV 3D Philips, 117 cm, Full HD worth 1000e was bought for 70 cents
Ultrabook Dell Studio XPS Duo 12 worth 1100e was bought for 70 cents
switch Cisco Catalyst 2960 worth 2700e was bought for 1.70e

in around an hour 730 products were bought and the loss was 23.0000 euros. after sending an apology email stating that the price was not right, and like in this case a shitstorm started, company decided to honor all orders.
it was no publicity stunt as they are the biggest here and had the most successful black friday in 2014. nobody expected the outcome. very professional. in 3 minutes a small numbers of customers placed bets there. that could have been handled and look profi and customer care.

 

[vinylweatherman]

Actually by EU laws retailers must honour the marked price. My wife is a shop asst. manager and yes, they need to be careful with pricing, because mistakes cost them money. But I guess it must be different for different types of businesses. Some of you might remember this from last Christmas

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Once the items have been marked as dispatched, they were gone for 99p. And that cost some people fortune. The pricing company was from Derry if I remember well, wonder if they're still in business.

You're right, the pundits knew it couldn't be right and took a chance, the question is whether Skybet is obliged to pay by the law or not, since they accepted the bets.

This is the key phrase. In store, once you have paid at the till, it's too late for the store to cancel the purchase. Online, they have a distinct advantage in that there can be a significant delay between "purchase" and "dispatch". This allows them plenty of time to spot that customers have been charged too little before they have effectively "closed the transaction and left the store with the item".

It seems odd therefore that this "point of dispatch" when it comes to betting sites is after the event has finished, even though the transaction (bet) is "finalised" as soon as it is marked "accepted" by the bookie. It would appear that bookies have a special "carve out" in law that allows them to effectively cancel a transaction after the fact, rather like Tesco being able to visit your house and demand you return that iPad you bought from the local store for £49 earlier in the week.

Punters don't have the same right to correct "a palpable error" when they bet £200 instead of £20 on a match, even if they spot the error before the event has concluded.

 

[Gaz237]

Late

This is the key phrase. In store, once you have paid at the till, it's too late for the store to cancel the purchase. Online, they have a distinct advantage in that there can be a significant delay between "purchase" and "dispatch". This allows them plenty of time to spot that customers have been charged too little before they have effectively "closed the transaction and left the store with the item".

It seems odd therefore that this "point of dispatch" when it comes to betting sites is after the event has finished, even though the transaction (bet) is "finalised" as soon as it is marked "accepted" by the bookie. It would appear that bookies have a special "carve out" in law that allows them to effectively cancel a transaction after the fact, rather like Tesco being able to visit your house and demand you return that iPad you bought from the local store for £49 earlier in the week.

Punters don't have the same right to correct "a palpable error" when they bet £200 instead of £20 on a match, even if they spot the error before the event has concluded.

Vinyl. Your two weeks late to the party

 

[thebigs]

After working over 10 years in the bookmaking game i came across a few human errors on our side and most of the time i can recall they were honored.They did not have to be but were paid as a goodwill gesture.
I used to have a punter who would sit there watching the live golf and he would constantly take advantage of price moves and try to beat the system.
Due to the fact we had a bit of grace with allowing the punter to place the bet then normally he would get the price he was looking for even though it could have been long gone.
To be honest,sky bet should really should have looked to see how many bets they actually took at the inflated price and if it wasnt much maybe should have just paid them if the liabilities were not big.
I remember a case not too long ago where 2 women tried to take advantage of placing a bet on the Euromillions.
The draw was on the tv at 9pm i think here but had actually been drawn in Paris an hour earlier.They then placed the bet with winning numbers they already new were drawn about 1min after the actual draw had been made and then said they should be paid because they asked the cashier if they were on time and she had said yes.
The staff behind the counter are meant to check any prices that are requested but when your busy it is not so easy to do so if a punter chances their arm trying to get the bigger price and you only pay them at the price when the bet was placed can lead to a tricky situation.
In my 10 years i had 2 punters climb the counter trying to attack me until they saw the size of me and i had another wait outside until i finished to show me he had dented my car.
I am 3 years out of the rat race now and do not miss it one bit but i still have a heart for the people who work in the gambling game.

 

[quber]

IBAS have requested through Parliament that these terms are made clearer and fairer.

You do not have permission to view link Log in or register now.

Relevant passage:-

ii. Obvious Error Rules: The long established principle in bookmaking that an operator reserves the right to correct a price quoted to a customer where it is considered to be a ‘palpable error’ has evolved with developments in technology. Some operators now reserve the right to correct any error where the price offered did not match the intended available price as recorded in the company’s central database at the time the bet was struck; although not all have amended their operating rules accordingly. Different bookmakers’ rules describe similar situations in different ways, some referring to ‘obvious errors’, some to ‘mistakes’ and others to the broader category of ‘incorrect prices’.

With an ever growing range of betting opportunities available – particularly with the development of ‘in-play’ betting – the scope for incorrect prices being offered remains high.

There is also variety in the approach taken by bookmakers where obvious errors are detected. In some cases operators reserve the right to make void bets struck at prices they did not intend to offer, rather than resettling at the correct price; ideally, customers would be offered the choice of both where circumstances allow. Some operators resolve price disputes using the ‘best market price available at the time’, others the better price of either the odds available at the time or the starting price. Others have rules which mean that incorrectly quoted odds are simply replaced with the odds that company wished to have offered at the time. It would be helpful to have a more uniform approach and IBAS recommends that consideration is given to using either the LCCP or new regulations to achieve a fairer result for bettors.