Just got idea - why to tranfer all staked money when buying block of SnGs when eg. 25% should be enough because ROI bellow -25% is EXTREMELY unprobable?
Example for explanation -
Skilled pokerstrategist (seller) want to move limit up and reduce impact of variance so he decide to sell 50% of himself for 1k SnGs (10+0.5s). Overstacked micro grinder (buyer) decide to buy 1% of those 1k SnGs. Mark-up is 1%.
Standart way: buyer will send $106.05 (10.5*1000*0.01*1.01) to seller, he will play 1k SnGs and send 1/100 of winnings back - in case of ROI 5% seller will send $110.25 back and deal is concluded.
My Idea: buyer will send just 25% of buy-in money + mark-up (10.5*1000*0.01*(0.25+0.01)) which is $27.30 in this case of 5% ROI he will get back 30% of buy-in money ($31.50)
In both cases original money +$4.20 profit was transfered back to buyer, so what are advantages and disadvantages of my idea?
Advantages:
Buying part of someones play will not block too much money from buyers bankroll.
When seller sends money back after stake he will be less restricted by dialy sending limits etc.
Is seller scams buyer its for less money
Leverage and its benefits
Disadvantages:
if ROI will really drop bellow -25% then seller take full impact from loss over -25% (25% is just example, but it imo enough to make this situation nearly impossible, to compansate for this risk seller can for example ask for 0.01% mark-up or just take it as his risk)
Leverage and its risks
Note:
This is ofc possible only when buying blocks of SNGs, not for individual tourneys etc.
