And for example, if i take Tipster X in july he makes -10 units, i have him free in august and he makes again -5 units(overall -15 units) so in both months he made minus, then what happens? I need to pay for him to have him in september?

@Editor‍

Puh, to be honest - yep: some may call me biased as I am a buyer, not a seller - I don't know whether this is good. People normally start following services from a different date which means, unless you don't fuck up an entire month as a seller, there is still a chance to get at least money from some of your customers. With this new rule however, every customer has to pay after max. 60 days, no matter how performance of seller was. This imo causes one big problem for buyers (like me): Amount of money invested in services will definitely increase. Otherwise, nothing would have changed. Now, I have some 15 services from which I know they are top-class, still, sometimes they fuck up an entire month, are deeply in minus. Consequently, I am in minus, too. Mostly, big loss cannot be compensated within one month. Consequence: If I maintained all services, at some I'd now have to pay for losses. Allright, risk of investor. Sure... But as an investor that sometimes even paid for "promising, not proven" services, my policy thus has to change also. From now on: Less risk when investing in sellers and probably less services I follow. PROPOSAL: I wouldn't cut it after 30 days (regardless of anything as new conditions say), but when next month was profitable. If two negative months, then another extension until one positive month follows. I think this would be very fair towards everyone, maybe current conditions are unfair to sellers, but new ones imo are not fair to buyers. Well, nothing more to say, you decided and I can live with this decision... I mean, if that is what people want, I'm a democrat, so... Still, I think it is everybody's right in a democracy to state his - maybe unpopular - opinion. This update of conditions means that I and maybe also others have to face consequences plus have to make some changes - changes that in the end CAN (not: MUST) be also harmful to other sellers (when I quit the service). To be honest, just my first thoughts, I will have to take a closer look at the entire thing during weekend. But it is not unlikely I will proceed as described above. Cheers and have a nice weekend @todos - Arrano! :)

*decrease instead of increase (of course). So difficult to quality-check with only three lines to read!

* nope, it is increase. Increase relates to what will happen from now on as a buyer: I'd have to increase money invested in services if I wanted to maintain customer of all of them. 

@Dalia‍ yes, it is your decision if you buy again or no after total -15. And it is also your decision if you use the extension at all or just get refund straight away.

Yep, that's the essence of the change. If tipster is valuable for you and you want to keep him, then you have to pay him, not use a free extension for 3-4 or more months. :)

I understnad what you mean, but as i sayed when this whole discussion began, from my point of view the sellers will lose in long term because i don't know how many will pay for a good tipster that has once a year 2 consecutive loses on minus...Even if not perfect, i think that Arrano's proposal it is better than what you have done. try to reconsider it, because, i for example, and i believe that a lot more, joined the blogabet market especially because of the old policy, which at least allowed you to be on 0, if not on profit. I personally, if i will have tipsters on minus month after month won't pay for them. If you remember @Editor take a look when Brasil's strike began, there i described the perfect example with service from petkov, a good tipster but who had some bad results and you will draw the conclusions yourself. At least untill he has at least a month in profit is a common sense request from my point of view

Yes, @Petkov2‍ case is clear example, if you do not want to pay for loosing months, you don't have to do it, it is your choice. When tipsters is back in making profit you can by then again.

@Editor‍ So if i understand correctly, regardless of the balance after 60 days, the buyer has to pay? And he pays just the first month, the first 30 days, correct? 

@Editor‍ So if i understand correctly, regardless of the balance after 60 days, the buyer has to pay? And he pays just the first month, the first 30 days, correct? 

and also, from my personal point of view i don't see why to pay a tipster that is on minus, at which you already lost money. @Editor‍ at least take in consideration what Arrano wrote and let it go untill that tipster has a month on plus...will still help a lot

I am buying here a lot of and its a very bad decission for me. IT looks that now only sellers will win money.

I have to agree. Now its unfair for buyers. Before the change it was not ideal for sellers but it think it was more acceptable than the change for buyers now.

@Dalia‍ If you don't want to pay just don't pay. If you think the tipster is valuable to you long term, pay him because he has to work through losing months the same as through profitable. I think that this new system is better because it takes a lot of preassure away from tipsters. Some started chasing losses because the old system was forcing them to get back to profit quickly. 

The problem is that all of you are buyers (all of you who have commented so far-- except Alin-- ) and this decision can't be based on just one part of the equation... 

@Arrano Beltza‍ I think you are right, with this new system we pass from very customer friendly to seller friendly, as a seller i have nothing against it! but as a customer also i think could be a little more fair... after two negative months i think is fair to give another extension, even if is to a long term subscriber that is in positive taking all year stats, at least until a positive month... long term subscribers who got a lot of money before that bad month or months most probably will still subscribe again... but those people that is more new to the service wont have any incentive to get a 30 days subscription... that can cause two things, as Arrano says people maybe thinks more before subscribe so reduce the number of services, the second is that people maybe dont give enough time to test a service, after a bad month they will be more seduced to ask for the refund than try for another month... 

Doesn't seem good at all for anyone. Now both buyers and sellers will lose! The number of buyers that will buy again after 2 negative months shouldn't be that high! And when a buyer don't buy again and don't receive new picks they forget about the seller and will never buy again! So it's a lost customer forever!.

It should be if previous month was negative next is free! And when the month is positive next one cost. Then the buyers are motivated to buy again because there was a positive month!

Plus that it don't really make sense to not get a free month if there are a guarantee system if you haven't received any winnings in any month!

From what I read the thing sellers complained about where if they had a huge negative month that they never got paid again from the active customers. Not that that they didn't get paid if they continue to have negative every month. So don't know whom these rules are for, as said everyone should lose. 

I am a seller and also a buyer and I see it as a good change for both sides. 

@TheDraw Ok, it is good to take the preasure from tipsters, agree with you. BUT (and this is a BIG BUT) after i pay your services, i can go bankrupt because of a tipster, this one who takes it? Just me, the punter. So basically i pay for your tips, you make minus (let's say you have a very bad streak) and i continue trusting you, but if i go bankrupt with the money i have to invest in betting (here we are not talking about personal money, just the money for investing in betting) then what happens? Does that tipster gives me back my loses? In the old system was better because i knew that untill that tipster reaches the line i can adjust my stake, go with a lower stake when he loses and when he starts to recover i can adjust it again so when he is on 0 i can be also on 0. But now what, you, as a tipster, can completely screw me as a punter and still get payed? This rule that blogabet made (@Editor) i do not think it is very good because you in the end, as a tipster, waste 2-3 hours/day in search of tips and and the worst think that can happen to you is that you don't receive moeny, because honestly, you don't deserve them if you are on minus, but i can lose all my betting bank, do you find this to be correct?

@Dalia‍ If you lose your bank in just two months then these two months would have to be an absolute nightmare or you set your bank completely wrong. 

For the most part I agree but how on earth can you justify having to pay after 60 days if BOTH months ended in negative?!??  If I subscribe to someone and they make say -50 units in month 1 and +20 units in month 2, then fair enough, paying for 1 lot of 30 days seems reasonably fair, even if I am in negative overall (not ideal, but fair enough).   If I subscribe and they make -50 units in month 1 and -50 units in month 2, how on earth does this seem fair to not offer a refund or another 30 day extension???

@Editor‍ From my point of view, the most correct thing to do is next: you have a month in minus, after that you have 72 hours to caim Money Back, if not, money goes to seller and you receive free untill he gets at 0. If you ahven't asked for moeny back, badluck for you. In this case Tipsters will be payed and us, the customers, will still have the thing that we come on blogabet: THE GUARANTEE THAT A TIPSTER HAS TO MAKE PROFIT IN ORDER TO PAY HIM AGAIN. If you work somewhere for exzample, and don't make money for your company, i am curios, will they still pay your salary or let you go? I think that with this decision we will all have to lose, tipsters and punters aswell :(

@TheDraw let's say that are absolutely nightmare, but you, the tipster who gave me nightmares (not you personally) you can go to sleep with my money in your pocket, money which you don't deserve. This just allows tipsters to do whatever they want, knowing that they will get payed, this is not ok, i think the tipsters we feel this when they will have 2 consecutive months on minus and will see that they have just half of puters than they had 2 months ago, if they are lucky, and they will see then how it will be

@Dalia‍ "This just allows tipsters to do whatever they want, knowing that they will get payed, this is not ok" C'mon man no tipster wants his customers to lose money.

not all, but when a tipster (like the one from who started all this) comes and sayes something like "i don't care if my customers lose money because of me i still think that i deserve to get payed" (altough i personally don't understand what for) that says a lot. For example if you work for a firm and you don't bring money in that firm, do they still continue payng tour salary? Or you get fired? In the end we are all here for the money(buyers and sellers) and as long as i have to pay for a tipster and lose money i personally won't do it, it has to be a tipsters with who i am working for a long time, basically, since each tipster has 1-2 bad months/year. the punters will leave them after 1-2 months, a lot will ask for refund because they don't want to risk 2 consecutive months on minus and lose even more, including the subscription. The tipsters are like a football team who has fans that cheer them as long as they have results, and here since it involves money, and for a lot of puterns a lot of money i am curious what will hapen

It is so simple tipster loose money you get moneyback or if u want to continue then u risk to get no moneyback. With this change tipsters will have more freedom to make you more profit in long run. With old policy tipster just want to get out from red zone with minimum profit for u just enough to be paid. In this way will be less calculation and more quality for buyers in long run

Its simple as it can be. Why buyers should pay one single euro for a negative performance? Buyers lost money on the picks and should pay furthermore for 30 days (after the 60 days). No logic at all. If a tipster hunt to green the month everyone will know it and keep this in mind regarding extending subscription. So this is no argument in my view.  

#26 agree as well

@weier‍ totally agree with you, why should i pay, after i lose money, for a service? it is beyound commom sense, i understand that the tipsters should be payed earlier, not to wait untill all clients are green (as i sayed, the best thing will be after the first 30 days you have 72 hours to ask for refund, if not, you will receive all the picks untill he is at least on 0) and if they don't ask for refund in those 72 hours after that the tipster takes the money but still he has to provide untill he is at least on 0, not on minus

and my only fear is that this from this move the only ones who will win will be those scums called reseller, because after 2 consecutive months on minus (even if i personally will never work with a reseller) but i will definitelly not buy again from that tipster, especially if i am under 1 year with that tipster

You are completely wrong.  70-90% of revenue goes to Sellers, so this change has nothing to do with Blogabet earnings. The major chunk of benefits will go to Sellers and they deserve it.

No, it is not deception, you are still eligible for full refund of your payments on all your current subscriptions that are in free extension and expire in loss.  They will get one last 30 days extension and you will get the choice to use it or request refund. 

You decide to use the extension or get refund. If you decide to use the extension, after subscription is expired it will be again your decision to buy or not again. 

You are right @Editor‍ but as long as they provide profit, from my point of view it is not that blogabet earns more money, my problem is that i have to pay again after i already lose money on a tipster, that is my problem. Please read what i wrote up, i think it is better for everyone, tipster take money sooner and we don't have to pay untill they are at least on 0, that was the big charm of blogabet, quality guarantee

Yes, you are completely right and we believe that is the most fair and balanced solution, i.e. not looking only from Buyers point of view.

Yes, Buyer pays only one time, 30 days extension is free.  But after 60 days whatever the result, the subscription will be expired and Buyer will have to decide if he wants to pay again or not.

Yes, I wouldn't pay either, but you have the choice to decide yourself, may be if this tipster has long and good history and has just last 1-2 months bad. 

Ok, we will see, I bet you will be still here after few months ;)

I can't agree, old system was heavily dis-balanced in favor of Buyers and was putting too much strain on Sellers.  With this change we believe it will be close to 50-50  as Buyers still retain full control of their decisions and still get 30 days free in case of negative results. We believe no other paid tipsters platform comes even close to the lever of Buyer Protection that we offer. Most even don't offer any kind of money-back guarantee or independent and transparent verification of odds and records. So, please let's be objective and look at the bigger picture and both sides of the story.

Answered already, but still seems many people don't get it. You don't have to necessarily pay after two consecutive months, you decide if you want to invest further or not.

The problem Is that variance Is a bitch. The reason for this change Is that many sellers have big diffs In their months , so fex If seller X makes +40units first month and then makes -1 units 6 months In a row then the buyer deserves 6 free months ? ofcourse not.

Yes, we have noted that suggestion, but can't comment on it at the moment, we will probably discuss it internally next week and anyway we still have 30 day before the first such subscriptions start to expire. :)

@Editor‍ allow me to contradict you, with the others that i work don't allow refund but they give you tips untill you make profit and also with this decision it is a huge disadvantage for buyers unfortunally,  nowere near 50-50, i understand for tipsters to receive the money but i don't understand why to pay as long as they are on minus

The old Pareto principle that  The 80-20 rule generally holds that 20% of the holdings in a portfolio are responsible for 80% of the portfolio’s growth. On the flip side, 20% of a portfolio’s holdings could be responsible for 80% of that portfolio’s losses. If you look at many blogs It Is true here too , you have many months of break even and some small win and some small loss and then you have a few months with gigantic wins. 

Comment was deleted. Reason: bad english

@Editor‍ #41 in this case you should try to find a solution to leep punters close to buyers, this is the only way we can all benefit, you have only once the posibility to refund, if not, you receive till it brings profit or at leadt on +0...

I'm a buyer and obvousily I want things in the buyers favour, however if I look at the bigger picture, a lot and I mean a lot of good tipsters struggle on here when going paid or sometimes a few months after going paid and start chasing losses due to the pressure of handling a bad run on a paid service under the old format. This change could take that pressure off the tipster so they chase less and manage to work their way out of a bad run sensibly so continue instead of packing up a service after 4 months when hitting a bad run when they have previously been smashing it for 8 months making loads of profit whilst free. For sure I would probably be more selective with the number of tipsters I follow and I maybe drop some that I don't want to wait for profit with this new change but this could indirectly make me as a buyer more money further down the line if good tipsters maintain their services long term with better results.

And also why do you wanna keep getting tips from a tipster that you do not believe In , the losses will be much bigger than the subscription cost. The only way to make It real fair Is that It´s calculated on the total +/- on every customer but that would need a totally new system. I do not think It´s doable.

Comment was deleted. Reason: bad english

Boom! Finally justice is done. When i decided for a strike two months ago, I got many words and likes of support. Hey guys, just look my example. Let´s imagine you re my client since february when i started seriously the year. A good start with + 103 but i failed in march and i ended month with minus - 88. Then april,may and june numbers ended on +56, + 53 and + 131. It means + 255 in five months(average of 51 units per month). However,  overall i didn´t touch money on march, april and half may. It was denied to take in account my profit of past months but the losses of profit never was forgotten. It makes no sense at all to alyways erase past profits but to keep  the red month for the following month.  If by supposition I have managed to  share on this same period(feb to june) 25(instead 255) unit[average of + 5(instead + 51)] I would touch all subscriptions but sharing much less money. Maybe most of you haven´t noticed but many sellers probably slow down pace on purpose when a subscriber expiration date is close of the end. I guess this won´t happen anymore. This change sounds healthy. Not the ideal for sellers but still Blogabet one more time is taking Justice in account. Bravo!

@Brasil‍ i agree that you should not wait to receive money, as mentioned above, i think thateach subcriber should be able  to ask for refund only after the first 30 days, if he doesn't take it then he receives tips till you have profit(not necesarilly a whole month, even a few days, as long as you need to get back on profit) and that will be ok for everione. Tipsters take money earlier and punters still have the profit fuarantee, even if it is 1 unit

@gambler00‍ or we pay the whole

amount and half goes to tipster and half remains as an insurance at blogabet, if he has profit, money goes to tipsters otherwise, if he has minus we can decide, to continue or to refund and if we continue to still receive guarantee of

profit

Lot of people here have a wrong idea of what betting is. 1 month is nothing and sellers cant win every month. Punters must accept to lose 1 month, punting is about long term.

The current system was bad for sellers. Anyone with some seller experience will notice it. Lot of pressure to win all the time, which is not possible in betting. Here it s just an extra option, a month is still refundable so... But I think blogabet should allow sellers to define a lower minimum subscription cost. Atm it s 25, we should be able to go down to 10 with less profit guarantee conditions ...

Hope you reconsider this system, if a month negative give free month and 72 hours refund option. Then reset the stats for next month with the exact same rules as the month before. That is fair to all! This system will get more buyers to choose refund so they don't have to risk paying for another negative month, or quitting after 2 negative months. Then they won't come back and the seller might have lost a long time customer.

Buyers shouldn't forget that if a seller makes +50 in march, -5 in april and -5 in may then he is paid just for one month.
When he makes +5, +5 & +5 = +15, he is paid 3 months when actually buyers made far less money off him.
So if they want more profit they need to let more freedom to sellers...else sellers are just going to minimize the numbers of picks when at +5 rather than possibly reaching +50 as in the 2nd example.

in 2-3 months minimum monthly subscription will go down to 10 EUR and it will be possible to sell single picks ;)

You are absolutely right, but most Buyers just look from their own side and can't see the whole picture. When Sellers are better paid and not under so big stress to provide profit every month, Sellers will perform better ;)

@Editor‍

I like this approach. Good stuff. Thank you Editor. 

@Editor‍ I agree with #63 Zizou variation, I thnik it will be the best variation for both sides. This new system is more profitable for sellers, but now for buyers.

Very well said and coming from a Buyer perspective. Nothing much to add. Future will show if it was the right decision, but we examined the state of the Market very carefully before jumping on the trigger.

You are absolute right, unfortunately it is not feasible to make past months profits to count because 90% of Buyers will just open new accounts to bypass this system. And in response we should turn Blogabet office into a Police investigation department. We already spend a lot on anti-reseller activities and we are not really keen on trying to see how many accounts each Buyer can make. Hope you understand.

Buyers are protected here like polar bears. So one way thinking. Why you dont think how to motivate sellers for a change ? For example seller will receive same 50 euro if he have 3 units profit and he will get 50 euro if he make 30 units profit or 300 units. Thats fair ? Becose of that you get low profit services becose nobody want to risk becose reward will be the same. You just bitch about refund when is so simple dont buy more than 7 days or 1 month subscription and thats it. Why you dont implement some additional bonus reward for more profit per month double subscription price if service gived +20 units of profit or something ? I dont see u are arguing when u placed 1000 euro per bet and u have profit from tipster 20 units x 1000 euro u get 20000 euro and u paid to tipster only 50-100 euro. That fair ? Becose is not fair sellers start to calculate and not to risk, and u get only 3-10 units profit per month. You buyers just wants a lot for maybe less then 5% of your profit which u made from sellers. You must think like a seller not just like buyer and then maybe you will understund what you give and what you receive or what should you receive for your investement.

So many different opinions here, interesting to see and also good to see blogabet community has discovered the announcement feature! I thought some time about what I wrote, re-thought and so on ... still, I'd stick to most of my opinion. Some Sellers here sound like Buyers would be totally dependant on them, this is not true, basically, every tipster as an idividual tipster is replaceable and I from my side will, as announced, reduce number of suscriptions. I just cannot afford to pay some 50*15€ steadily AT LEAST every two months (side fact: I've asked myself prior whether it even makes sense to have so many paid services, it is not easy to keep all tipsters in focus and I don't even play all of their tips because I then would bet my entire bank every weekend. Instead of taking 2 picks from A, 2 from B, 2 from C and so on, I will take 4 picks from A, 4 picks from B and so on. Number of picks would be constant and probably, yield and profit would go even up (in case I stick to the right tipsters)). Well, where was I? Oh yes, no money anymore for so many services with new conditions. There we go: I already made my proposal in my first post (only when consecutive month is positive, suscription ends. Two months negative in a row lead to a third, free month (and yes, I know perfectly about long-term blah blah)), I'd stick to it, new rules are not fair to buyers imo - as well as old rules - I can fully understand reason for changes in favor of sellers - were not fair to sellers. I cannot change it though, we have to swallow and I guess only time will show whether it was the right choice: 1) Will suscriptions go down so that in the end neither a) blogabet (they also earn a share when people suscribe - so I am glad to also have financed blogabet as premium customer haha) nor b) the seller has a real benefit? 2) Will also (some) sellers deal different with new situation? Basically, they COULD (and 80% of all services here are shit, so this COULD is not only a weird thought, I also experienced the following on my own) go chase results now (which some, as said, already do) - and still get their money in case they fail with it (which they will most likely do as chasing never ends up well). Doesn't affect top-services, I am 100% sure. But those 2-month-history-and-I-spam-the-main-feed-and-hope-there-are-people-dumb-enough-to-believe-the-bullshit-I-say-services COULD possibly go paid then, sell picks and they have MONEY GUARANTEE. Not that I personally care, I smell those suckers from 100 miles distance - but not everyone here does, so possibly, no rules make blogabet a MEKKA for those mugs I just mentioned. 3) Very many pessimistic thoughts until now, I am not only democrat (as said in prior post), I am also optimist in general... So, let's add: Because of (1) and my doubts (I have too many paid services), I am now forced to my personal success, my personal next step: Because of being really selective from now on, I only stay suscribed to tipsters that 100% suit to me, not only yield/profit I mean, also their style (frequency, average odds and variance, etc.). Maybe, less suscriptions = more profit (as said, I don't follow all paid picks as 1) bank is too little and 2) some tipsters would be too dominating (those who post 200 picks per month compared to those with 20)). So, maybe all this has a positive effect to the BUYER as well - unvoluntarily. We will see. I won't post anything more about this topic, I think I said all I have to say (and most likely even more. Maybe, I go write a book in the near future so I don't have to annoy you here with my essays)! :) 

Comment is hidden because tipster is banned.

Comment is hidden because tipster is banned.

@strongpicks‍ imagine that you have a tipster like the example i gave with petkov, there you will find a lot of balance and the problem is like @Arrano Beltza‍  sayed, 80% of service are for nothing...

great chance in my eyes. a seller doesn't sell the guarantee to make profit. he just sells information, knowledge and skills. so this is just fair.

Comment is hidden because tipster is banned.

Comment is hidden because tipster is banned.

Comment was deleted. Reason: Sory

Comment was deleted by a moderator. Reason: Comment not on topic

I must say that almost eery decision after new blog start to work was 100% right and fair. This team is on right way  no matter I did not belive in this new platform and ofr many years spend on blog I did not belive I will become seller ever but system is like that and it is right. Everyone here forgets that when someone become paid tipster that ussually means he was at least few mounth good and possitiv free tipster. Lot of guys can not handle that pressure that they have after opening paid blog and htey end up after many + mounths free in paid mounth -. When we talk about is this fair or not remember that if you really follow some tipster before paid service you are in 95% of cases in situation to make nice profit for sure more then few mounths subscribe cost because average cost is around 50e and if you choose to pay someone 50e I am sure that you made at least few hundred before on his free bets. Buyers here need to understan that many great tipster don't deal with pressure of big number of subscribers good and ot try to help to bettor that they pay subscribe to overcome hard mounths esspecialy when serie is bloody red because if someone already showed he is good on free he can be good on paid side just to ovecome that pressure and this way blogabet team did small favore and just lil bit lower pressure on paid guys. It is more then fair and good move and I am sure in past years buyers were always in better possition then sellers it is important on this new platform to adjust lil bit possitions and after all this site exist because of sellers at least 55% and this is opinion of guy that was 99% sure that he won't open paid blog ever...

@Editor‍

Nice move  i think...After sometime  you protect and sellers :D  Brasil guy say good , if tipster make few month 300units plus than one month -10-20 is not nice to not take money and customer take a lot..So is good even they can take moneyback if want :) Is good for tipster stress so NICE MOVE :)

I have to say, that i´ll have to accept the new rules from 16-07-01 on. I think it is more fair to sellers and that is ok. But in my view it is absolute unfair to change the rules for old suscriptions. I´ve accepted an art of contract as i bought the suscription and now you tell me all is gone. I have some suscriptions were i lost more than 10k and after the rules changed all bad results are erased???? That is more the unfair to thousands of buyers. 

Comment is hidden because tipster is banned.

@ vijay, nearly all blogs with consistent positive months rely on small markets and joke books like bet365. More serious services naturally suffer much more from variance.

Belpunter is right. For example Vijay, your service do not fit to me, because you have many tips in crap bookies.

@Editor‍I also think that the tipster must play on game day. Many service game before which is more than bad. So every  a bit better tipster would have a huge yield if play game before but limits is big joke... Also those scammers hundred go with 10 stakes, and then when they hit the first five games, go to 1 stake ... To me this is pure scam ..

In blog stats you can see how early the tipster publishes the picks, i.e. 2-3 days before match day, or 12 hour before match start, etc.  There are thousands of customers that are fine with early limits and bet365 odds, nothing wrong with that and no idea why you think only high rollers use the Market.  As for scammers you have to report when you see such things, then we can take action.  

Comment is hidden because tipster is banned.

Comment is hidden because tipster is banned.

Yep  ok :)

@Editor‍   What is if a seller is in minus for the month of first suscription, i take the addon for the next 30 days and the seller does not post any pick in this month? He is also not in holidaymode. Get i my money back or what else happens?

@Schlumpi‍ i believe there is a minimum of 10 picks per month which the seller must provide , but editor can say it exactly / thank you @Editor‍ for this change 

Comment is hidden because tipster is banned.

Maybe it's not perfect now, but it's definitely better than it was before. Sellers don't sell guarantees, just knowledge which leads to money in most cases. We're not able to provide profit every month, but many of us are able to provide a good investment on the long run. And I'm sure that experienced buyers know how to judge a service, even if they maybe lost some money after 60 days. Because in most cases they've earned much more before and will earn much more afterwards. Thanks for thinking about the sellers here, Blogabet! 

Ijay, you have 0% yield on pinnacle and 20% yield on bet365 . I don´t care what yield you can have on crap bookies like bet365, that what I mean on crap bookies. On the other side, is not a good strategy to insult potencial costumers.

Deception is that earlier I subscribe to other conditions. I have a subscription, I work 4-5 months and unfortunately, they are now in the big red line, and thus lost my money. Introducing this condition for older subscriptions, you deprive me the chance to play their funds to these subscriptions. With this change, you are making it impossible to work on your service, I will explain why. I think you understand what a subscription costs - is about 5% per month of the allocated amount of funds for the tipster, so the subscriber is focused on what to buy for delivery had a positive balance and a refund - it is small consolation for him if he lost on subscription 30-40%, for example. And you your change creates a situation where the subscriber is no guarantee no, give examples of: 1. I pay a subscription, the result -10 subscription extended for a month - the result of -15, in the end, I have -25 units and must pay for a subscription. I once again pay a subscription - the result of +10, as a result I -15 and I'll have to pay. 2. I pay a subscription, the result -50 subscription extended for a month - the result of -30, in the end, I have -80 units and what I do in this situation ??? Again, having to pay a big disadvantage for delivery or refund the amount of the subscription, which is only a small part with the lost funds ?? Bringing a subscription to a positive balance - it was one of your basic privileges, now I think I will go gradually outflow of real subscribers.

<!--[if gte mso 9]> <![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]> Normal 0 21 false false false DE X-NONE X-NONE <![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]> <![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Normale Tabelle"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;} <![endif]-->At first thanks to editor and his team for great work and providing blogabet in this way.

Of course I agree with changements to avoid unfairness, for now I hope that a step will follow soon to adjust.Editor, as you know I have also 2 subscription -), so I want to write about my thoughts.

At first the point I clearly disagree.

If I made a contract with another party than one party or even a third party is not able to change later a part of the contract onesided.

That means that existing subscriptions should not affected from those new rules.

blogabet wants to be most sophisticated betting advice platform with respect and trust, so blogabet need to agree with common law.

Some thoughts about the new rules and about the so often called risk from the seller. I feel it need to point out about the risk from buyers:

If a seller performs one month -20 units and than 5 months each + 1 unit than the buyer need to pay 5 times for -15 units, if he wants to continue, because he still trust him.

Answer here in this thread – risk of the buyer.

If a highroller joins the tipster and many other buyers are not able to catch the odds – risk of the buyer.

The seller accepts more and more followers and odds dropping faster and faster – risk of the buyer.

If something changes in the real life of the seller and he don’t continue with same professionalism but don’t inform followers – risk of the buyer.

If a buyer feel it is not worth to continue following a tipster after loosing many units, he makes refund. But of course he lost units and not subscription price – risk of buyer.

That means also that the answer “buyer can take refund” after buyer lost much money is without any intelligence.

And if the buyer deciding to continue after loosing months and paying again because tipster had good past performance – of course also risk of buyer to loose even more, if he would only have his units back.

That all means that the risk is unfair on thy buyers side.

Also I have the impression that some sellers forget that they failed to follow tipsters profitable before they start own paid service!

All in all  there should be at least a rule that the buyer  is in green overall with a tipster about decent period before those rules will be applied.

I agree with belpunter #87, this should be the right way for a fair solution.

If you don't agree with new rules you should request money-back for all your subscriptions that are in loss and leave the platform. Simple as that. There is no deception, we never offered anything more than full money-back on negative subscriptions and it is still valid.

Same for you, check my reply #103

Comment is hidden because tipster is banned.

How about tipster selling yield combined with minium number of picks (both can be determined by the seller)? E.g. 10% and 100 picks minimum for 50 €. If after 100 picks yield is below 10% buyer can decide to opt out and get money back (maybe partials if yield is 9% 5 € cashback etc) or he decide to continue and subscription end as soon as the seller provided 10% yield for this particular buyer. This puts the seller in a good position to offer a fair price and a guaranteed profit for the buyer.

Good

thanks!

How to delete a profile ? I swear I don't have a button "delete" in my menu

@stiflerpicks‍ you have in your blog admin button the option -> close blog

Buenas tardes para hablar con editor

Como puedo contactar contigo editor

I think there is one thing that is unfair for buyers now. Keeping that 6 months ban for subscribing to service after buyer uses refund option makes no sense for me now. I would definitely prefer to change it. Lets say buyer has a negative month with service and wants a refund because seller is in negative state of mind because of family issues or shit like that, but buyer knows that in 3 months sellers top league will be back after break. So buyer has only one option here - give up on money and that just doesnt seem right imo. In this situation (6 months ban rule) I dont see many advantages for sellers anyway, but I see a huge disadvantage in buyers part. Would you consider to change it, Editor?

and other thing... the system is broken. I have an experience with the service that at the end of the subscribtion was +7U positive with me, put 8U bet and before subscription ended, the pick lost. So in real I was -1U negative. But blogabet graded that pick as a push, then my subscription ended. Blogabet regraded it two days later to lost, but I have no option now, because my subscription simply ended. I didnt know what part of the help desk to use and forum doesnt exist anymore. Honestly I dont care anymore about the subscription or refund, I just wanted to let you know that I experienced this and I think it should be included in TO-REPAIR list :)

Comment was deleted. Reason: wrong topic

@Editor‍ sry to bother and bumping the post, just trying to get your attention and eventuelly some response. Cheers, man

@TenistaAFC‍ just contact support in such cases blogabet.com/help

o.k