Start a new topic

Gulen Extradition and ancillary suggestion of 2020 markets

I think a market regarding whether the US will extradite Fethullah Gulen to Turkey would be interesting.  Especially now that Turkey has officially requested extradition.



As an aside, it may be time to start considering 2020 markets for RNOM/DNOM/PREZ.  I think they'd get some reasonable volume for the names with higher likelihood (Clinton/Trump/Cruz/Warren) even this early, and since the results of the November general election will greatly influence the likelihood of those various names, the markets would serve as interesting derivatives of the 2016 markets.  It would be educational, at least, to see how longer-dated markets behave in this setting, and in the context of the more imminent general election.  In further support of my case, having a few longer-dated markets might assist in keeping funds within the PredictIt system once November has come and gone, so that PI can continue to gather data and support the infrastructure of the site beyond November.  Thanks for your consideration.

But as a more imminent request, I really think a Gulen market would be educational/fun/unique/profitable.


ThePredicator, I wrote a long reply, but when I submitted it, I was told the system malfunctioned, and I hadn't saved my reply :-(

In short, I agree that many questions like "who will be VP" are just derivatives of the most popular questions like "who will be president".  PredictIt should get a waiver from the regulators, to ask a few questions with 100'000 bettors. 

I don't like a betting market for a Gulen extradition, because a decision should rely on legal not political reasoning.  The only exception I see is SCOTUS, which is essentially a political body today, albeit superior to House and senate, and whose decision should be "bettable".


About the long-term nomination betting I've got two remarks:

- Who is elected in 2016 and with which margin will impact who will be nominated in 2020, so those betting markets shouldn't open before the general election 2016.

- Very long bets have the disadvantage of binding your money for a long time.  That's not very exciting betting.

Peter, thanks for your feedback.


I don't quite understand your comments with respect to a Gulen market.  I'd argue there are both legal and political aspects to a potential Gulen extradition, and the interplay between the two creates an interesting dynamic of uncertainty.


Regarding 2020 markets, I agree that the extended time until resolution would present a challenge for trading volumes and volatility, particularly directly after November 2016.  But in the interest of furthering PI's educational goals, I think such a market could be quite informative.  It would be interesting to see how an incumbent's re-election chances are priced throughout their entire term.  Whoever wins will surely face some scandals (however contrived)  that would affect their perceived re-election chances, and the market can also begin to anticipate their potential challengers, and their likelihood of success.

The extended time until resolution would certainly dissuade SOME bettors from participating, but there would still undoubtedly be opportunities within both Yes and No contracts to play the swings and capture some shorter-term trading profits.  My goal would likely be to build a portfolio of No contracts that would minimize my risk and capital outlay.  I'd also likely buy the occasional Yes contract when I deem it under-priced, in hopes of offloading it fairly quickly with a penny or two of profit.


I think if 2020 markets are added anytime before 2019, then they should be added soon, as the volumes and educational opportunities are most compelling right now.  Rather than adding yet another 2016 Prez derivative (like "Who will be the winning VP in 2016?" and "Will the next Prez be a man or woman?"), I think 2020Prez would serve a more unique role as a 2016Prez derivative - it's almost akin to asking "Who will win the 2016 election, and how successful will their term be, and who is most likely to capitalize on their perceived shortcomings?"  I find that to be a very interesting question, and would enjoy participating in, and analyzing the data of, that market - both pre- and post-election.


Regardless, thanks again for your comment.

Login to post a comment