Related questions
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ446 | |
| 2 | Ṁ156 | |
| 3 | Ṁ52 | |
| 4 | Ṁ39 | |
| 5 | Ṁ24 |
@TonyZhang the other one closes sooner, so people are more willing to bet it to a lower price because they'll get their profits sooner.
The correct probability for both markets is near zero, but I and many others know we can make more than 10% on other markets by end of year, so there's no point betting here, and not much point betting on the other one.
The situation will improve after the end of the year when there's more mana relative to the number of markets closing soon, and markets will be less mispriced.
@chrisjbillington Oh! That makes so much sense. Really thought I spotted an easy arb (since this thread had so few people betting on I thought it was a liquidity issue). Thank you so much for clarifying! What a way to start my Manifold journey :)
@Donald could you clarify that this wouldn't resolve YES if there are outbreaks of existing pathogens in other countries, like RSV? It requires the outbreak in China to be a novel pathogen of some sort, or at least some new variant of an existing pathogen, that spreads elsewhere, yes?
@chrisjbillington Since I didnt specify in the question that it needs to be a nove pathogen I will resolve this YES if an existing pathogen is shown to spread from China to other counties and is understood to be the cause of the pneumonia outbreak. If there is just a pneumonia outbreak in other countries but there is no evidence of it being a result of a transmission from China I will resove NO.