This question will resolve positively on the 1st of July, 2022

121

280

Ṁ150K

Ṁ1.3K

resolved Jul 3

Resolved

YES

ALL

This market resolves positively on the 1st of July, 2022. This question is meant to find out whether Manifold users are incentivized to correctly predict on longer-term markets, and, to some extent, what the implied discount rate is. Note that with Manifold's lending functionality, you can bet the first M$20 for free.

Get Ṁ200 play money

🏅 Top traders

#	Name	Total profit
1		Ṁ534
2		Ṁ519
3		Ṁ275
4		Ṁ217
5		Ṁ204

25 Comments

99 Holders

294 Trades

Sort by:

Resolved yes, sorry for the delay. Also rip my inbox.

predicted YES

It didn't

predicted NO

That's why I always buy one M$ of no for such questions :D

predicted YES

I'm very confident that Nuno will resolve this YES as soon as he is reminded that it's reached the resolution date. I'm not surprised that it didn't resolve on time, though.

predicted NO

(~~Shouldn't this resolve no then because the resolution criterion is not fulfilled?~~)

predicted YES

@JoyVoid I was thinking about making a "This question will resolve positively on September 31" market and then resolving it NO on October 1st but I couldn't figure out how to word it without giving it away (there are 30 days in September).

predicted YES

Here's a derivate market on how this market resolves: https://manifold.markets/jack/will-nuno-resolve-their-question-ye

predicted YES

@JoyVoid I don't think so - I think the intent is very clear - to resolve this market yes on (or about) 7/1/22. The market is not phrased as a question about whether Nuno will resolve it properly, it's phrased as a statement of how it will resolve.

predicted YES

(You probably meant that as a joke, but it is a little unclear because people do sometimes write markets like "X will happen" and resolve NO if it does not happen. I would prefer that they didn't to avoid this ambiguity.)

predicted NO

@jack Yes, sorry, that was indeed a joke refring to what you just said (which I tried to indicate through markdown strikethrough, but lack of formatting plus tonal indication means it was bound to get lost in all of it).

predicted NO

(I don't actually doubt Nuno will resolve this YES, just bought M$1 ought of principle/benefits calculation :D )

predicted YES

@JoyVoid Yeah no worries, I realized what the ~~ meant after posting my comment lol

predicted YES

I do believe that there is a base rate of >1/10,000 of misclicking the resolution. (Would be great if Manifold supported fixing a resolution - it could work by undoing all the transactions just like N/A resolution does and then re-resolving it differently)

bought Ṁ50 of YES

Strange that non-determined markets, resolving after this one, have more extreme prices. Not sure what the arbitrage is tho As some examples, the markets - https://manifold.markets/Tetraspace/will-11-on-january-1st-2023 - https://manifold.markets/LarsDoucet/will-china-invade-taiwan-in-2022 - https://manifold.markets/ACXBot/will-manifold-markets-still-be-aliv - https://manifold.markets/c/will-more-than-15000-people-be-kill are at 97%, 4%, 97% and 98.2% respectively.

predicted YES

Hmmm, maybe you can bet against it, then point them to this sort of market? If they do move their funds to the safer markets, you've just made some profit. Perhaps this would help to make the discount rate more consistent across the site.

@JonathanNankivell that would have worked before they implemented transactional taxes in MM (used to be an income tax).

The other issue might be liquidity. The probably doesn’t tell you what you will get for betting 100. I have seen some good bets before where the probability was good but any big bet would yield less than 1M profit.

Finally, this market is not an actual loan. If it were there would be more activity and interest.

predicted YES

@Undox Thanks for the thoughtful comments. I hadn't heard about the transaction taxes - where can I find out more?

@JonathanNankivell Fee schedule is described here: https://docs.manifold.markets/binary-markets Currently fees are 13% x post-bet probability of the outcome you're betting against. So the fees are higher if you're betting "against the market", so to speak.

predicted YES

@MattP Just checking I understand that correctly... If I bet M100 on YES to move the probability to 90%, I would pay 13% * 10% * M100 = M1.3 in fees? And if I bet M100 on YES to move the probability to 10%, I would pay 13% * 90% * M100 = M11.7 in fees?

@JonathanNankivell I believe so, yes. It's less noticeable because when you're betting long shots (against the market) the number of shares you get is much higher than betting sure things (with the market), so the higher fees aren't as obvious.