Quote:
|
Originally Posted by THErealdeal
This is a pro trader and his opinion on surebetpro.
I know a lot of riskfree members, and they do indeed make money, I have seen plenty of statements, but the software is useless. Its MLM, nothing else, but people do make good money.
http://www.sportsarbitragereview.co.uk/ |
Hi THErealdeal,
Here is a little reading material for you that should answer why this guy says what he says about RFP. It is always better to be informed from both sides before posting negatives about something you know nothing about.
Most of us just turn our heads when we read negative comments about RFP because you have your opinions and are allowed to voice them.
Just to inform you , if you wish to add this to your website. Alan Seymour is a fake. This site is actually set up by a person that is providing another arb service. This is his way of doing dirty under handed advertising. Below is what I am been told.
Alan Seymour Is a CON
01/07 00:06
I am sure many of you are suspicious of this person already but this is just a warning. I recently received an email from this person (assuming he exists at all) trying to sell me the journals of his progress as an arb trader even though on his website the first thing it states is that "There is nothing for sale on this site".
I was warned about this person and I now know that he is a con and advise all readers to avoid buying his products.
He is trying to make money out of novice arbitrage traders, even though he lies and says he is only trying to offer 'free' advice.
Stay well clear of Alan Seymour and Zero-Risk-Arbitrage. They are one and the same.
Sports Arbitrage Review is a front for ZRA, thats 100% certain.
- "Alan Seymour" has never been a member of our service, although on the website he claims to still subscribe.
- His supply of Google AdWords vouchers never seems to run out, meaning that his "genuine" and "unaffiliated" website always out-bids other ads on Google.
- Until recently, the Google ads linked to ZRA's affiliate manager software, 1ShoppingCart. "Unaffiliated" my backside!
- There's a road in London next door to ZRA's registered office called "Seymour Place". You'd think that "Jason" could have been more inventive when making up a fake identity!
"Alan Seymour" is ZRA.
I'm sure ZRA is a good service and I have no problem with them on that score. But I do object to false marketing ploys disguised as "genuine" references.
Below is an email I (James Beattie) sent to him last August (2004) to which I never got any reply
From: James Beattie
To:
alan.seymour@sportsarbitragereview.co.uk
Sent: Tuesday, August 03, 2004 2:31 PM
Subject: From James Beattie
Hi Allan,
I trust you are keeping well.
Before I proceed, I would like to get your permission to send this e-mail out to all our RiskFreeProfit members. If you are opposed to this I will respect your decision and not broadcast it out to the entire database.
I presume you have heard of the term "selective hearing" . Let me elaborate . When he you are having a conversation with a person and you have selective hearing, you tend to only pick up parts of the conversation that you want to hear and the rest falls by the wayside.
In this case, I feel you suffer from selective reading and selective quoting. This is totally unfair, unjust and also very unprofessional. You were asked to write a review on the SureBetPro software. However when you compiled the review, you were in selective reading and selective quoting mode and therefore your review cannot be taken seriously. Let me say that I am totally in favour of freedom of speech but you should present the full facts of a review or not present any review at all.
Allow me to point out these cases.
Selective reading - Case 1
In your review you were 100 percent correct and justified in your assessment of the WRP software. As you correctly pointed out, this software application has many flaws. It runs directly from your PC, which means it uses up huge resources on your computer. Now, when you are running this WRF software and you are trading, the danger is that when you have placed money with one bookmaker, there is a chance that your computer could crash before you get to place money with the 2nd bookmaker, because of the huge resources that it takes to run this software. This would be a disaster when it comes to arbitrage trading. Now, with this WRF software, all it does is send a Robot from your PC to scan the bookmakers odds pages. This has some major disadvantages. If you had numerous users of this software this would mean that the bookmakers would the taking all this traffic from each individual's PC and would therefore be using up the bookmakers' bandwidth resources. This would also increase the chance of the software crashing. This software application does not have the ability to correctly detect arbitration situations because of the way the bookmakers' present their odds on their web sites. E.g. If Pete Sampras was playing Tim Henman in the Tennis, some bookmakers will present Pete Sampras as P. Sampras, others bookmakers might present him as Pete S. , others as P.S. It would the virtually impossible for any Website scanning software to match all this data correctly.
Now, this is where the selective reading comes in. You have mentioned in your review that our software is similar to the software described above. You have failed to mention that the new version of the SureBetPro application will now be running as a server-based application, removing all these flaws. You also failed to mention that the SureBetPro application you were running was a demo version and not the real live version. We put this demo version together to give our promoters, many of whom have no prior knowledge or experience of arbitrage trading.
We have alerted our members of this on the numerous occasions on our updates, which you have received but you somehow seemed to have overlooked this important information in your review, be it by design or by accident. To me, this is totally unjust and unfair.
Selective reading - Case 2
In your review you have pointed as that you paid us $139 for the software. That is correct. However, once again the selective reading comes in. You have failed to mention in your review that our 30-day subscription date will start the day the software is released. If you have paid us money already, this will be put towards your subscription payment from the date the software is released. We have told our members this on several occasions in our update emails but once again you failed to mention this in your review.
Selective reading - Case 3
In your review you have mentioned that we have changed our payment processor on a few occasions. You were correct in saying this. However, you have failed to mention the reason we changed processors was that prior to this we were using Stormpay and Paypal..Due to our members requests we changed processor. The reason they wanted a change was that these named processors would charge a very high fee for our members to receive commissions. We have mentioned this on a few occasions in our updates but once again you went into selective reading mode when you received these updates.
Selective reading - Case 4
You also mentioned in your review that our website content seems to be copied from other websites. You have, however, failed to mention that we have updated our website and changed content and graphics, etc. We have also notified all members of this in our updates, which once again you seem to have overlooked. As for the use of the word copy, this is a very strong word and totally unjustified. As you are aware, there are hundreds of web sites dedicated to arbitrage trading. If you went to each of the web site owners and asked them to compile a 500-word description on arbitrage trading and post it up on their web site, you would find that at least 75 per cent of the content would be the same on all these web sites.
Outrageous Statement
This is what you had stated on your review
UPDATE: The company owner, a James Beattie, has recently started making claims that he made a deal with 50 bookmakers to get their odds directly into the software. Unfortunately, this appears to be a blatant lie. It seems to me that they have done a deal with the likes of oddsexchange.com or betbrain.com to use their lines. This has almost no value because the data is available for free on the respective websites and the problem is that it is not updated frequently enough to be of use in arbitrage.
This is a totally wild and rash statement and after reading this my estimation of you has dropped down a good few notches.
1) Now, how could it seem to you that we have done a deal with another company when we have not released the live version yet. You have not seen the live version or seen how it works, yet you make these wild and rash assumptions based on some sort of hunch.
Now Allan, in all fairness, how can you compile part of a review based on a hunch and then post it up on your web site? Do you think this is professional? I don't think so and neither would your peers.
2) How do you know what kind relationship we have with the bookmakers when we have kept agreements private and confidential? Why do you call me a liar when you know nothing of our dealings with these bookmakers? Again, do you think this is professional??
3) Why do you just assume that we have done deals with other companies when you have absolutely no proof of this. Why would we go to these other companies when there are odds feeds that can be up to 15 to 20 minutes old? As you know yourself, in arbitrage trading this would be suicidal. Assumptions are very cheap when there is no proof to back it up. You should know this.
4) These bookmakers are our allies. This is how RiskFreeProfit makes its profit. In arbitrage trading, you are placing money with at least 2 bookmakers and although you are winning money from one of these bookmakers you are also leaving money will the other bookmaker. This other bookmaker pays a percentage of the money that is deposited in the trader's account. This is part of our agreement with them. The other part of our agreement with them is private and confidential but very beneficial in the development of our software.
However, you seem to know all about these agreements or should I say lack of agreements as you seem to think. With this sort of amazing psychic knowledge that you seem to have, I am surprised that you have to get involved in the arbitrage trading industry at all. With your psychic powers you should be able to pick a winner on each sports events at all times.
MLM concept.
The points that you have made on the MLM concept, I will not argue which you. MLM is not for everyone and people are entitled to their opinion on this. At one stage in the past I also had a negative opinion on MLM as I got, for want of a better term, a bad doing in MLM. I am not alone on this. However, I feel that RiskFreeProfit can go a long way in restoring people's faith in MLM. We now have a consumer product that our members can use to make them money instead of just costing them money, which makes a change in the MLM industry. As I have pointed out above, RiskFreeProfit makes its profits when our members use our product, so it is in our utmost interest to have many people as possible using our product. However you are fully entitled to your opinions on the MLM concept. I know many who would disagree with you - it really depends on one's personal experience in the industry.
So now Allan, as you can read there is plenty of food for thought in my e-mail. This is not a personal attack or anything of the sort. There were just a few points I had to make clear to you after reading your review. We will be releasing our live version next Monday and I would be honoured if you would try out this version a few days before we release it. Then you can compile your review and I will provide you with any assistance you want with your review, be it good or bad. I welcome reviews provided ALL the facts are presented and not just a selection.
As I mentioned earlier, I would like, with your permission, to send this e-mail to our entire database. If you are opposed to this I will respect your decision and not do a broadcast. If this is the case, I think it is only fair that you have another look at your review and maybe change some of the content that is reflected in this e-mail or at least have a link on your review where visitors can view this e-mail. I think this would be very fair and just. I have included my phone number at the bottom of this e-mail and I welcome and would be delighted to receive a call from you .
Best Wishes
James Beattie
CEO of RiskFreeProfit
(Phone number removed)
Best Regards,
Re: RiskFreeProfit - RiskFreeProfit.com
Hybrid Mode
