I wrote:
... So far direction comparisons between markets and other institutions
in the field have favored markets. ...
[EMAIL PROTECTED] responded:
In this case, were the markets closer than the polls taken right before the
election? Were they closer than the exit polls?
I don't know the details
In a message dated 11/3/04 6:54:43 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>In the end the important question is comparative - are there any other
>institutions that on average do better? So far direction comparisons
>between markets and other institutions in the field have favored
>markets. And real and
Well the betting markets made a big reversal last night, from up to almost
75% in favor of Kerry, now down to a 5% chance for Kerry (even that looks
too high, so I finally made my first election bet).
Of course we should expect this sort of reversal at least 1/4 of the time,
so one can't be too stu
Last night before I went to bed (10:00 CST), the Iowa Electronic Markets
site was showing Kerry shares selling for $.506 and Bush shares selling
for $.49 in the vote-share market. Now (5:00am CST) Kerry shares are
selling for $.457 and Bush shares are selling for $.547. There was an
equally dramati
At 5:33 EST Robin wrote:
> >Tradesports, IEM, Betfair give Kerry a 71 to 74% chance to win.
>
At 10:02 EST, Robin wrote:
> Tradesports now gives Bush a 62% of winning.
Doesn't this big swing undermine the theory that markets are
consistently good predictors of elections?
--Robert Book
[EMAIL
At 5:33 EST I wrote:
Tradesports, IEM, Betfair give Kerry a 71 to 74% chance to win.
Tradesports now gives Bush a 62% of winning.
Robin Hanson [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hanson.gmu.edu
Assistant Professor of Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-
703-993-2326
