People who are overpriced

curtains · #1 02-23-2007, 12:44 AM

There are quite a few singers who although being good, have virtually no chance to win the competition. They can come in the top 5 maybe but they simply will not win. Because of this they should really be at like 2 thru 4 the entire time. Two prime examples of this are:

Stephanie Edwards
Sabrina Sloan

I could name a few more whom I believe have very little to no chance, but those two really have almost none. Despite that for some reason they are at 10 and 7.

The only reason they have any value is that for some reason people think there is a small chance they might win. Sabrina being +900 is simply ridiculous, same for Edwards being +1328. Anyone who buys these people is simply throwing money away, unless your plan is to unload them after another good performance (although I really don't see them getting any higher).

Phil Stacey also has zero chance, he shouldnt even be 5 3, he should be 2 0 because literally he has probably less than a 1% chance of winning the entire competition. Same for Antonella, she has zero zero zero chance to win. They should really have no value at all....so be ready to sell whenever you think they are at their peak.

Basically it's a really weird betting structure where even though we all know that some people have literally less than 1% chance to win, we buy them anyway, as do lots of others, with the hope that their stock (which should be practically worthless) will go up. It's just so weird, in a perfect world everyone should be spending their money on at most 5-6 people and everyone else should be stuck at 0.

thing85 · #2 02-23-2007, 12:56 AM

True - but as you hint at, this is about making money, not just picking the winner. All any of these people need is a solid performance and their stock will go up (if only for a few hours). Of course, with WSEX's vig, it's hard to make money by riding the short term fluctuations.

I agree that Edwards and Sloan are overvalued (although if Sloan puts together a string of solid performances, she will have a shot at winning).

I don't really think Phil Stacey is overvalued. Antonella is definitely overvalued - in my mind, she's eliminated. I'm not sure what donks here pushed her 0 2 price up to 3 5. Granny's idea of buying some Antonella at 0 2 was probably a good idea, but at 1 3, I don't think it should be touched.

I also think Sundance is overvalued. To me, he has less a chance than Phil Stacey primarily because he has shown multiple times now that he can't really sing (maybe it's nerves or song choice, but in either case, he's not a versatile performer).

curtains · #3 02-23-2007, 01:57 AM

[ QUOTE ]
True - but as you hint at, this is about making money, not just picking the winner. All any of these people need is a solid performance and their stock will go up (if only for a few hours). Of course, with WSEX's vig, it's hard to make money by riding the short term fluctuations.

I agree that Edwards and Sloan are overvalued (although if Sloan puts together a string of solid performances, she will have a shot at winning).

I don't really think Phil Stacey is overvalued. Antonella is definitely overvalued - in my mind, she's eliminated. I'm not sure what donks here pushed her 0 2 price up to 3 5. Granny's idea of buying some Antonella at 0 2 was probably a good idea, but at 1 3, I don't think it should be touched.

I also think Sundance is overvalued. To me, he has less a chance than Phil Stacey primarily because he has shown multiple times now that he can't really sing (maybe it's nerves or song choice, but in either case, he's not a versatile performer).

[/ QUOTE ]

My point is that its just weird that pepole who realistically have no chance at winning, have values much higher than 0. Sabrina Sloan is the most outrageous, she is probably somewhere in the range of 200-1 or more to win, yet shes 10-1 odds on the site and people are trading with that number in mind!

pokerpunchout · #4 02-23-2007, 02:04 AM

I think there is money to be made on Phil Stacey. I see him as a a good candidate to make the top 5. If he does this his sell price will be no less than 10 to 12.

revots33 · #5 02-23-2007, 10:34 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I think there is money to be made on Phil Stacey. I see him as a a good candidate to make the top 5. If he does this his sell price will be no less than 10 to 12.

[/ QUOTE ]

Even if he makes the Top 5 (doubtful IMO) that's no guarantee his price will be 10 or higher. Depends on who he's up against, but if there are 2-3 big favorites still in (say Lakesha and Melinda), his price could just as easily be 1-3 or 2-4 at the Top 5.

Advancing in the competition does not mean the price will go up. It will only go up if enough people think he can win the whole thing. We'd need a bunch of shocking eliminations for that to happen.

disjunction · #6 02-23-2007, 10:49 AM

[ QUOTE ]
There are quite a few singers who although being good, have virtually no chance to win the competition. They can come in the top 5 maybe but they simply will not win.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure if this can be determined after one week, though. It all seems so clear in retrospect. A few names, did they ever fall into this list of people who have virtually no chance? These three all could have won had their opposition faltered.

Diana DeGarmo
Jasmine Trias
Elliot Yamin (I took a lot of crap thinking he had a chance)
Kimberly Locke

pete fabrizio · #7 02-23-2007, 11:33 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There are quite a few singers who although being good, have virtually no chance to win the competition. They can come in the top 5 maybe but they simply will not win.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure if this can be determined after one week, though. It all seems so clear in retrospect. A few names, did they ever fall into this list of people who have virtually no chance? These three all could have won had their opposition faltered.

Diana DeGarmo
Jasmine Trias
Elliot Yamin (I took a lot of crap thinking he had a chance)
Kimberly Locke

[/ QUOTE ]

If I recall correctly, Yamin's stock was in the gutter until Chris was eliminated 4th, when people started believing he could win.

curtains · #8 02-23-2007, 12:39 PM

My whole point is that basically a lot of people have zero chance to win almost no matter how long they last, and it's just the public's gullibility that gives them any value at all.

Also I think DeGarmo, Trias, Yamin and Locke had virtually no chance to win. I don't believe for a second when they say how close those votes are. Also Locke was very good and Yamin was pretty likable as he had a pretty big underdog factor going, I wouldn't put them in the same category as Phil Stacey and Sabrina Sloan.

disjunction · #9 02-23-2007, 01:41 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure if this can be determined after one week, though. It all seems so clear in retrospect. A few names, did they ever fall into this list of people who have virtually no chance? These three all could have won had their opposition faltered.

Diana DeGarmo
Jasmine Trias
Elliot Yamin (I took a lot of crap thinking he had a chance)
Kimberly Locke

[/ QUOTE ]

If I recall correctly, Yamin's stock was in the gutter until Chris was eliminated 4th, when people started believing he could win.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's my recollection as well. Our own wise-on-all-things-but-this Granny continually labeled Elliot as having no chance at all from almost the start.

He got knocked out because the judges picked "Over the Rainbow" for Kat, and you can't fight that. And also his elimination night was one of his worst performances. If Kat didn't have that song, and Elliot had advanced, the Finals could have very well been hyped as "Style versus Substance".

disjunction · #10 02-23-2007, 01:50 PM

[ QUOTE ]
My whole point is that basically a lot of people have zero chance to win almost no matter how long they last, and it's just the public's gullibility that gives them any value at all.

Also I think DeGarmo, Trias, Yamin and Locke had virtually no chance to win. I don't believe for a second when they say how close those votes are. Also Locke was very good and Yamin was pretty likable as he had a pretty big underdog factor going, I wouldn't put them in the same category as Phil Stacey and Sabrina Sloan.

[/ QUOTE ]

If Fantasia had gotten laryngitis or withdrew because of her baby, someone else would have had to win, I saw nothing distinguishing Jasmine from Diana until Jasmine's last week. Latoya and others were better onstage than both of them IIRC. I made the Elliot argument above. Jasmine, Diana, and Kimberly were "No chance, none, zero, zip, period" people before good performances.

But some people also grow each week, I haven't seen enough of either Phil or Sabrina to rule either out as < 2%. It's all about the odds of course. But you have a point, in that the prices you listed do seem maybe twice what they should be for both of them.