Talk:Intrade

message: Intrade is becoming a phenomenon where a community similar to a wiki folks gather on it and are predicting the future just like folks define the world on a wiki.
Therefore while it IS a website it should not be deleted.
:Okay, but how does it meet the notability guideline for web pages? -FisherQueen (Talk) 12:28, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability 

message: ____These are two separate questions, the first and more important one is not answered by the bullet, I am new to wikipedia. what should I do?____
Are the bets on Intrade legal in the U.S.? I'd expect the article to say so. Also, if it is legal, how is it different than gambling? What's the difference on betting on McCain to win the election vs. the Bears to win the Super Bowl?
*Unless you own a sports bar in Chicago you are probably much more financially exposed as an American citizen to the outcome of the election than you are to the outcome of the Bears' season. Arguably then it's much more useful to know the odds and have an opportunity to hedge in prediction markets for politics than it is for markets in sports.24.18.229.101 (talk) 08:37, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Legality

message: That race is a tossup by any means.
I also don't understand why this is the only mention of how intrade did as a means of predicting in 2008. There's a lot of stuff to discuss - correct predictions for Obama in lots of places, wrong in Indiana. Correct about Missouri being a tossup. Right on Montana.--68.56.17.70 (talk) 06:56, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Favored to win in [[Minnesota]]? 

message: The article states that the markets consistently predicted that GWB would win Florida comfortably. However, intrade cannot predict the size of a win based on the contracts. It confidently predicted that he would win but that's all they did. The market is on the win itself and not the size of the win.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.148.241.130 (talk) 23:01, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Florida]] claim 

message: I'm not sure the fee section is correct when it says the $5 is charged on inactive accounts. When I requested my account be cashed out, I got an email which partially read:
"We have received your withdrawal request for the full balance of your Intrade account. If you are withdrawing all of your funds due to the new fee structure we have introduced I'd like to advise that you can set your account to "inactive" to avoid paying the monthly membership fee.
While your account is inactive you can login and view account and market information but you cannot make any trades, but neither will you be charged the monthly membership fee. This is particularly useful if you are a seasonal trader or are not using your account at the moment. To reactivate your account just send us an email and we will reactivate your account and charge the monthly fee for that month."
--Gwern  (contribs) 01:35 12 January 2011 (GMT)
:I've removed the section. It was inappropriate. --Ronz (talk) 21:00, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fees 

message: Buzzfeed has just run a nice long story on Intrade's downfall that seems like it would offer a lot that could be used to improve this article and some stories it should be telling but hasn't been: the regulatory issues that forced the site's founders to distance themselves from actively running the company and largely cede control to Delaney, the spikes in futures ahead of Saddam's capture and the Ryan pick, whether Delaney's death was a suicide brought on by a concealed health problem or just a routine climbing accident, and the Romney Whale. Daniel Case (talk) 06:01, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Buzzfeed story