When you start, there are no shares to buy or sell. For a dollar, the market will sell you a “yes” and a “no” share. When the bet matures, one of those shares will be worth a dollar, and the other will be worth nothing. If you keep both shares, you’ll get your dollar back, nothing more, nothing less.
You think the bet will resolve to “yes”, so you want to sell off your “no” shares. You try to sell them at $0.50, nobody buys. You lower your price to $0.30, and they sell. Now you have $0.30 and a “yes” share that might be worth a dollar in the future.
You see someone is offering to buy “yes” shares for $0.80. If you sell your “yes” share, you’ll end up with $1.10 total.
Suppose after a trading back and forth all day, you find yourself with a “yes” share that you’ve paid $0.40 for. You have a “no” share that you’ve paid $0.30 for. At any time, you can join those two shares together and sell them back to the market for $1.
But why would anyone buy shares after an event resolved? You’d expect liquidity to dry up at that point. So i can’t imagine that this is how it’s ultimately resolved and you get paid out.
Where did I say anyone was buying up shares after the event resolved?
When the event resolves, the platform pays out $1 for each share on the winning side. Shares on the losing side are worthless.
If you have a “yes” and a “no” share, you can join them together and sell them to the platform for $1, before the event resolves. You don’t have to wait for the event; you can sell them back at any time.
Yes but my whole question was about how a bet resolves, who decides it is resolved and who decides what the true outcome was. So i assumed your answer was to that question, which it didn’t seem to answer.
When you start, there are no shares to buy or sell. For a dollar, the market will sell you a “yes” and a “no” share. When the bet matures, one of those shares will be worth a dollar, and the other will be worth nothing. If you keep both shares, you’ll get your dollar back, nothing more, nothing less.
You think the bet will resolve to “yes”, so you want to sell off your “no” shares. You try to sell them at $0.50, nobody buys. You lower your price to $0.30, and they sell. Now you have $0.30 and a “yes” share that might be worth a dollar in the future.
You see someone is offering to buy “yes” shares for $0.80. If you sell your “yes” share, you’ll end up with $1.10 total.
Suppose after a trading back and forth all day, you find yourself with a “yes” share that you’ve paid $0.40 for. You have a “no” share that you’ve paid $0.30 for. At any time, you can join those two shares together and sell them back to the market for $1.
But why would anyone buy shares after an event resolved? You’d expect liquidity to dry up at that point. So i can’t imagine that this is how it’s ultimately resolved and you get paid out.
Where did I say anyone was buying up shares after the event resolved?
When the event resolves, the platform pays out $1 for each share on the winning side. Shares on the losing side are worthless.
If you have a “yes” and a “no” share, you can join them together and sell them to the platform for $1, before the event resolves. You don’t have to wait for the event; you can sell them back at any time.
Yes but my whole question was about how a bet resolves, who decides it is resolved and who decides what the true outcome was. So i assumed your answer was to that question, which it didn’t seem to answer.
See the edit in my original post.
Ah. I think I misunderstood your question.