For those of you who love prediction markets (a variety of which we’ve written about in the past), there’s a new site that looks to be as vast, inclusive, and user-friendly as anything I’ve seen: Predictify.
You can wager on standing bets (who will be the Yankees’ next manager, e.g.) or “tap collective wisdom” (I hope they’re paying Jim Surowiecki a royalty) by putting a question to the public.
There’s a free version of the question model in which you get 100 responses from the public, as well as a premium version that, if the audience proves to be dependable, might soon become every marketer’s best friend.
The featured bet when I visited the site was established by Scott Adams of Dilbert fame, asking how many copies of his new, non-Dilbert book will be in print by January 2008.
Great bet — as long as you can believe the publisher’s number. (Hint: search for “biggest joke in history” in the link provided.)
and 
. You can also watch it on 
An odd thing about prediction markets as opposed to sports gambling or stock exchanges is that there don’t appear to be any rules against insider trading or betting against your self or team. Will the tail wag the dog?
An odd thing about prediction markets as opposed to sports gambling or stock exchanges is that there don’t appear to be any rules against insider trading or betting against your self or team. Will the tail wag the dog?
Cliff, maybe the insiders have information that will be reflected in a more accurate price?
Cliff, maybe the insiders have information that will be reflected in a more accurate price?
I’m surprised you linked to Adams’ blog without making any reference to his very Freakonomics-esque observations about the differences in predictions between different demographic groups and his theory that it might have something to do with the relative optimism of people in said groups:
http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/the_dilbert_blog/2007/10/hiring-republic.html
I’m surprised you linked to Adams’ blog without making any reference to his very Freakonomics-esque observations about the differences in predictions between different demographic groups and his theory that it might have something to do with the relative optimism of people in said groups:
http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/the_dilbert_blog/2007/10/hiring-republic.html
Predictify may be a fine “for dummies” prediction game, but it certainly isn’t prediction “market”. It’s rather more like parimutuel betting. The distinction is important because prediction markets reward people not just for being right, but for being right before others. Prediction markets have demonstrated again and again their ability to aggregate information and produce accurate predictions, whereas prediction games like Predictify still have everything to prove.
It is deeply misleading to call any wisdom-of-crowds contraption a prediction market.
Predictify may be a fine “for dummies” prediction game, but it certainly isn’t prediction “market”. It’s rather more like parimutuel betting. The distinction is important because prediction markets reward people not just for being right, but for being right before others. Prediction markets have demonstrated again and again their ability to aggregate information and produce accurate predictions, whereas prediction games like Predictify still have everything to prove.
It is deeply misleading to call any wisdom-of-crowds contraption a prediction market.