If you did not receive an invitation to join this service you must be very selective in who you allow to contact you. I reckon I saw in excess of 12 emails from a wide variety of sources, mainly the small operations but a couple who perhaps should be looking at more information before allowing their list to be used. One of those used a headline of “He win’s you win, he loses – you don’t lose!” Really?
My main concern was the assertion that the author has successfully managed 9 out of 10 previous attempts at this strategy. Could I find any verification of this? Not a chance. And another of my pet hates when you try to find out about the service – you have to enter an email address to get to the home page. This is unethical at best as the entry will be taken by the service to give them permission to send you other so called offers. (Already started here!) That is why we will always be publishing the home page link for such services which will save members being exposed in this way.
But what about the service? It is explained fully in the marketing, the author trying to turn £100 into £1,000 in just 18 days using what is described as an aggressive strategy mainly involving soccer and horse racing. To be fair you have a pretty good indication at this point that this is going to be high risk so if you are not up for that get out now.
If you do go ahead you receive a welcome email and explanation of how things will work once the attempt begins. Selections are advised by email and may also be seen at a page on the website which was set up as the usual issues with email delivery were experienced. The emails are set out clearly and explain the bets planned including a link to a screenshot of the Betfair Sportsbook market involved. This is helpful where multiples are involved (frequent) and should allow you to be sure you have the right bet if in doubt.
The odds available when the emails are sent are quoted and there is no reason not to use Oddschecker or a similar service to make sure you are getting the highest price possible for your bet. If you cannot find the multiples advised then alternative options are given in the email but this should not be an issue.
Subscribers will have got a pretty good picture from day 1 of how things are going to progress in practical terms. There were 10 bets covering 4 sports and staking 45% of the starting bank. From comments made in emails it would seem that some subscribers were using more that £100 as their start point – all I can say to them is why? An unproven service offering high risk bets where the author himself suggests £100 is the optimal starting point. Greedy can be the only real answer.
And things went reasonably well at the start with the bank increasing by 45% quite quickly but after day 4 a rather stagnant spell was followed at day 8 by a sharp decline with a further 3 days needed to lose 75% of the starting bank and call it a day for this attempt. In all 55 bets were placed with 18 being successful. Up to 30% of the bank was staked on 1 selection when times were becoming desperate.
Individually none of the selections would be regarded as unrealistic but of course multiples will always mean the chance of an unexpected element causing a total loss. There were certainly some unlucky outcomes in the series but the author himself has confirmed that he regards his selection process as poor for this attempt. 17 of the last 21 selections failed which might just support his admission!
So subscribers are now left with a tricky choice as their initial sub – if a member paid the full price of £99 please do let me know – covers 2 attempts to make £1,000 and the failure of the first effort means an extension to a third cycle. The author has confirmed this by email and that he will extend things a further attempt if the next one does not at the very least recover the loss of £100 on this series. The cynic might say that all this does is allow you to potentially lose £400 at no cost if you remember to claim back under the Clickbank guarantee.
The results spreadsheet will show the full story of this attempt and it has done nothing to build any confidence that things might be different in the future. When you couple this with the poor technical background to the service – website and emails not working again as I pen this – you might think it better to get out now with minimal loss.
We must classify the service as failed at this stage.
A second attempt at multiplying the bank 10 times in a short time and the second complete disaster. It demonstrates quite clearly the pitfalls of subscribing to services that claim good results but cannot verify them. Here we were told that Matt had succeeded in his quest 9 times from 10 and so the initial losing sequence should be taken as an indicator that all will now be well.
Far from it – just 40 bets later and the bank is down to just 9% of where it started from and there has been no word from the author since then. The daily results have not been posted this time and the emails have given the impression that it is a bit of an imposition having to produce them. Enquiries on progress went unanswered.
What the author does seem to have achieved is to generate a mailing list that he can exploit with others who apparently occupy the same business address as him (unless of course its the same person using other names!) and the new opportunities continue to appear.
My advice to any unfortunate enough to have subscribed is to make sure you claim your refund from Clickbank before the 60 days is up. Do this direct with Clickbank and don’t get drawn in to correspondence with the author who will probably tell you it will work next time – chances are he will still email the selections anyway should he carry on as promised in round 1 but why on earth would you want them.
The failed classification is well and truly confirmed.