Monopoly from the Perspective of Mass Gambling

There is a live video platform in China called Douyu who offers virtual currency gambling, from which I find out a very interesting phenomenon - the return rates always stay low, i.e. on specific conditions when the outcome is a random event (50% chance on each side), the return rates always stay below 1 (often 0.1 - 0.7) on both sides, rendering it unfair for any gamblers who pays - take it or not.

Platform and gambling mechanics

The gamble functions almost the same as football gambling. And there is this slight difference between this mass gambling and football gambling. Some gamblers will have to play the role of 'maker'. These makers propose a pool of money at certain return rate at which other gamblers choose to buy of not. Pools whose makers guarantee higher return rates are sold first, and if the return rates are of the same, then earlier makers get their pools sold first if anyone is to buy. There is a minimum requirements to start a pool (at 1000), which makes the normal gambler without a small fortune outside of the makers' group. Each transaction will be charged 10% by the platform.

Start from scratch

Even capitalism itself start from scratch, it's not necessary that every participants start from nothing, i.e. someone born with a silver spoon in his mouth - one can pay for his virtual currency with real money. However, most still have to work hard to move up. Fortunately, there is a way. And I even wrote a script for this.

Who is benefiting from all of this?

Of course, No.1 winner is the platform itself. Not only is the gambling feature attracting massive amount of users, it's also recycling its virtual currency via the 10% tax upon each transection to avoid infation, which would make the whole gambling system unsustanable. Though sharing a different goal from football gambling platform who consider this an ultimate money-making method, it casts exactly the same influence upon gamblers. And No.2 winners are those who monopolize the gambling system with their fortune - capitalists. No further winners, I'd say, according to the gambling machenics.

Free choice?

Paradoxically, no one is banned from playing the role of capitalists or otherwise, but most just choose to be one of the proletariat, all spontaneously. And a world of exloiting and exploited class is born this way. Ironnically, monopoly is born at the same time. Capitalists have their tacit agreement to keep the return rates low. For gamblers, if stay behind someone else may go first and there will be nothing left in the pool soon. For makers, though they want to have their pool sold out, they want it to be sold out in a way that will not harm themselves. In other words, if the deal may destroy their benefits, they won't do. And when there aren't any makers, there won't be any deals. Sounds familiar? Many of us have heard of the story of capitalists pouring milks away to keep price up. All of this leads me to compare this model with governments.


This is the fore-mentioned model.
SocietyMass GamblingFuntions
GovernmentPlatformRule maker and tax levier
BourgeoisieMakersMonololy the market spontaneously
ProletariatCommon GamblersUnder exploitation


This is the auto return rate model where return rates are caculated according to pools on both side.
SocietyMass GamblingFuntions
GovernmentPlatformRule maker and tax levier
ProletariatCommon Gamblerswinners? Definitely not


Communism is a socio-economic arrangement where there is no state, no heirarchal class system and all productive property is owned collectively. No specific rule maker and tax levier. No gambling platform. All fair for gamblers. Though I doubt there is still any incentives for gambling.