[yieldcrv]

Why even look for alternatives, prediction markets suck due to inherent limitations in liquidity, making it impossible for them to ever fulfill their purpose of broadcasting what "the market" believes. One market participant with slightly larger size moves the state on low volume.

[nojito]

I’ve made hundreds of thousands of dollars on predictit. It was a great way to make a straightforward side income for me for many years.

[yieldcrv]

hundreds of thousands across many years

this suggests to me that you needed to spend that money periodically as it was made, for your lifestyle, and/or that there was a maximum trade size for possible (or just for your risk tolerance)

[londons_explore]

They could be high volume though... There might be traders who run AI bots to scour Twitter and other news sources and do high frequency trading to earn money on volatility. Just like stocks and shares.

[yieldcrv]

> There might be traders who run AI bots to scour Twitter and other news sources and do high frequency trading to earn money on volatility. Just like stocks and shares.

Yes, thats the point and promise of all prediction markets at any pitiful size.

I'm not seeing how this response addresses the limitation of them. They're not big enough and have had decades to subvert that. Instead its just stupid binary questions for events that frequently are not binary, the questions/markets are unilaterally posted with no analysis of whether it is a binary-enough event. Liquidity is fragmented, there are no market makers helping - from what I can tell - and market makers shouldn't appear with the broken structure of the markets and questions and arbitration of outcomes to begin with. And then, the profit is limited to just the binary option maximums, compared to an actual option with unlimited upside. A trader running an AI bot should just stick with stocks and shares and commodities then.

Prediction markets do not succeed well in monetizing events. They're a broken half measure.