Betting on politics: Were Rangers relegated?
Matthew Partridge explains why, when it comes to placing your bets, it always pays to read the small print.
Get the latest financial news, insights and expert analysis from our award-winning MoneyWeek team, to help you understand what really matters when it comes to your finances.
You are now subscribed
Your newsletter sign-up was successful
Want to add more newsletters?
Twice daily
MoneyWeek
Get the latest financial news, insights and expert analysis from our award-winning MoneyWeek team, to help you understand what really matters when it comes to your finances.
Four times a week
Look After My Bills
Sign up to our free money-saving newsletter, filled with the latest news and expert advice to help you find the best tips and deals for managing your bills. Start saving today!
There's an interesting case going through the Scottish courts just now. In 2011 bookie Albert Kinloch bet £100 at 2,500/1 on Rangers football club being relegated from the top Scottish division. The club subsequently went bust and was kicked down to the third division. Kinloch claimed his winnings. However, Coral, which took the original bet, refused to pay up, arguing that they were demoted, rather than relegated, and that, since the original company was wound up by the courts, the new club is technically a separate entity. While this may seem pedantic, Coral stands to lose £250,000 if the judgement goes against the company.
The political betting world isn't immune to such controversies. In 2007 Tradesports (now defunct) refused to pay out on bets on North Korea carrying out a nuclear test. Although widely reported in the media, Tradesports argued that the rules specified that the test had to be confirmed by the US State Department. To be fair, unlike Coral, Tradesports was an exchange so it didn't get any direct benefit from the decision. Indeed, it could credibly argue that settling the bet in the other direction would have been unfair to punters on the other side of the bet.
This could be pertinent to terms of the various Donald Trump markets. Most bookies offer some bet on the new president being impeached, resigning, leaving office or simply not serving his full term. But there are subtle differences between each outcome. Contrary to popular myth, Richard Nixon resigned before the Articles of Impeachment were brought to a vote by either part of Congress.
MoneyWeek
Subscribe to MoneyWeek today and get your first six magazine issues absolutely FREE
Sign up to Money Morning
Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter
Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter
Conversely, Clinton was technically "impeached" by the House of Representatives, before being acquitted by the Senate. There's also the outside possibility that something could happen to the 70-year-old Trump. So read the fine print on any bet (Betfair posts its rules alongside every market).
Get the latest financial news, insights and expert analysis from our award-winning MoneyWeek team, to help you understand what really matters when it comes to your finances.

-
Average UK house price reaches £300,000 for first time, Halifax saysWhile the average house price has topped £300k, regional disparities still remain, Halifax finds.
-
Barings Emerging Europe trust bounces back from Russia woesBarings Emerging Europe trust has added the Middle East and Africa to its mandate, delivering a strong recovery, says Max King