A persistent bias in prediction markets is pricing very non likely events as slightly more likely than they are. ie; a 1% event priced at 4%, etc, because people like to bet long shots.

Whether there is enough of a predictable bias there to snag enough low return high probability bets to beat the vig and not shift the markets I have not looked into in any way,but it is a known bias with them.

The real money to be made in prediction markets is being the ones with the actual knowledge which is arguably why they are useful and why for some topics, people find them abhorrent.

71 cents*, the bookie gets a cut either way it goes.

It's not. But also a lot of those stats thrown around are misleading.

> I bet the average price for a no bet across these markets is 73 cents.

Behavioral economics has already answered the question of whether humans are, on average, perfectly rational economic actors. They are not.

To the contrary, there is substantial evidence indicating a meaningful number of humans will mis-estimate the likelihood of uncommon future events.

I’ll take the “no” side of that bet ;)

Why would outcomes match perceptions?

The whole premise of gambling is that they don't