what is this i never heard of these movies before

@121 in addition to other potential reasons for divergence in taste i'm gonna wager you are quite a bit younger than the hosts of this podcast

@Cogsdoc n/a-ing because while this is a YES there is no point adding it after the announcement

while i absolutely did not expect 25th hour, tbh i'm not sure how it never occurred to me as an option! very big whiff. didn't see anyone guess that, even though it makes a lot of sense.

The first option has resolved—Lady Bird is #5.

I am quite confident 3 of the remaining films will be Fincher/PTA/QT (you can bet against me on which ones are likely if you'd like). The 4th is a genuine mystery—would have expected it to be many that ended up lower on the list. (I'm going with Ocean's 11 for now, but wouldn't bet it super high, since there's a long tail of wild cards)

@Ziddletwix When was Lady Bird added and resolved?

Was even a pure prediction?

Were any bets AFTER the info was available? Is it OK to add or/and bet on any of the 4 remaining movies AFTER the info is known in the next Wed's?

@delfinasu

When was Lady Bird added and resolved?

if you click on the 3 dots next to an option, you can see when each was added—lady bird was 16d ago, ~12d before it was announced as #5.

Were any bets AFTER the info was available

yup, the option was not much traded overall (this is a sparse market), but cogsdoc was first to react and bet it from ~40% after it was announced (& i bet it the final bit to 99%)

Is it OK to add or/and bet on any of the 4 remaining movies AFTER the info is known in the next Wed's?

short answer, yes—you are absolutely allowed to bet on things after they have been announced.

adding options is trickier. for this market, i'd probably N/A an option that was added after, although that's mostly personal preference. first, in terms of site rules, there's no explicit site rule "you can never ever make a market about something that has already happened". in part because that's tricky to define—sometimes an event has already occurred but there's remaining uncertainty (e.g., we're waiting for more reporting about what occurred), and so it's still interesting to trade.

the reason it would not be allowed is basically that it's spam. if lady bird was never added to the market, and someone added it after it was announced and immediately bet it to 99%, then the option was pointless and you're not allowed to spam pointless options. note that this person would not gain any mana by doing so—the mana they spend to add the option is ~essentially just recouped by their betting on it. so the main question is the intent behind why they added the option. one reason to do so would be to farm profit. you are not allowed to do that (i.e., create endless markets "will the sun rise tomorrow" and bet it to 99%). but the bar for "do you have a reason for creating this market/adding this option" is pretty low—if there's some reasonable justification for why you wanted to do it, then you'd probably be allowed to.

re: trading, broadly for the site you are always allowed to trade on events that have already occurred. and the first one to react to news often gets to reap some reward, even though that isn't predictive. trading != forecasting, they often diverge. note that the upside for newstrading is somewhat limited, you can only take (at best) the liquidity remaining in the option, which usually isn't a ton. ultimately, the question creator put up that liquidity. if i didn't want someone to be able to take it by newstrading, it'd be up to me to close the market in advance so they cannot do so. and while some people wish manifold would somehow not allow that, in practice it is very difficult to define news trading in a coherent way. most events don't go from X% to 100% in an instant, there are levels of certainty based on the reporting & etc. so if you are the first to react to an announcement, you can grab the remaining liquidity in a market, and if the creator wants to preserve that liquidity they need to close the market early.

@Ziddletwix thank you very much for your elaborated answers!

We're down to the final 6, so I added a few more options. I am ~fairly confident that out of the final 6, we'll have PTA (TWWB/OBAA), Tarantino (IB/OUATIH), Fincher (social network/zodiac), Greta Gerwig (lady bird, or frances ha as actor). Next I'd guess mulholland drive, but less confident there. And I am very unsure about what to expect for the final movie (~probably #6 in the ranking, but unsure).

@Ziddletwix should be #1, RIP

Due to their "one film per director" rule, "Once Upon a Time... in Hollywood" + "Inglorious Basterds" should sum to <=100%-ish, with the "-ish" because there is nothing stopping them from changing the rules if they choose to.

(I didn't add it, but similarly "The Social Network" would IMO be a near-lock if not for the small chance that they pick "Zodiac". If it were just Sean, that would be plausible, for their shared list I'd be pretty surprised).