I'll disregard my earlier comment and assume the latter interpretation for now.
So here are the things that can (and can't) happen:
So, starting with Alpha's coin flip, here are the only possible paths:
Unlike in Newcomb's problem, in this case Omega's prediction is irrelevant to what Alpha actually did. The envelope either contains £1 000 000 or nothing, and you're going to receive it as-is, no matter what Omega says about your future actions. If the envelope has £1 000 000 in it, and you're the sort of person who would accept the £10, then Omega will not offer you this conundrum, because it couldn't honestly state the prediction as given — it would just leave you alone with your new riches. Same if the envelope is empty and you are the sort of person who would reject the £10. Your strategy affects nothing other than whether Omega will show up in the first place.
Conclusion: be the sort of person who would accept the £10. It won't affect whether you'll receive the envelope or what you find in it, and if it is empty, at least you'll get that £10 as a consolation prize.
(And now I'll read the rest of the thread to see if smarter people agree with me.)
This is a variant built on Gary Drescher's xor problem for timeless decision theory.
You get an envelope from your good friend Alpha, and are about to open it, when Omega appears in a puff of logic.
Being completely trustworthy as usual (don't you just hate that?), he explains that Alpha flipped a coin (or looked at the parity of a sufficiently high digit of pi), to decide whether to put £1000 000 in your envelope, or put nothing.
He, Omega, knows what Alpha decided, has also predicted your own actions, and you know these facts. He hands you a £10 note and says:
"(I predicted that you will refuse this £10) if and only if (there is £1000 000 in Alpha's envelope)."
What to do?
EDIT: to clarify, Alpha will send you the envelope anyway, and Omega may choose to appear or not appear as he and his logic deem fit. Nor is Omega stating a mathematical theorem: that one can deduce from the first premise the truth of the second. He is using XNOR, but using 'if and only if' seems a more understandable formulation. You get to keep the envelope whatever happens, in case that wasn't clear.