This needs to be settled, vote on Empire here

[mack23]

I am having a hard time believing how many 'You think it's bad business to ban players who are costing Empire money?' quotes I am seeing on this issue. To attract business, companies will have offers or sales that they expect will bring in customers. They realize that they will make little or no profit off of the sale in hope that people will buy regular priced items that they would not have otherwise bought while shopping there, or continue shopping there when no sale is offered. Many businesses DO have offers that cost them money that have no guarantee that customers will buy anything as a result (free samples in the grocery store or free giveaways the day after Thanksgiving at retail stores)

If Empire Poker has an offer or 'sale' where a customer potentially could cost them a small amount of money by careful game selection, that is not the customer's fault that they have a poor bonus or 'sale' structure. They should have the same intent that regular businesses do and hope that we will 'buy regular priced items' (tourneys) while playing there, or continue to play there after the sale (bonus time) is over. It IS bad business to ban someone for taking advantage of an offer that the business sets up to attract customers. Especially when that player is not breaking any of the contractual agreements. If it is really even affecting their bottom line at all, they need to change their bonus structure to ensure a player cannot 'cost' them money during bonus time rather than ban players who break no rules.

OK, my opinion is obvious. But I would like to find out what the % is on both sides so a poll is in order. Please vote!

-Mack

[Arnfinn Madsen]

Empire has messed it all up. Their bonus generates negative MGR for them at .5/1, their most popular level. Pokerstars and other sites have bonuses that generate negative MGR (i.e. $5 SNGs at Stars, 1/2 at Absolute) at some levels too but it is not on their most popular level.

The negative publicity created from this is very -EV for Empire.

[afk]

[ QUOTE ]
The negative publicity created from this is very -EV for Empire.

[/ QUOTE ]

What publicity?

The only ones who know about this are those who really chase the bonuses. Some one who chases the bonuses but also plays high enough to generate revenue for Empire surely can't care that much and will keep playing - though perhaps there are a few who won't (but why?). The only people who this affects are those who Empire has lost money on (speaking of that, why haven't they banned my account yet? I'll play more often then...) - and that's good for Empire, they're no longer losing money on these players.

Edited to add: I believe the OP touched on this but I think that Empire's best solution is to change their bonuses - in that they make them more account specific (ie. not the whores who are costing them money).

[qsdaddy]

I play only at Empire and I love it!!!!!! It's +ev idea if your a real player.

[MrVanDresen]

jesus christ, you people who keep defending Empire are pathetic!

If you lose money in giving bonuses then DON'T GIVE BONUSES or make them harder to clear!!!! Its simple, you don't ban selected people

[afk]

[ QUOTE ]
If you lose money in giving bonuses then DON'T GIVE BONUSES or make them harder to clear!!!!

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi, thanks for pretty much reiterating my exact point.

[DMBFan23]

you registered just to post about Empire? geez MOVE SITES ALREADY

[MrVanDresen]

YOU talking to me??? I have other things to talk about too

[Jeff W]

Who could possibly vote that this is good business policy? The far better solution is to restrict reload bonuses to regular players.

[Phill S]

that wasnt the question as i interpreted it.

given the choice of banning or not, from a business sense banning is best.

i agree that other methods should have been taken, but thats business for you.

[mack23]

[ QUOTE ]
Who could possibly vote that this is good business policy? The far better solution is to restrict reload bonuses to regular players.

[/ QUOTE ]

60% of the voters so far. I really can't believe it either! Not too many marketing or business majors out there it appears. I'm starting to get worried that PP and skins have many players brainwashed into thinking they can do whatever the hell they want to and players must just go along with it or get banned.

[dabluebery]

I agree with most of what you say, after skimming through it, as it's basically exactly what I've been saying here in a few posts.

Most of what I've read to the contrary has been completely sophomoric or so logically flawed that it's not worth much consideration. About the only thing I'll give credence to is the notion that it's just not worth worrying about, there are plenty of better sites that can absorb people who were banned. It might be better just to move on.

[Izenra]

yes it's -ev for them, for player that are actually informed about the poker world, which is what... 10 % ?


One thing to think about : If someone was to suck you up like that, how would you react?

I know it's sucks for player, but it is understandable.

[grouchie]

Honestly, I say who cares.
Sure, the people who got banned will be annoyed for a little about the 100 bucks a month they are losing out on, but the rest are now going to play more often so they don't lose out on that potential bonus.

This is the same thing that online Casino's have been doing for a while because of bonus-abuse. Of course, now everyone is up in arms because it is touching a little closer to home for them, but really we should have seen this coming.

So, scratch one site off of your list of places to whore and you are still left with a tablet full of bonus's that you can chase elsewhere.

As the months go on the bonus's have been getting less juicy from the party network anyways. 5x to 7x and 10x (and 400x in the case of multipoker). It's going to even itself out to the point that the bonus's on the party network are going to more closely resemble the bonus's from everywhere else (or at least that is how it appears to be trending), so whore it while you can.

[Vern]

Hey, I am one of the players that got axed and regardless of what the OP or meow-meow stated, I, like the vast majority of players banned, have never bitched or complained about the fact they gave me the boot. That is why I voted that it is a good business plan, Answer the question posed Vern

Most of the threads with complaints have not been about getting axed but the manner with which Empire put the plan into action. That manner could barely instill confidence in those that did not get axed. The posts have mostly argued that a warning ahead of time would have caused the player to act differently with regard to play time, or at least honesty in providing a reason for termination would have avoided the PR mess generated by the closings.

So, to answer your biased poll, no, I cannot see how any rational person would '...think it's bad business to ban players who are costing Empire money?' but had you also bothered to include a question as to the manner of action on Empire's part you might have actually gotten at the root of the problem. Likewise I cannot see how any rational person could answer this question 'no': "When closing down the account of a person only playing on their site for the offered bonuses; Do you think it's bad busniess to ban a player's account without warning or explination and when not stone walling, only responding to inquries by implying the player had engaged in 'wrongful' or 'suspicous' activity?"

Vern

[LinusKS]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Who could possibly vote that this is good business policy? The far better solution is to restrict reload bonuses to regular players.

[/ QUOTE ]

60% of the voters so far. I really can't believe it either! Not too many marketing or business majors out there it appears. I'm starting to get worried that PP and skins have many players brainwashed into thinking they can do whatever the hell they want to and players must just go along with it or get banned.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fun Fact: 81% of Empire-defenders are "ditto-heads."

[supersub]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Who could possibly vote that this is good business policy? The far better solution is to restrict reload bonuses to regular players.

[/ QUOTE ]

60% of the voters so far. I really can't believe it either! Not too many marketing or business majors out there it appears. I'm starting to get worried that PP and skins have many players brainwashed into thinking they can do whatever the hell they want to and players must just go along with it or get banned.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am a marketing major and I voted yes. I have not followed this to the letter but as far as I understand it, empire is banning people that costs them money.

These same people are the players that thinks this is a marketing fiasco. The "real" players understands why Empire is doing this and they also understand that the money saved will probably somehow be used to keep the profitable customers happy.

[StellarWind]

It is normal practice in many industries to turn away undesirable or unprofitable customers. Empire has been heavy-handed but there is no point in arguing that they have done something unusual.

[ QUOTE ]
free samples in the grocery store or free giveaways the day after Thanksgiving at retail stores

[/ QUOTE ]
Different industries have different problems. Notice the shortage of "grocery whores" who subsist solely on freebies and loss leaders. It's not practical for an appreciable number of people to patronize dozens of grocery stores where they buy nothing but loss leaders.

Empire's problem is real and solving it will mean that they get zero business from the whores. Whether this is accomplished by banning them or simply making the bonuses unavailable or unattractive to whores is really just a detail.

Multi solved the problem the other way by imposing a 20x requirement on the two most recent reloads. When I observed that I found this solution to be more appealing than banning, someone rightly observed that this is tough on the regular players who play 3-4 hours per week. They've made it difficult for a valued customer to enjoy the bonus they want him to have.

Finally I like to give thanks for all the good things in my life. One of those good things is not working in customer service for a poker room that gives the monthly reload to 95% of its customers while excluding a 5% whore list. I totally understand why Empire is not interested in the endless negativism and customer complaints such a policy would generate.

[Freudian]

[ QUOTE ]
jesus christ, you people who keep defending Empire are pathetic!

If you lose money in giving bonuses then DON'T GIVE BONUSES or make them harder to clear!!!! Its simple, you don't ban selected people

[/ QUOTE ]

Why should their loyal customers be punished with worse terms for what the bonus whores do?

Those that complain about the unfairness of it all are mostly disgruntled bonus whores who have lost an easy way to make money.

Yes, Empire could have handled things in a better way by being upfront about what they were doing it, but it is 100% clear it makes perfect business sense to do what they did, especially if they use what money they save to reward loyal customers.

[DMBFan23]

we miss you in the strategy forums

[CountDuckula]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Who could possibly vote that this is good business policy? The far better solution is to restrict reload bonuses to regular players.

[/ QUOTE ]

60% of the voters so far. I really can't believe it either! Not too many marketing or business majors out there it appears. I'm starting to get worried that PP and skins have many players brainwashed into thinking they can do whatever the hell they want to and players must just go along with it or get banned.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, you can subtract one "yes" and add it to "no"; I misread the question. D'oh! /images/graemlins/blush.gif

I think it's reasonable for them to keep people from playing there just for bonuses. However, I agree with those who are saying they simply should avoid offering them to everyone; they should pick the players they want to keep around, and offer the bonuses to them only.

I have to admit, though, I'm half hoping they'll ban me and send me $5 for the 19 cents or so I happen to have there right now.... /images/graemlins/grin.gif

-Mike

[DMBFan23]

how much do you think that will cost Empire in infrastructure changes? a banning costs them zero except for bad customer relations. I will say that someone estimated that their losses from that would be less than the cost to upgrade infrastructure.

we are all biased in our opinions (well not me, I am a regular there) so our opinions aren't going to objectively represent what is actually good business practice from an EV standpoint, IMO.

[Vern]

[ QUOTE ]
Who could possibly vote that this is good business policy? The far better solution is to restrict reload bonuses to regular players.

[/ QUOTE ]
Re-load bonuses are not to reward long term players as much as attract fresh blood, so offering one only to those that play alot, would be a waste, from a business POV, unless it was perceived by the business as a form of customer retention. The biggest target for re-load bonuses is those customers that have stopped playing a site, to attract them back. That is why I think a hands per $ requirement should be based on your MGR for a time period, like the last 6 months. Then if all you do is play re-load bonuses, the next bonus would require you to play more hands, and the next one more after that, but if you were just some player who opened an account last summer and forgot about, the re-load would not be that hard to clear, and therefor attractive anough to get you back and hopefully enjoying the site enough to stay. This also has the effect of rewarding long terms players for retention by offering them the same bonuses with easy clearning requirements since they are +MGR over the time period.

[Vern]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Who could possibly vote that this is good business policy? The far better solution is to restrict reload bonuses to regular players.

[/ QUOTE ]

60% of the voters so far. I really can't believe it either! Not too many marketing or business majors out there it appears. I'm starting to get worried that PP and skins have many players brainwashed into thinking they can do whatever the hell they want to and players must just go along with it or get banned.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am a marketing major and I voted yes. I have not followed this to the letter but as far as I understand it, empire is banning people that costs them money.

These same people are the players that thinks this is a marketing fiasco. The "real" players understands why Empire is doing this and they also understand that the money saved will probably somehow be used to keep the profitable customers happy.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem was, when it started happening, none of those 'real' players knew anything and neither did the players (myself included) that got the axe. Empire could have come out smelling like a rose had they announced they would be terminating accounts of players that it became apparent were only playing for bonuses. No one could then offer a rational arguement for a bad busniess move, not even those that got the axe. Heck, we are not arguing it was a bad business move to axe bonus chasers, our comments are more to the manner, which in the beginning scared players regardless of whether they were banned or not.

Vern

[afk]

I agree with you there Vern. Things would have been a lot better had they just been honest right off the bat and saying why they were banning the accounts.

[MicroBob]

haven't read the whole thread.


[ QUOTE ]
as far as I understand it, empire is banning people that costs them money.

These same people are the players that thinks this is a marketing fiasco.

[/ QUOTE ]


I play on empire a lot...and still play there although not quite as much. And I also think it is a marketing fiasco and a terrible decision.


Even Party itself hasn't done anything like this.
Nor has Stars or crypto or pokerroom or anywhere else.

If it is really such a great plan to ban these players (as opposed to any other options they could have chosen) then they are the only ones to have figured this out.


Stars and crypto's bonuses kept me coming back.

I decided I like Stars enough to continue playing there in the absence of customers.
That was part of the strategy of their re-load in the first place. To attract some of their current customers.

For quite awhile they were not making any revenue on my play there. I was pretty much bonusing there only.


Crypto could have had a chance to win my business too by continually bringing me back to check them out.
Unfortunately for them...I don't particularly care for the software there.
However...that hasn't stopped me from occasionally giving them another shot during another bonus-clear.


I don't like what Empire is doing one bit but they will continue to have my business because I'm in the royal-flush club and the benefits are too good to pass up even if their points structure is idiotic.


I get the free $100/month (no raked-hands requirement), occasional RF club freerolls, a free TV will be coming shortly, and they also have some raffles giving away various pries like a laptop or digital camera.
So I'll continue to play there with some of these incentives.


But everything they are giving me compared with the amount I am playing there isn't exactly lining their pockets either


Obviously empire is well within their rights to ban whatever players they want. But those who think they are actually gaining EV out of banning these players are not really correct
...they could have done other things to stop any of the trivial losses they have suffered while perhaps doing more to attract the players to stay there longer during non-bonus times.

Or they could just take the patient approach like stars and other sites and continue to bring the vanishing players back until they decide, like me, that they like playing there regardless of whether a bonus is offered.
With some of their VIP incentives they could potentially have done thing with some customers.

[Miggo]

Whether it's good business practice or not, I don't know, I think you'd have to look at the financial statements of the company in the future and see.

I just wanted to make the point, that if a retail store did this, they'd be taken to court. If I went into Wal-Mart and just bought sale items, and then Wal-Mart decides to not allow me in the store because I only buy items that are on sale, I think they'd be on CNN that night.

[Aetherish]

Everyone has got to calm down. This has become a Whore vs. Whore-hater war, and has hardly anything to do with Empire's business practices.

Is actively discouraging whoring good for Empire's bottom line: Yes.

Are they going about it in the right way: No.

If they want to discourage abuse, then remove the privilege (no more bonuses) or change the T & C so that the bonus work for them (Empire).

Banning people, with no warning, just antagonizes them. Remember that whores followed the letter of the agreement.

For those of you who think that whores are -EV players without their bonus... Who are they loosing that money to? It's not always the fish.

Whining about it either way is non-productive and juvenile. I think the overall concern should be Empires practices, not who they happen to be targeting. Who's next? 5+ bb/100 players? Why not protect this fish from the sharks, and keep the common man happy?

[teamdonkey]

[ QUOTE ]
I really can't believe it either! Not too many marketing or business majors out there it appears.

[/ QUOTE ]

no, just a bunch of armchair CEO's who beleive they have all the needed information and know exactly what is best for Empire.

We all know Party (and skins) bonuses are by far the easiest to clear. We know they are the largest player in the market right now, and have been for some time. Obviously they realize there is a problem with some people abusing their bonus (thus the bans).

it's vaguely possible that someone somewhere in this huge highly profitable company mentioned in passing that they could up the bonus requirements instead.

since they chose to ban whores and not change the bonuses, i'd assume they have a legitimate business reason to do so. banning people they lose money from and pissing off others who are most likely whoring bonuses from 4 skins with 3 accounts on each probably doesn't bother them much.

- TeamDonkey, arm chair CEO in-training

[Piers]

I suspect it was a 'political' decision on Empire's part not a financial one.

Also I as sure someone got a lot of satisfaction out of designing those bonus whore hating Emails.

[nervous]

Empire is only getting rid of players who are costing them money. These bonuses are supposed to attract players to keep playing on Empire even without a bonus, and Empire will profit off of that. They are just cutting out all the players who do not get "hooked" onto their marketing idea.

If you were only a bonus-chaser there before, you obviously regularly play on a different site, so Empire doesn't really care about you when you are just costing them money.

+EV for Empire.

[mack23]

This is a great debate, either way!

I used to play Empire and nothing else when I was playing for a living. Now I'm back in the corporate world and have very little time for online poker. I could see in the future this meaning I play Empire only during bonus time. And I'm afraid I'll be one of those who are banned. I just won't agree, it is not ethical to practice business this way and the result will be many lost customers.

The vote is getting closer, 53-47 now /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm starting to get worried that PP and skins have many players brainwashed into thinking they can do whatever the hell they want to and players must just go along with it or get banned.

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually they can do whatever they want and ban anyone who doesn't go along. I would have thought that was abundently clear by now.

[MicroBob]

so this means that Party, Stars, crypto, UB, paradise and other rooms all have bad business plans because they keep trying to win over the business of the players on the other sites via bonuses.

Perhaps you are correct...but if so then Empire is the ONLY site to have figured this out (not even party does this).


even if 1 out of 10 of those banned bonus-chasers were to change their mind and bring the bulk of their play to empire they could turn a profit.

They really aren't losing that much on the bonus-chasers...

they could have gotten some of them to play a bit more on their site by simply telling them ahead of time that they were now having issues with this...

they could have changed the bonus-structure or simply not invited the bonus-chasers to take part in the bonus.



If you don't want someone playing for a bonus then don't offer them the freaking bonus in the first place.


This really isn't that hard and those who think that empire is actually helping their EV by banning players who could have proved profitable sometime in the future are really missing the boat here.

[Eder]

"even if 1 out of 10 of those banned bonus-chasers were to change their mind and bring the bulk of their play to empire they could turn a profit."


Very true...Empire management are morons....Banning a few potential gold mine players is idiocy.

[Freudian]

[ QUOTE ]

The vote is getting closer, 53-47 now /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

You have the remember that the sample is hardly unbiased here. Most of us found Empire bonuses profitable and if we got to decide we would have liked to continue doing them and dislike Empire for removing that opportunity. Despite of that the majority thinks it makes sense to ban bonus hunters.

[Freudian]

Empire perhaps can afford to take unpopular decisions because they have so many high volume players (due to that-we-don't-speak-of).

But Party also has taken some unpopular decisions (banning individual trackers, messing with PokerNow).

I get the impression that Party-network isn't feeling particularly threatned by the competition and will continue to push things to increase profitability. It may come back to haunt them, but up to now they seem to get away with it.

[2easy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Who could possibly vote that this is good business policy? The far better solution...

[/ QUOTE ]

60% of the voters so far. I really can't believe it either! Not too many marketing or business majors out there it appears... I'm starting to get worried that PP and skins have many players brainwashed...

[/ QUOTE ]

cute, put up a "poll," supposedly to get feedback, and then denigrate those who respond to it differently than what you wanted to hear.

classy!

[danobee]

Empire makes more off of the bonus-only players as a whole than they would without them.

Stupid.

[dabluebery]

I agree with basically everything you say here, Microbob.

I was signed up through an affiliate, and despite the fact that my MGR was approximately break even, considering the bonuses (may have been slightly negative, we're talking under fifty dollars TOTAL, and I cleared at least $500 in Empire bonuses), I was banned.

The real point is, I would have played ball with basically whatever restriction they wanted to put on me. For example, since the Empire banning, I signed up for the stars bonus. I've been playing 3 tables there consistently, and have alternated a fourth table at Party / Pokernow, trying to give action at my other sites.

I am slightly less optimistic that this Empire nonsense isn't the beginning of the end for bonuses, so I'm trying to avoid the "whore" stigma by spreading my rake dollars around.

[timprov]

People are being very silly. There's one point and one point only: Empire went and banned people for following their T&Cs. That's bad, bad business. And everyone else should be wondering what it is they're doing that Empire says is A-OK today, but might change their minds tomorrow. It doesn't have to be something rational.

If "bonus abuse" was ever mentioned in the T&Cs, I would agree that Empire was ok to ban those players. But they followed the rules, and got banned anyway. This from a site that can't manage to stop spammers.

I didn't get banned, but I'm not going back to Empire. And I play high enough that bonus whoring is getting pointless, and even if I was playing under bonus, I'd be profitable for them. Also, I'm moving more of my play away from the Party network as a whole. I don't like the trend there, and unlike a lot of people here, I don't have trouble winning elsewhere.

[mack23]

[ QUOTE ]
Actually they can do whatever they want and ban anyone who doesn't go along. I would have thought that was abundently clear by now.

[/ QUOTE ]

I should re-phrase that I suppose. I meant players seem to think the sites can do whatever they want and they go along with it without any repurcussion. As if there is nothing they can do about it, so why try. There IS something that can be done about it! Take the business elsewhere and if enough people do it, there will be no more account banning without cause.

[Vern]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Actually they can do whatever they want and ban anyone who doesn't go along. I would have thought that was abundently clear by now.

[/ QUOTE ]

I should re-phrase that I suppose. I meant players seem to think the sites can do whatever they want and they go along with it without any repurcussion. As if there is nothing they can do about it, so why try. There IS something that can be done about it! Take the business elsewhere and if enough people do it, there will be no more account banning without cause.

[/ QUOTE ]
This requires mass consciousness though, and generally, when you get that many people fired up about a cause, most of them still don't understand why, they are just along for the ride. I doubt any Party Skin has to worry about a mass instant defection, the only players that would consider that are ones Party does not care that much about. Party's concern should be on the up and comings, that some pop-culture event will become associated with on of these runner up sites and that would provide the momentum to surpass Party etal in number of pay players.

Vern