party and the 10% rake highest online.....

[pokerhacker]

I play little higher limits at party but
noticed for lower stakes party poker is pretty much charging
a 10% rake on its customer which is highest online.

on a $5 they take .50 which is 10%, i know they dont take no more out until $20.00 but taking .50 cents out on the low limit players who play .50/1.00 there is like scamming them. So if you play low limits stay away from party poker as they do charge highest online rake.

[pokerfan]

You bring up a good point. Many players I guess just don't notice this. You scoop a couple of pots and the 50 ents and 1.00 rake does not seem that substantial, but it is. Win 20 pots an hour thats 5-10 bucks per player per hour. That surely is a lot of rake for a 50 cent game. Games are good at party but the rake issue at the lower limits takes away some of the fun of playing the lower limit games.

[Inthacup]

Win 20 pots an hour thats 5-10 bucks per player per hour.

Are you saying that you consistantly win 20 pots per hour? That's hard to do even at a shorthanded table.

[MS Sunshine]

Party has 7 games of .50-$1 going early afternoon. The pot average is $7-9. Now it seems that they should know their business so raking this way most likely makes them more than 5% or .25 on each $5, but it seems that most of the pots run in the 5-15 range. This doesn't seem too out of line.

Maybe someone with pokertracker could shed some light on this subject.

MS Sunshine

[pokerhacker]

im playing 1/2 tables and when i bet on flop and everyone folds and I bring a whopping $6 pot in the house gets .50 . This will be my last week at party cashing out... Im glad alot of new poker sites are on the rise....gives me choices and allows me to avoid places that charges such high rake.

Instead of promotion wars lets see rake wars....

[TimTimSalabim]

The looseness of the games at Party more than makes up for the high rake. Don't trip over pennies on your way to making dollars.

[jasonHoldEm]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
Instead of promotion wars lets see rake wars....

[/ QUOTE ]

Would that imply the creation of rake whores? I might have to become one...

Seriously though, it would be interesting to see one of the newer sites slash the rake to see what would happen. I suspect many of the people that play online simply don't realize the implications of rake on hourly rate, so it might not have a dramatic effect, but it would be interesting.

jHE

[SunTzu68]

Inthacup,

Are you saying that you don't consistently win 20 pots per hour? lol.....
/forums/images/icons/tongue.gif

[24hPOKER]

A lower rake does obviously not attract a lot of people to the tables. We have since long offered the lowest rakes at a lot of levels.

Promotions that have more of a lottery touch to them are much more profitable even though the real value is much less.

However, in the long run a lower rake will make the poor players play longer hours and thus create more action for others. But since the rake is a rather hidden cost for the player and difficult to calculate, it is not - YET - one of the major competitive tools when promoting your site.

But we keep trying. /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

Best regards

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Stefan:

While I agree with what you say, there is no reason for it to be that way? Have you thought about not only advertising the lower rake but attempting to educate your customers and potential customers to the benefits of a lower rake?

It's my opinion, and I can't prove this, that rakes everywhere, and this includes B&amp;M cardrooms, are too high. It would take a little time, but if rakes were lowered let's say 25 percent across the board, it would create so many more games, and decrease the need for props that in the long run poker rooms would become far more profitable because there would be so many more games. But I do concede that in the short run you will make less money.

Best wishes,
Mason

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Hacker:

I'm not familiar with Party's rake structure so what follows could be wrong.

I doubt if the fact that they get their rake very quick as opposed to a slower schedule makes that much difference in the low limit games. If the games feature many players who play too many hands and go to far with their hands, almost all pots will have maximum rake anyway. So the important number is not so much when they take the rake, but what their maximum is.

Best wishes,
Mason

"The looseness of the games at Party more than makes up for the high rake. Don't trip over pennies on your way to making dollars. "

This may be right but sites with low rakes and loose games are even better. I'd rather see that extra rake ending up in my opponents pockets (if I didn't win the pot) so I can win it in future pots.

/knö/forums/images/icons/smirk.gif

[24hPOKER]

Yes, we have tried to educate players and create a debate over the rake impact. This is a contreversial subject and the channels that would really be the most effective ones are often very dependent (if not always) on their advertisers and therefore choose not to bring it up.

If everyone else is charging more and those who have tried charging less do not seem to get too much action; why wake the bear that sleeps? (Old Swedish jungle saying)

Then again, would I really want to educate my players too much even though I offer the lowest rakes (and while you are talking about 25% less we are already offering 50% less in midrange games)?

This would - if I were successful - bring an awareness to the industry not even I am really sure I want. What if this was to become very popular and pokerrooms actually had to offer flat rates? It would be nothing short of disaster for the industry.

So you can see that although I would very much like to be the good guy, I too have hypocritical tendancies. I would even admit to the fact that once I have grown large enough and if others did not yet lower the rakes to my levels, I would advice that we adjust the rakes upward.

I am not without sin and I too am out here to maximize my profits. To get there I really do think that the longterm way is to offer more value to the players. Good promotions is one thing, lower rakes another. Faster cashouts, security, support, game selection etc... are more issues to address.

So I would love for the rake to have a greater impact when players choose their site - but only as long as it is 24hPOKER they choose. I would not like the poker site that got major attention by promoting "$9.99 a month - no rake" and became very successful in doing so. This has not yet happened, probably because the majority of poker players are not educated enough.

Can you see the dilemma?

So all of you guys, just spread the word about the low rakes at 24hPOKER just enough but not too much. What a joke isn't it?

As to the B&amp;M rooms, the rake in the mature markets in the US is justified IMO. (In Sweden they cap at $25 a pot). The online poker market is not yet mature. It is growing rapidly and is extremely interesting. We will see a lot of changes in the few years that come and competition should be welcome from a players point of view. More semi-large cardrooms should increase game selection as well as software selection and pressure the industry to offer better value for money.

Remember the great value you as a poker player has to the poker site in which you invest your time and money. it is to often forgotten in the discussion.

[jek187]

I would not like the poker site that got major attention by promoting "$9.99 a month - no rake"

I pay well over $1k in rake monthly. If a site charged say, $200/month I'd be there for life, and give up my Whoring ways. Of course I see your point that if this sort of thing became popular, eventually $9.99/month would happen.

On a side note, I find this site operator talk fascinating. The more the merrier Stefan.

[Graham]

I'm scared to add up, but I'm in the same ballpark as you for paying rake online.

But the trouble with the $200/month notion is: where are the fish going to come in? They won't sit at a site where they have to pay 200/mo for the privelige of sitting down, but go where it's 'free' to sit down. I think many of them'd do this even if you educated them about how the rake affects them. Like Stefan says - it's "hidden" cost.

Kinda like Stefan's honesty in discussing stuff in his post there - might have to go check his site out.

G

[justus]

Absolutely go check out his site. The freerolls alone are worth it. If you like action you can't beat the higher limit games. I also have to agree with you. Stefan has the best posts of any site manager. Seems to really care about us little guys. They also have a rake free game. Really! Rake Free!

[Graham]

Sounds cool. I'm one of those freaks that shuns limit HE, tending to play other games instead; mainly stud/8, PLO, a bit of regular stud and a bit of PL/NL HE. Do you know if they often have much in the way of these games going? Not much point if it's just a limit HE fest most of the day. I'm not to bothered by freerolls...I got fed up with myself for spending so long working at them, just to bust out somewhere along the line.

G

[jek187]

But the trouble with the $200/month notion is: where are the fish going to come in? They won't sit at a site where they have to pay 200/mo for the privelige of sitting down, but go where it's 'free' to sit down. I think many of them'd do this even if you educated them about how the rake affects them

I think this could be remedied by making the monthly fee optional. As long as the software only rakes pots won by non subscribers, this would seem to be good for everyone.

[Graham]

This doesn't sound like too far-fetched an idea. Just flag the monthly subscribers: "We have the technology"...The Six Million Dollar Man. /forums/images/icons/cool.gif

It'd encourage regular players to log more time at the tables (or switch to such sites), while not troubling the occasionals who might get in a kerfuffle thinking about rake issues. Depends whether the sites themselves think it would harm their bottom line or improve it by having regular players paying lower overall rake. With the rake some of us pay, I'd jump on a site that'd offer something like that...as long as the games seemed otherwise worthwhile as well.

[wdbaker]

All,
I think maybe something important to think about would be not to advertise it so much as just have it posted somewhere and then the site can begin to solicite those who specifically are playing a large # of hands consistently every month. That way it doesn't stir up non issues with newbies or occasional players. I think word would spread fast amongst the regulars and this would be nothing but good for business. Also if the site were smart, they would have computers logged into all of there competitions games collecting data on who the regulars are on those sites for solicitation.

[Cubs fan]

Seriously though, it would be interesting to see one of the newer sites slash the rake to see what would happen. I suspect many of the people that play online simply don't realize the implications of rake on hourly rate..

I think serious players would obviously be interested, I think the fish(gamblers) are interested in the promotions, I don't think the extra rake is a huge considerations to them.

Cubs Win!!

[24hPOKER]

One of the problems with attracting serious more or less professional players is of course that it tightens the games. Sites want the fish. They are the ones feeding the sharks.

So, even if it would be a successful marketing strategy it could actually turn out to be counter productive.

A good combination would be preferrable. I am speaking from experience since we started with a rake capped at $1.50. We did not get a flood of players jus because of that. However, we quickly set up a small but loyal group of players that vary a lot in quality of play. Some are very good (mostly residing in the Monday Big Bet Games) to the fishy types who are constantly losing but seem quite happy with that. After a while we raised the rake a bit $100 pot =$2 rake, $250 pot=$2.50 rake. NOBODY even commented. So still, the incentive for sites to slash rake is low.

I would like to do more "serious" marketing creating real value for players, giving back a lot of the rake to the players in proprtion to what they put in.

This is a difficult task and personally I believe too much emphasis is put on getting new players to sign up and too little on keeping the existing crowd happy. I intend to make a difference.

Best regards

[24hPOKER]

You are welcome to try us out. PLO has become quite a niche for us so you will find games at your level.

Limit Texas is very scarcely populated, mainly because noone wants to sit down first. We hope to change that when advertising a bit in Cardplayer in the near future though, attracting more Americans and extending our hours from almost exclusively European peak to a more around the clock room.

Best regards

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Stefan:

Here's an essay from my book Poker Essays, Volume III that covers this subject.

Best wishes,
Mason

Comparing the Rake


As the majority of you know, I live in Las Vegas and this is where most of my poker is played. It means that I pay one of the lowest rakes in the country. Specifically, the game that I have been playing most recently is $30-$60 hold ’em. At The Bellagio, I pay $5 per half hour to play this game. If I were to play the same game in California, I would be paying almost as much as twice this rate depending on the location. So this brings forth the obvious question. Is the rake in California too high, or is Las Vegas ridiculously cheap?

To address this question, let’s look at a different poker topic that we are all familiar with — bluffing. Top poker players know that if you bluff too much, you are not playing very well, and if you bluff too little you are not playing very well. That is there should be an optimal bluffing frequency that assures you maintain a certain level of profits. The same should hold for the rake.

If I ran a cardroom, my goal would be to set the rake at that level which maximizes my profits over the long haul. Obviously if I didn’t charge poker players to play, or charged very little the cardroom would lose money and eventually go out of business. On the other hand, if I charged way too much, everyone would be losers; the games would cease to exist, and again the cardroom would go out of business.

Notice, then, there should be an optimal amount to charge. This amount would allow the house to make a reasonable profit, but would also keep the games thriving. That is, a core of regular players would develop to start games and keep the games going; and poker as an industry would grow.

What’s interesting about this is that most players will tell you that the rake in California is ridiculous. They say, “Compared to Vegas it is way too high.” I disagree. In fact, in my opinion the rake in California is much lower than it is in Las Vegas. At least if I lived in a place like Los Angeles or San Jose, that would be the case for me. Perhaps not with you, but if I lived in one of these locations, the clubs would be paying me to play. That is my rake would be reversed.

Many California Cardrooms are built on what is known as the prop system. This includes “silent,” as well as “regular” props. For those of you who don’t know, a silent prop is a player who is paid by the house to play in a particular game. He puts his name on the list like a regular player, and like a regular player he can’t be pulled from the game. (He also usually doesn’t get paid as much as a “regular” prop, but the salary can still be pretty good. I should know. Many years ago, when the Bicycle Club first opened, I worked [for about three months] as a silent prop in their $25-$50 draw games on the weekends.)

So what does this mean in relation to the rake? It means that the true rake the house collects is not as high as it seems. Even though a game might be full, if a couple of props are sitting at the table, the California cardroom is collecting less for itself than the cardrooms in Las Vegas, even though Nevada cardrooms generally have a lower rake. In other words, the rake in California is not very fair. Some people are paying “double rake,” while others aren’t paying any rake at all.

But why do props even exist? The California cardrooms will tell you that they are needed to start games and keep games going. They are needed because there are not enough regular players. This is clearly the case because when the regular player population base gets large enough, most California Cardrooms do eliminate some of their prop jobs.

This leads to an interesting conclusion. If the rake was lower, this extra money which the players would “hold,” would do exactly what the prop salary does. That is, it would create more regular players who would start games and keep the games going and there would be no need for props

However, it gets even better than this. I believe that the more poker players there are, the more poker players there will be. We players tell our friends what a great game this is and recruit new people to the cardrooms all the time. In addition, a lower rake will allow more players to get through that initial survival period, again producing more long term customers for the cardrooms.

So the final conclusion is this: In the long run, a fair and equitable rake will be better for players, and better for those cardrooms that adopt it. It may lower a cardroom’s profits today, but it will greatly enhance them and allow our industry to grow at an optimal rate in the future.

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Stefan:

You wrote:

One of the problems with attracting serious more or less professional players is of course that it tightens the games. Sites want the fish. They are the ones feeding the sharks.

While I completely agree with this, keep in mind that sites that charge high rakes and thus are forced to hire lots of props are also achieving just what you want to avoid.

Best wishes,
Mason

[24hPOKER]

You clearly know how to formulate these thoughts in a much better way than I do. All of this is certainly true and it touches at my reasoning earlier about the B&amp;M being a mature market and online not.

I believe that by having a lower rake, more players will be winning players in a given time period. More players will thus be able to spend more hours at poker tables and create more game selection.

We have a momentum 22 (or whatever that book title is in English - is it perhaps Catch 22?) where the smaller sites would have more to gain if it were true that it would attract new players. However, smaller sites do not have the game selection needed to attract a lot of players on a rake basis alone. When they finally do, they are not small any more and will have more to gain by raising the rake than the other way around. The key to this problem is to give more allround value. The reason the current situation prevails is because it is the "uneduvcated" player who doesn't know/doesn't care about the rake that is the true nourishment for the professionals. The one group pays to the site becasue they do not know/care, the other because it is worth it anyway.

In theory your theory is correct (IMO), but IRL online (that's an expression to think about), I think the flaw is the immature markets. therefore I also predict a lot of changes in the online poker industry in the future.

I just might be a little unstructured in my reasoning here. Please accept my apoligies in advance for inconsitencies in the reasoning. This is just from the top of my head on a stressed out day.

Best regards

[lorinda]

I see the 24h adverts in Poker Europa, and they are good.

The main obstacle is distrust "Why can they give a lower rake" amongst new players.

Perhaps Mason could give you permission to have something at the bottom of your advert to put something like "To enter discussions on this, and other topics, visit twoplustwo.com's internet gambling forum"

This would help your site by removing the bs fear factor, it would help twoplustwo because those reading would be newbies in general who would want more info (and hopefully books) and it would also help 24h by just getting more people interested in net poker, even if not all the customers came their way.

Just a thought,

Lori

[SunTzu68]

Here is a link to PartyPoker's rake structure.

web page (http://http://www.partypoker.com/games/rake.html)