Poker fad already fading?

[revots33]

http://www.tvweek.com/news.cms?newsId=8773

Quote from the article:

[ QUOTE ]
The conceptual twist exemplifies how fresh treatments are now required to get a poker series on the air. After two years of booming ratings and more press coverage than any other programming trend this side of reality TV, the televised poker audience is, in many cases, dropping.

Travel Channel's "World Poker Tour" was down 17 percent in total viewers watching first-run episodes during its 2005 season, compared with 2004, according to Nielsen Media Research. ESPN's "World Series of Poker" is down 14 percent season to date. CNBC's "Heads Up Poker" tournament is down 18 percent. And among the three iterations of GSN's own "Poker Royale" series, most are similarly down.

And those are the success stories.

The syndicated effort "Ultimate Poker Challenge" is struggling, having been relegated to early-morning slots in major markets. E! debuted "Hollywood Poker Night" this summer but has not renewed the program. CMT's "Dead Man's Hand," like several announced poker projects, died in development.

The only series that bucked the trend was Bravo's "Celebrity Poker Showdown," which increased 12 percent, though its overall audience is much smaller than the ESPN or Travel Channel shows.

The question for networks and producers now is whether the numbers signal a downward slide or merely the stabilization after an impossible-to-sustain boom.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think, like every other fad, poker got too overexposed. Remember the tv show "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?" It was a huge hit when it was on 1 night a week. Then as usual the tv execs killed the golden goose by putting it on almost every single night. Went from #1 to off the air in a few months.

My feeling is that people who imagine there will be a never-ending supply of fish thanks to poker on tv are in for a rude awakening. Fads don't last forever - and they usually end quickly once the "it" factor is gone. Actually, I wouldn't be too suprised if the WPT is no longer on the air in 3 years.

[POKhER]

Yeh it'll die, but people will always think "Yeah ill have a shot at the game".

17 year olds will turn 18, 209 year olds will turn 21... Cash in etc.

I think its sliding now(I heard Party sign ups have fallen big time anyhow?).

Get it whilst its hot /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[Mr_J]

Problem with your arguement is that online poker isn't a fad.

[primetime32]

You people don't see the diffference between TV poker and online poker?

People's urge to gamble is not a fad. Just because people (like myself) find TV poker to be less and less enjoyable, that does not mean that i am playing less and less poker.

[revots33]

[ QUOTE ]
Problem with your arguement is that online poker isn't a fad.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's debatable. If the game itself is no longer the "hot" thing on tv and in popular culture, do you really think that will have no effect on online poker? Just because 2+2ers plan to continue playing regardless of poker's overall popularity, doesn't mean everyone else will.

[lonn19]

[ QUOTE ]
You people don't see the diffference between TV poker and online poker?

People's urge to gamble is not a fad. Just because people (like myself) find TV poker to be less and less enjoyable, that does not mean that i am playing less and less poker.

[/ QUOTE ]
Couldn't have said it better. There is a big difference between the decline of ratings of televised poker and the desire of people to play poker.

[ChipWrecked]

Seems weird to think there was actually discussion around poker tables at one point asking, "Think anybody'll watch this 'World Poker Tour' thing?"

with the extreme overexposure of poker what's to say the viewing population in general is the same or even increasing, just that it is spread out thinner because of all the new shows coming out. I for one stopped watching wsop and wpt, because I'm playing poker instead. I think this is a market where they took a big hit. watching poker was fun when I didn't play it. Now I'd rather be online then checking out the main event.

[Mr_J]

I didn't say the popularity of tv poker doesn't influence the popularity of online poker, but online poker definately doesn't rely on it. You don't see online sportsbooks or casino's relying on tv coverage to survive. Online gambling is a HUGE industry, and the nets biggest industry apart from porn (or is it larger now?).

Online gambling isn't a fad, just like online banking or online shopping aren't fads.

I doubt TV poker will stay as high as it is now, but there's room for it to evolve into a different animal.

I'm sure when NFL football became a TV staple in the 1960s, most people weren't familiar with defensive schemes, quarterback reads against a possible blitz, etc, etc., but became interested in them as part of watching the game.

If there are enough people interested enough in poker to play it, there'll be interest in perhaps a more advanced level of analysis on TV and watch for more than the suck-out dances and Poker Brat bellyaching.

I mean, hell, if golf can stick around as a TV sport, why not poker?

i think all the people that WERE watching poker on TV are NOW online playing it...
no...MULTI-tabling it (so they can't possibly WATCH it on TV at the same time). lol

I'd be willing to bet that a lot of people (esp. the fish/losing players) will
continue to gamble online...they'll lose, get mad...but when they get their next paycheck, they'll deposit and try again...

Think about this: ALL casino games ARE "rigged"/tilted in favor of THE HOUSE...
people KNOW this good and well before they go to a casino to gamble...yet they continue to do so...why?
I don't think the casino business is going to drop off the face of the earth...

I don't think there will be a decline in the # of people (esp. fish) playing poker anytime soon.
I predict the opposite! Once the law(s) catch up with online poker, advertising the
existence of online poker sites wont' be illegal (it'll be on TV, in magazines, in Newspapers, etc.), it will be easier to get money into the sites via
credit cards/PayPal, etc....
This
"boom" that happened in recent years is not over. AND I bet there will be other BOOMS in growth in the future...maybe in 300 years poker will go away, but by fad if you mean in the next 100 years poker might go away or
cease to be popular anymore...I might actually agree with you!

HERE's to POKER - the greatest thing ever! I worship you!
get your money into the sites!

[Unabridged]

poker on tv is unwatchable, 90% of it is stupid ass all-in hands and most of them are suckouts.

[MicroBob]

Interesting article.


1. As others have mentioned...I don't think online-poker relies on the popularity of televised poker.
The best part about televised poker these days is that the online-sites are able to advertise. A little over a year ago there were zero online-poker ads on the air until the stations grew comfortable with the dot-net work-around.

2. The over-exposure on TV with all the CNN stories and what-not certainly couldn't continue at the break-neck pace it was on.

3. I had dinner with family-friends of my GF and GF's Mom. Many Latin Americans. There was a 70-year-old Peruvian woman who told me she loves watching that poker stuff on TV. There's a good chance she doesn't understand much of it except that they have lots of chips and money that they're pushing at each other.

I have witnessed similar examples.


4. How does the article claim that NBC's HUC coverage is down 14%? It only has aired for one season...so how did it go down (unless they're looking at a decline from the beginning of the coverage to the end...if so, if was up against tougher programming and also had inconsistent time-slots and not nearly as much promotion).


5. Most of the shows that weren't popular or wound up getting cancelled were pretty bad. You can't just put 5 people at a tablr, give them cards, and expect people to watch. There has to be SOME quality to the production and the announcing.
It would be kind of like comparing Jeopardy to one of those local (probably dated) high-school kids on TV quiz-shows (called 'Scholar Bowl' or something). Both TV shows just ask a bunch of trivia questions. But one is clearly a done a bit better than another.

[Photoc]

[ QUOTE ]
209 year olds will turn 21...

[/ QUOTE ]

Hummm, quite possibly in the future this could happen. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[revots33]

[ QUOTE ]
Think about this: ALL casino games ARE "rigged"/tilted in favor of THE HOUSE...
people KNOW this good and well before they go to a casino to gamble...yet they continue to do so...why?
I don't think the casino business is going to drop off the face of the earth...

[/ QUOTE ]

I've heard this argument many times. But if that's the case - where were all the poker players until recently? Poker isn't a new game. If the fact that people just like to gamble explains why it will always be popular - then why WASN'T it always popular? Most casinos didn't even have poker rooms until the current boom (a boom fueled largely by poker on tv).

I don't agree with the argument that just because people like to gamble, poker must therefore always stay as popular as it is now. One does not equal the other. People move on to different things and newer fads. Even if everyone who currently plays continued to play, the decline of poker's popularity in the popular culture would ensure less new players joining the game.

It's not just a question of television ratings. It's a question of poker's place in the popular consciousness. In a few years, I'll be interested to see how many poker chip sets are on the shelves of Target and Wal-Mart, and how many poker-themed t-shirts are on the racks at Kohl's. Not too many, I'm guessing. Because fads don't last forever. Just because this fad involves a gambling game doesn't mean it won't suffer the fate of most other fads. It will continue to be played by those who love the game, and it will no longer be played by those who were just playing because it was the "in" thing to do.

[SharkBait]

Gambling is a fad.... There won't be any casinos left in 12 months.

[ QUOTE ]
Gambling is a fad.... There won't be any casinos left in 12 months.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ship it batches!

[Tom Bayes]

[ QUOTE ]

In a few years, I'll be interested to see how many poker chip sets are on the shelves of Target and Wal-Mart, and how many poker-themed t-shirts are on the racks at Kohl's.

[/ QUOTE ]

I bet chip sets will be super cheap at garage sales 5 years from now.

[Hoopster81]

I think that while decreased amounts of televised poker certainly will not be good for poker, as long as sites continue their aggressive television advertising campaign the effects will be minimal.


oooooooooh, party poker

Very well put argument revots...I really have trouble re-futing your last post (in response to mine).

I think, though, what would clear things up a little and what would also move us closer to agreement on the issue would be to define the term "people" as we are both using it/the term...

I agree there will be a certain amount of people who see poker as a "fad" and who will stop playing online and live, stop buying poker merchandise, and stop watching it on TV...they'll move on to the new fad in a few years perhaps...maybe many of them have already moved on! The question is
what %age of players is this? Is it a high percentage? Is what fueled the
recent boom in poker play online (and live) made up of a high percentage of short-attention span "trendy" people?
(probably a high %age of really bad
losing players meet this criteria...)

Give me this, though... that a lot of the people that started playing online (and live)/were INTRODUCED to poker play as a result of the recent boom and WILL end up being lifetime/lifelong players...
(But, you could say, which would go along with YOUR argument, that it goes on to reason that as the years go by, no matter how stupid a "lifetime player" is, he/she will gradually be getting better as time goes on...so this %age of the poker playing population
will eventually all be sharks! lol). So I can see your arguement...the games will get worse...UNTIL the next boom! (hopefully which will occur when online poker rooms begin to be located in the US and
the US begins to regulate and pass laws making it expressy "legal"...this boom will probably be bigger than the moneymaker/ESPN boom!

So, in the end, I agree with you...it stands to reason that "fresh fish"/calling stations/bad players need to
continue to be sent to the games in order to keep them really good...

But There are so many factors that can influence this and the arguement can go back and forth...
Heck - Little "booms" are probably happenning month by month (and even week by week online!).
The games might be great at one site for a few weeks due to a re-load bonus, recent advertising on the part of the poker room, etc., but the next week
the games might stink/be full of sharks! Poker is too big now to decline to the point where all the games will be bad...
it is soo big it just can't happen. Like I said it would take a few hundred years for this to happen - seriously.

I need more coffee before I continue arguing...burning out here...but I still think the games will be "beatable" for the next 100 years at least...lol

consider also that "Really good" players can continue to make money off of the other good players...
it just won't be as much money as a good/ave. player can make from a table full of 5 or 6 fish...

So what?

You think playing poker is going to decline? By how much? I will lay you 20:1 that the #entrants in the 2006 WSOP will not be below the # in 2004.

[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]
So what?

You think playing poker is going to decline? By how much? I will lay you 20:1 that the #entrants in the 2006 WSOP will not be below the # in 2004.

[/ QUOTE ]

How bold, you don't think the number of entrants is going to decline over 50 percent from one year to the next. Wow.

--Zetack

[BradleyT]

Anyone who doesn't see the correlation between online player #'s and the popularity of televised poker is a [censored].

[MicroBob]

There are lots and lots of people who are learning the game via online and are a bit more confident to try the live games now too.
It sounds cliche when Raymer mentions it in his PokerStars TV ad. But I know this to be true.
I was one of those folks (who was told about online-poker and gave it a try). I was a card-counter at BJ and had walked past the poker-room about a zillion times....but knew that I didn't know how to play and that it wasn't +EV for me since I was ignorant...so I never tried it.


I've since met several people who like to play the play-money tables online but are a bit too intimidated to try the real-money yet. Obviously some of these people will....and of those people...some will try the live games too.


Basically....it is my assertion that online-poker makes it easier to learn how to play and is partly the reason for the B&M poker-boom.

I think it all feeds into each other and is kind of a chicken-egg argument almost.

Televised poker helps online-poker....but online-poker is also a help to B&M poker and vice-versa...and home-game poker is obviously bigger than ever partly due to BOTH televised-poker and online-poker...etc etc.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So what?

You think playing poker is going to decline? By how much? I will lay you 20:1 that the #entrants in the 2006 WSOP will not be below the # in 2004.

[/ QUOTE ]

How bold, you don't think the number of entrants is going to decline over 50 percent from one year to the next. Wow.

--Zetack

[/ QUOTE ]

nobody does. that's my friggin point.

[Eder]

[ QUOTE ]
poker on <font color="red"> the internet </font> is <font color="red"> unplayable </font> , 90% of it is stupid ass all-in hands and most of them are suckouts.

[/ QUOTE ]

fyp lol

[Voltron87]

people are dumbasses, they confuse "levelling off and not continuing to grow at an exponential pace" with "a fad dying out".

This fad has an addiction tied to it in gambling, and addictions RULE.....GO POOKERRRRRRR

[MicroBob]

"they confuse "levelling off and not continuing to grow at an exponential pace" with "a fad dying out". "


Yes...I think this is true.
Just because it's not explosive anymore doesn't mean it still isn't pretty popular.

Also consider that there are MANY young people who love the game, are following it on TV, and will be making decent incomes in the years to come (that they will be bringing to teh poker-tables...both online and live).
If it's a mostly grown-up thing that is also cool among the countries youth then it should continue to thrive imo.

That's what makes poker different than...say...magic-the-gathering, or pokemon, or day-trading on the internet.

Pokemon was mostly a 'kids' thing and died in popularity fairly quickly.
day-trading was more of an adult thing and didn't have the appeal to kids (plus....lots of people just got clobbered trying to do it).

Poker is cool among adults AND kids which is not a very common thing.



Walking with a couple people I know...one guy knows I play poker for a living...the other guy does not. The one friend who knows asks me about my recent slump 'at work' and I have to explain to the other guy that I play internet-poker full-time for income.
He's fascinated and acts like it's the freaking coolest thing he's ever heard in his life. He's asking me a zillion Q's about it and can't stop about how cool he thinks that is.
He's about 22 or 23 or so I'm guessing.


His feelings about poker (or about actually knowing someone who makes their income via online-poker) are not uncommon.

I don't think the fad is really 'dying' that much.
If anything, online-poker is more and more 'accepted' and less and less taboo...which is certainly a good thing.

[ncboiler]

[ QUOTE ]
I for one stopped watching wsop and wpt, because I'm playing poker instead. I think this is a market where they took a big hit. watching poker was fun when I didn't play it. Now I'd rather be online then checking out the main event.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is exactly my reason for not watching poker on TV anymore. The more you play the more you realized how heavily edited it is and how unlike "real" poker the shows are. "Real" meaning how boring 19 out of 20 hands can be. ESPN makes poker look like a run and gun basketball game. I am not convinced however that online poker is not just a fad.

[DeadMoneyOC]

Someone probably already mentioned this but I am going say it anyways. There is one HUGE difference between poker and every other fad. Poker is gambling and gambling is addicting.

[Petomane]

This is a silly article, because it fails to point out that the scheduling is really awful - people would watch more poker if only they could find it.
Of course the WSOP TV is down - they kept pre-empting it with sports events and then repeating the same episodes over and over. I had a hard time keeping up.
As for the WPT, the season is too short. It runs from March to June/July and then they keep repeating. It's hard to build a loyal following with lack of new shows.
The Ultimate Poker Challenge is all over the place. In my area it doesn't have a regular time slot and when I do occasionally catch it, I can't hear the commentary for all the background noise.
Bravo Celebrity Poker is always on Thursdays at 9pm. People can find it and people watch it. It's that simple.

[Shoe]

[ QUOTE ]
Someone probably already mentioned this but I am going say it anyways. There is one HUGE difference between poker and every other fad. Poker is gambling and gambling is addicting.

[/ QUOTE ]

That, and just about EVERYONE thinks they are good enough to win at poker.