ZeroRake.com

[Syntax]

Came across some spam for this site. Looks like they just launched today. I didn't download it, but the sofware looks like a Paradise clone to me. It's developed by Las Vegas By Home? Looks like they do a lot of other gaming software.

Heres a quote from their website:

[ QUOTE ]
An idea - NO RAKE, ever. That’s how it started. We the Players grew frustrated with paying too much money in rake to online poker rooms. Running an online poker room is no where near as expensive as running a land based operation, and hands are played faster online, generating even more gross profit.

Why are they charging us so much to play? The online industry rakes almost the same as the land based industry, and a small number of people are getting very rich off OUR money. It is finally time for a change!



[/ QUOTE ]



It's interesting, and a step in the right direction. Cheers to rocking the boat. /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[Syntax]

The more I look into this, it seems more interesting. It looks like its operated by Action Poker Inc. They run another cardroom, Tiger Gaming Club. I've seen banners for that room on this forum. I wonder if these rooms are on the same network?

Has anyone played at Tiger Gaming? How is it?

[gabyyyyy]

Syntax I would tread very very carefully through this one.

A site that claims to be formed by the players, but is really formed by casino execs creates many red flags in my mind.

I would say with 85 percent surety that this site utilizes bots and other not so kosher ways of getting money from the player.

It would be a totally different story if the site was formed by some known poker player or something. However, this site IS part of the tiger gaming group, not a bunch of players who are protesting paying rake.

Tread carefully my friend. This may be the next propoker.com

[csuf_gambler]

i just looked thru their site, not quite understanding it.

so hows this work? you pay a one time sign up fee of $5.95 and play rake free forever?

is this place trying to be like rakefree.com or what

[Zwiggelte]

5.95$ for the first month after that you pay 29.95$ a month.

Still a good deal..but will the fish come here to play?

[Rooster71]

[ QUOTE ]
i just looked thru their site, not quite understanding it.

so hows this work? you pay a one time sign up fee of $5.95 and play rake free forever?

is this place trying to be like rakefree.com or what

[/ QUOTE ]

Look at the "Membership" page. The $5.95 is a "special" rate, regularly $29.95. The rates are for 30 day memberships.

I'll have to hear some feedback before I try it.

[Alobar]

Interesting. Hopefully someone with some more knowlesge comes in with some info. I'd be leary about playing there tho until something comes along to set my mind at ease. Although if they were using bots or something it should be pretty evident in your results.

[sumdumguy]

This is the single most informative post ever. Thank You!
I am very very interested. Please let me know how it goes.

[SomeTimesIWin]

The problem with this site is how they plan to attract players and especially 'good' opponents (fish). They will probably not be as promoted on gambling pages by affiliates etc. and they will probably have a limited budget to give bounses to attract new players. They will surely attract players such as readers of the 2+2 forums. However I wonder if the guy at the $10-$20 table im plying at right now calling early with J3o cares about rake.Good initiative though.

/SometimesIWin

[daveymck]

I dont see recreational players who maybe play with $50-$200 a month are going to pay a monthly charge of $30, so to me it is going to be a site more for medium to high stakes players.

Its one thing to tell a player they are paying as they play (your winnings are going up so the rake almost seems not to be there) its another to deduct that money straight off them in a big chunk.

[sumdumguy]

[ QUOTE ]
The problem with this site is how they plan to attract players and especially 'good' opponents (fish).

[/ QUOTE ]
You. Me. And everyone else on 2+2 will advertise for them via word of mouth.
What do you think the internet is for?


[ QUOTE ]
They will probably not be as promoted on gambling pages by affiliates etc. and they will probably have a limited budget to give bounses to attract new players.

[/ QUOTE ]
Affiliates are over-rated and overpaid. It has been proven to be an inefficient and fat loaded system.
The fat must be trimmed! Affiliates, begone!

Why would they have a limited budget? I'm sure their business plan, being high profit and low risk, has attracted more venture capitalists than they can deal with.


[ QUOTE ]
They will surely attract players such as readers of the 2+2 forums.

[/ QUOTE ]
Of course. Syntax will take the first step in the right direction and report back with his earnings so that the rest of us freeloaders can make our deposits and pay our membership fees in confidence.

The potential rake savings seem so huge that I have already emailed all my 10/20 and 15/30 buddies on Party, and all my 20/40 and NL/PL buddies on Paradise. I thought I should do my part for the pro community and help get the word out. Some have already replied that they can't wait to play rake free with Syntax.


[ QUOTE ]
However I wonder if the guy at the $10-$20 table im plying at right now calling early with J3o cares about rake.

[/ QUOTE ]
There's a guy on zerorake.com playing J3o in EP!?
Ready Or Not. Here I Come!

[El Barto]

Heres my rake free idea:

You pay a flat fee ($10?) every month that you win money. If you lose money for the month, you pay nothing.

The worst players may only have an up month a few times a year, while the good players will have 11 or 12 of them. This could keep a pool of fish happy.

This could be effectively marketed to the fish. "If you lose money this month, you PAY NOTHING to play /images/graemlins/grin.gif"

[Synergistic Explosions]

Just curious, does anyone keep track of how much they pay in rake each month? If so, how much per hour does it come out to at different limits?

[SomeTimesIWin]

"However I wonder if the guy at the $10-$20 table im plying at right now calling early with J3o cares about rake."

That wasn't at zerorake, I havent played there and I havent seen any games going there either (at least not when I use to play).

Whether or not affiliates are overpaid I don't know but I suspect a lot of players playing at Party and skins has been finding the site by the way of sites promoting party poker and their deposit bonuses. Furthermore the commercial aired on tv stations are probably also quite costly in the long run.

A flat fee of $30 won't give much room for such marketing efforts compared to the millions generated in rake at Party.

I hope however that the site will become a big success since it my push other sites to (at leas, I hope) lower their rake.

/SometimesIWin

[eugeneel55]

ZeroRake does make you pay 2% cashout fee and a large purchase fee as well.

Be aware that because of the laco of funding, a lot of the options we're used to (collusion investigation team, custumer support etc) should be much worse. It is something that sounds much better than it really is.

[daveymck]

And that is the problem and with the idea floated above no win no pay.

A company has to make a profit otherwise what is the point, to do this they need a strong income stream as well as an initial big investment.

Party as an example makes big profits as it has a good income stream that gives them the ability to expand, market and advertise and can keep bringing in new punters and can keep doing this till they hit their peak, once they stop growing then they will have to alter their strategy. People complain about the rake there however it is not reducing demand, and demand is the key driver of any business.

It costs a lot to setup a good online business properly, develop software have adequate servers good comms and get support staff etc, I dont see how a company only charging $30 a month is going to be able to have money left over for any marketing let alone doing the key elements of software development and support provision.

There have been leanty of failure talked about on here eg Choice and they all were charging rake, I dont see how a rake free type site can survive unless it can grow very quickly and that will have meant an even bigger initial investment for marketing etc.

Will be interesting to see how this venture goes, I would advise not leaving much bankroll in until it becomes established if you are trying it out.

[tyfromm]

Are there any online sites that charge by the hour instead of by rake?

[Gahnia radula]

[ QUOTE ]
Still a good deal..but will the fish come here to play?

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont think playing rake free will attract large numbers of fish to this site, mainly becuase i dont many fish understand the impact rake has on their results

If im wrong.....eh, thats ok by me

Gahnia radula

[Synergistic Explosions]

I checked out zerorake after reading this thread. I noticed they have three options if you want to play there. One is the monthly membership. Two is a daily membership for 4.95. Three is no membership, but you pay normal rake on winning hands.

[RollaJ]

Wow, this site should fail rather quickly. Anyone else want to play with others who play 80 hours a week?

[utopic]

You are talking about a 2% cashout and deposit fee. Ok.
But lets take an example about low limit poker. Let's say 0.5/1 $.
You pay a 30$ membership plus the deposit fee to begin.
Lets say you put 200$ on your account. You got 196$ on your account.
On party at 0.5/1 a player is paying 2$ per hour because of the huge rake.
You need so to play 17 hours a month at least to have an equity (30+4).
Then you're playing with a 2bb/h profit.
You're playing two tables, and two hours a day. 120 hours less the 17 hours, still 103 hours.
+2BB*103, 206$ less the 2% fee cashout. It remains about 200$.
Tell me where is the problem about the cashout and deposit fee.
The real problem will be promotion, because losing player and occasionnaly player will find the system expensive.
But with time and if this site is ok it should be one of the top 5 site soon.
At higher limits, the difference is less important, but I think it's still intersting.

[daveymck]

[ QUOTE ]
Are there any online sites that charge by the hour instead of by rake?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not that I am aware of.

[sumdumguy]

Just some rough guesstimates.

Very low limit players: 1-2 6max
80 raked hands/hour x 0.50 avg rake / 6 players = $6.67/hour
For a plus player prolly between $4-$5 per hour in rake.

Lower end of middle limit players: 5-10 6max
88 raked hands/hour x 1.35 avg rake / 6 players = $19.80/hour
For a plus player prolly between $12.50-$15.80 per hour in rake.

So.. the conclusion kinda runs like this:
The monthly membership fee is peanuts.
The 2% cashin and cashout fee is peanuts.

Potential savings is more than just a 2nd income (especially for multitabling types)!

Eugeneel be warned! Your affiliate days are numbered!

If the site takes off, many pros will see a a dramatic increase in their monthly income. However, as you pointed out, it comes down to marketing. If they fail to market successfully, the pros are doing nothing more than paying a membership fee for the privelege of propping. If the pros wanted to prop, they could do it at a number of sites without having to pay a membership fee.

[BradleyT]

Main stream poker players (ma, pa, your uncle bob, college kid joe) aren't going to pay to join a site when all the others are free. It doesn't matter how much they can "save" per month, it's the psychology of "paying" for a service when you can get that same service free at other places.

[Alobar]

It can be done. Look at all the monthly service games making millions of dollars. Ultima online, everquest and all the like. They seem to be able to turn a nice profit on a $30/month subscription

[Alobar]

I think they are making a serious mistake by not adopting the idea of rakefree.com where the $30 monthly is paid by your first $30 in rake. I think that would be ALOT more fish friendly than a lump payment once a month

[BradleyT]

"You only pay rake on your first 400 hands of the month" is a much better marketing idea than "you pay $30/month membership" even though it works out the same monetarily.

[daveymck]

Of course it can be, but you need to the initial marketing investment and to offer somthing different and not have competition etc etc.

I can see anyone on here being against it, lets hope it takes off, for my part I will be monitoring it but not playing till it has bedded in.

[BradleyT]

[ QUOTE ]
But with time and if this site is ok it should be one of the top 5 site soon.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah right, let me guess - you work for this site?

[BradleyT]

They're only $10-15 monthly subscriptions. After you pay that there's no further monetary commitments involved. You don't have the chance to pay money to lose money. There are no big MMORPGs that don't charge a monthly fee to pick as an alternative (Diablo II isn't MM). MMORPGs started with the pay to play business model back in '97 when UO was released. This place is doing it ass-backwards and introducing it after all the free sites are out there.

This concept is similar to a casino making your pay $20 to get in, but they set their slot machines 3% looser than the other 12 casinos within 1 block walking distance. People simply aren't going to pay.

Mainstream america isn't going to go for this idea when we have the Internet mentality of "free is good" implanted in our brains.

Anyone that has taken any kind of CRM classes knows this business model is doomed.

[Syntax]

Here are my general thoughts on some of the comments so far:

[ QUOTE ]
I dont see how a company only charging $30 a month is going to be able to have money left over for any marketing let alone doing the key elements of software development and support provision.


[/ QUOTE ]

$30 a month can be a profitable online business model. i.e. Playboy only charges $19.95 a month. As mentioned, gaming sites charge less and make money. The servers and bandwith demand for running an MMORPG or FPS, I would imagine is exponentially greater then it is to the run the Party client.

This profit would be sooo much less then a site like Party makes now, it's not even funny. However, a site that profits $5 million a year is no joke either. ($30 x 12 months x 30,000 players = $11 million gross. If the average person leaves $100 or more in thier account, and that money can earn a measly 3% interest, that will earn roughly another $1.5 million. Someone who is not making $5 million a year will go after it.

[ QUOTE ]
The problem with this site is how they plan to attract players and especially 'good' opponents (fish). They will probably not be as promoted on gambling pages by affiliates etc. and they will probably have a limited budget to give bounses to attract new players. They will surely attract players such as readers of the 2+2 forums.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the most important question. They would absolutely need an aggressive marketing campaign. The fact that their software keeps a running jackpot total of how much rake you have saved will turn the heads of even the most clueless players. They might even be better off not collecting a subscription fee, just start collecting rake and capping it at $30. That's like 6 hours of play for they typical $2/4 player After that it's starts showing you how much you arent paying in rake.

Also once you stop collecting rake from a 'fish' it will create the illusion that he wins $$ more often or loses less $$ more often on this site, and that in itself would generate a lot of buzz and keep the games going. So many 'fish' feel like they are being "cheated" at Party because they lose. Look at the crap people post here, on RGP, even in the chat window of a game there. Can you imagine the opposite effect when a player "wins" at a site simply because they are paying $100's of dollars less in rake. You couldnt pay for better marketing than that.

Also, being connected to an online casino like Pacific is would be a great start in getting the "good" games going.

Of course, if a site like this started to gain a lot of popularity, big sites like Party would shift gears, drop thier own rake and such to drive out the upstart. Sounds good to me. Either way, the players (good and bad alike) win.

Do I think zerorake will be the next big online cardroom. Nope, if just for the simple fact that its already launched and none of us heard of it. Obviously they aren't too keen on the idea of aggressive marketing.

However, people will start taking notice and soon enough someone will get it right.

[nolanfan34]

[ QUOTE ]
This concept is similar to a casino making your pay $20 to get in, but they set their slot machines 3% looser than the other 12 casinos within 1 block walking distance. People simply aren't going to pay.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good analogy. Your average fish has no idea how much they're paying in rake, and there's no way they're going to pay a subscription fee to play online. This site, if it makes it, may attract fish at the mid/high stakes level, but I doubt you'll see many at the lower levels.

[MrDannimal]

Of course, there aren't any free MMO games of similar quality, either. So the analogy kind of falls apart. Well, that's not true entirely, but for the purpose of the analogy, it is.

[utopic]

No. I'm just a low limit player who can't have a bankroll to play where the rake is almost nothing, 20-40 and above

I play mainly on poker stars at low limit always, because the rake is the lower among the poker sites.I'm not very good right, I just success to win 0.5BB/h, knowing that at pokerstars 0.5/1 the rake is 1.75BB in average per hour.
Sorry to be happy and to hope this site will work, but if I can avoid to pay 200$ per month...
Currently, for the low limit average players, it's just surviving poker. If some can build bankroll because of this low rake, something wrong ?
Yes, the site will have difficulties to do promotions, but with the low rake, you will see low limit players more often at high limit tables because of the bankrolls
Are players who are happy with good things always guilty to do spam ?

[RollaJ]

[ QUOTE ]
Main stream poker players (ma, pa, your uncle bob, college kid joe) aren't going to pay to join a site when all the others are free. It doesn't matter how much they can "save" per month, it's the psychology of "paying" for a service when you can get that same service free at other places.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[tiltboy]

[ QUOTE ]
Are there any online sites that charge by the hour instead of by rake?

[/ QUOTE ]
Americas Cardroom does this for their headsup tables, however, the traffic there is typically anemic. You have to check in often as most of the time there will only be a small NLHE game going and maybe a $.5/1 limit HE table or two. Then out of the blue a wild, usually short-handed, $5/10 or $10/20 will open up with an 8+ BB pot average and a bunch of short-stacked new players. It will eventually burn out and then the site again rolls up the sidewalks.

[Cry Me A River]

[ QUOTE ]
It can be done. Look at all the monthly service games making millions of dollars. Ultima online, everquest and all the like. They seem to be able to turn a nice profit on a $30/month subscription

[/ QUOTE ]

Except they don't - Everquest makes money, and everyone else tries to be Everquest but nobody else comes close and the rate of failure among new MMORPGs rivals that of new restaurants. And it's only getting worse now that the consoles have established strong online presences with all-inclusive packages.

[Synergistic Explosions]

[ QUOTE ]
Main stream poker players (ma, pa, your uncle bob, college kid joe) aren't going to pay to join a site when all the others are free. It doesn't matter how much they can "save" per month, it's the psychology of "paying" for a service when you can get that same service free at other places.

[/ QUOTE ]

You DONT have to pay a membership fee here to play. It says you can play for FREE, if you don't mind paying normal rake fees instead. It's your choice it appears.

[bvaughn]

If the fish will come, this is a great idea. Over the last two months of Party 5/10 6max, I've "paid" $4,625 in rake (27,000 PokerTracker hands). I assume this means that $4,625 has been taken out of the pots that I have won. Reduce this to $60 and instead of grinding out 1.8 BB/100, I'm $4,500 richer and thinking I'm the best poker player on the planet /images/graemlins/grin.gif. If this site can get the poor players to play, it will be an awesome deal for anyone with decent game...even the breakeven to slightly losing players will suddenly become winners.

[Synergistic Explosions]

I'm watching a game there right now. It does show a rake being taken out of every pot. However, if you win and are a member it pushes it back to you. If you aren't a member, it keeps the rake. That way anyone can play there if they don't want to pay a monthly fee. It will show you then how much you have paid in rake so you can make an informed decision later.

[Pokeraddict]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Are there any online sites that charge by the hour instead of by rake?

[/ QUOTE ]
Americas Cardroom does this for their headsup tables, however, the traffic there is typically anemic. You have to check in often as most of the time there will only be a small NLHE game going and maybe a $.5/1 limit HE table or two. Then out of the blue a wild, usually short-handed, $5/10 or $10/20 will open up with an 8+ BB pot average and a bunch of short-stacked new players. It will eventually burn out and then the site again rolls up the sidewalks.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought ACR heads up was free? It always was and the website still says it is. I think the main reason you do not see much higher limit action there is the rake is the worst on the net. 1/2 rakes nickels, 2/4+ rakes quarters and 4 player games rake $3 max.

ACR is about as opposite to rakefree that there is except for the heads up tables that I hardly ever saw used.

[Alobar]

Well I decided screw it and deposited and am playing there. I'll prolly start a new thread later with my thoughts and observations. But so far it actually seems pretty good. I like the software, and they are offering a rebate on the neteller fees. I'll keep you guys posted. They have a crappy refer a friend prog that doesnt give you much, but if anyone is interested PM me. more to come

[JAque]

Live support answer a few basic questions


Zain: Welcome to Live Help, my name is Zain, how can I help you?
JAQUE: HI: what is fee for playing 4 or more tables of 10/20 a month?
Zain: Currently, it's $5.95 for this month and after that it's $30 a month
Zain: If you're a member and you renew, you will receive discounts
JAQUE: wait a second please
Zain: The $5.95 will buy you 30 days
JAQUE: the home page says $208 ?
JAQUE: is this for normal rake?
JAQUE: can I play more than 4 tables at a time?
Zain: That's the amount of rake you would pay if you were on a raked site
Zain: No, unfortunately, you cannot
JAQUE: I see so it is $30 for 1 or more tables?
JAQUE: can I play 4?
Zain: It's $30 for up to 4 tables at one time
JAQUE: I see is there a picture of the tables in the web page?
Zain: One moment please
JAQUE: ok
Zain: Please follow this link and click on "view screenshot" to view a picture
of a table
Zain: http://www.zerorake.com/download/index.html
JAQUE: any deposit bonuses to open a new account?
Nathan: None. There are no margins in this revenue model.
JAQUE: I see. how many players do you have in your top hours?
Nathan: Well we only opened last night...
Nathan: So you'd be better to ask that in a week or two.
JAQUE: I see thanks bye

[tiltboy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Are there any online sites that charge by the hour instead of by rake?

[/ QUOTE ]
Americas Cardroom does this for their headsup tables, however, the traffic there is typically anemic. You have to check in often as most of the time there will only be a small NLHE game going and maybe a $.5/1 limit HE table or two. Then out of the blue a wild, usually short-handed, $5/10 or $10/20 will open up with an 8+ BB pot average and a bunch of short-stacked new players. It will eventually burn out and then the site again rolls up the sidewalks.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought ACR heads up was free? It always was and the website still says it is. I think the main reason you do not see much higher limit action there is the rake is the worst on the net. 1/2 rakes nickels, 2/4+ rakes quarters and 4 player games rake $3 max.

ACR is about as opposite to rakefree that there is except for the heads up tables that I hardly ever saw used.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, you are correct that the headsup tables are rake free. I don't think it is the rake, however, that keeps the higher limit tables from making there, since the worst of the rake is felt by $1/2 and below. Above this limit, the rake is not appreciably different from Party. ACR has lots of problems but I don't think high rake is chief among them. I've had an account there since late 2001, btw.

[Pokeraddict]

I of course agree ACR has many more issues then the rake. The rake increase was in last few months too. A baffling decision considering the problems they have had attracting players since Torstyn left and the promo system was changed. I am sure many wondered if betcris would even keep ACR open after months of one or two tables at peak hours.

On to zerorake.com I signed up there and have played about 2 hours. My rake rebate is $14 so I have more then doubled my $6 investment. The outcomes are believable and realistic, the software is basic but not buggy, there is some lag though. The players are nothing special it seems although it is a bit tight there.

If they do not run into a lot of fraud or cashout issues this should do well IMHO.

Myusername there...... RAKESUCKS !!! lol

[Syntax]

Did anyone ever find out if they were hooked into other cardrooms (TigerGaming) or do they stand alone?

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
Did anyone ever find out if they were hooked into other cardrooms (TigerGaming) or do they stand alone?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm pretty sure they stand alone. When I was on earlier there were less than 20 people on.

[Segor]

I agree 100%!!! They should simply stop raking your hands after you make them $30 in rake!