Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

Any of the big affiliates hear anything or understand what's going on? Needless to say this change has bigger implications for affiliate businesses than players.

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Any of the big affiliates hear anything or understand what's going on? Needless to say this change has bigger implications for affiliate businesses than players.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep, waiting with baited breath to hear what the affiliates have to say...assuming they haven't soiled themselves silly.

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

[ QUOTE ]
assuming they haven't soiled themselves silly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats a very silly assumption. This will cost some affiliates $10k+/month

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
assuming they haven't soiled themselves silly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats a very silly assumption. This will cost some affiliates $10k+/month

[/ QUOTE ]


I would guess it will hit some for upwards of 30k

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
assuming they haven't soiled themselves silly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats a very silly assumption. This will cost some affiliates $10k+/month

[/ QUOTE ]


I would guess it will hit some for upwards of 30k

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats what the "+" was for [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
assuming they haven't soiled themselves silly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats a very silly assumption. This will cost some affiliates $10k+/month

[/ QUOTE ]

yes, i meant soiled as in "they're pissed", not "hooray"

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

I assume you're talking about affiliates of Empire/Eurobet, etc. I fail to see how this change costs Party Poker affiliates money.

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

link or story please.

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

for those who hadn't seen it: press release.

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

What a bunch of BS. Guess they couldn't just come out and say "We were getting [censored] over by the other sites offering rakeback."

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

[ QUOTE ]
assume you're talking about affiliates of Empire/Eurobet, etc. I fail to see how this change costs Party Poker affiliates money.


[/ QUOTE ]

brahahaha you're kidding right. This is going to kill any Party skin affiliate-unless the skins can find a way to fight back or rejoin the Party Network.

Have you seen the pot averages on the Party Skin Network-all anemic. Total player on the network ~7,500.

This is going to put these skins out of business unless they can counter Party's move and they beter figure out something fast...in a prior threadin the ZOO I mused that EOL-Empire Poker listed on the London Stock Exchange would open down 20-30% Monday morning-after looking at this more in detail this stock will get hit much harder than that.

EuroBet is more diverse with its B&M betting parlors and online casino and sportsbook.

EuroBet may be able to weather this just like InterTops but Empire may not survive unless they can counter in a big way. What are their options.

Party has fvcked all these skins good.

Also Party stock may rally more than I thought eventhu this clarifies their bogus player counts and revenue/player growth estimates. If Party can pull this off and maintain solid player counts and build on it..this is a long term positive.

What Party has finally done is come out of the closet and clarified and cleaned up their accounting. How investors and analysts react to this will be very interesting. Party had to do this to protect its turf.

Party had to do this they had no choice.

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

I think you may have misunderstood my post. I was saying that while "Party skin affiliates" are indeed hurt by this move, as far as I can tell, it does not hurt "Party Poker affiliates."

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think you may have misunderstood my post. I was saying that while "Party skin affiliates" are indeed hurt by this move, as far as I can tell, it does not hurt "Party Poker affiliates."

[/ QUOTE ]

Hell no it doesn't hurt Party affiliates. They get to keep 100% of the affiliate payment.

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think you may have misunderstood my post. I was saying that while "Party skin affiliates" are indeed hurt by this move, as far as I can tell, it does not hurt "Party Poker affiliates."

[/ QUOTE ]

Hell no it doesn't hurt Party affiliates. They get to keep 100% of the affiliate payment.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would that be the case? I plan on paying out as usual.

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think you may have misunderstood my post. I was saying that while "Party skin affiliates" are indeed hurt by this move, as far as I can tell, it does not hurt "Party Poker affiliates."

[/ QUOTE ]

Hell no it doesn't hurt Party affiliates. They get to keep 100% of the affiliate payment.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would that be the case? I plan on paying out as usual.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's fine for you and your players. For the majority of players (who opened an account on Party before the RB craze hit), if they go back to Party, their affiliate will be pocketing all of the MGR rebate. I'm sure a lot of people with older Party accounts don't even know who their affiliate is.

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

no you are right I misread your post . For the largest Party affiliates this means they may pick up some business from skin players looking to come back to Party but remember many Party affiliates have historicaly targeted players that are not educated on rakeback and they havent offered rakeback to signups.

So Party affiliates may pick up new players but they are going to have give in a bit ie rackback to the new educated converts. My guess is unless affiliates can really invision getting loads of new signups they may not want to deal with offering rakeback. If they see tons is to be made from influx of converts they will need to spend money on better customer service,website automation etc....that's what the larger Party affiliates are doing right now. A site like Raketracker run by Morgant already have the infrastructure in place. I'm curious to see how wide Party will open the net. Will they let any affiliates join the party or just the biggest affiliates.

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

I think for most of us it's CardPlayerCruises!

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

The situation at Party does not have to adversely affect any affiliates or players of Party skins. They both can easily come back to Party.

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think for most of us it's CardPlayerCruises!


[/ QUOTE ]
CPC is supposedly the biggest Party affiliate run by Linda Johnson . I learned this earlier this evening from a large sub-affiliate of hers. I didnt know that she was making huge bucks as an affiliate.

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

Got to be very annoyed if you've bought empire shares. Wonder how long ago they knew about this? Before they bought noble presumably. If they knew before they listed tho??

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

Reeived an email from my rakeback affiliate this morning. Here is the opening paragraph:

We do not know the exact ins and outs of what has happened or why, but
it seems like Party Poker has divorced itself from its skins. They seem
to have done this suddenly and without telling anybody including the
skins!

This is a large, reputable affiliate. It appears they did not know this was about to happen.

It seems strange that Party can just kick the skins to the curb with no advance warning. Wouldn't this have legal repercussions.....as in the skins suing Party for breach of contract?

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

Your affiliate is wrong and obviously out of the loop!

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Reeived an email from my rakeback affiliate this morning. Here is the opening paragraph:

We do not know the exact ins and outs of what has happened or why, but
it seems like Party Poker has divorced itself from its skins. They seem
to have done this suddenly and without telling anybody including the
skins!

This is a large, reputable affiliate. It appears they did not know this was about to happen.

It seems strange that Party can just kick the skins to the curb with no advance warning. Wouldn't this have legal repercussions.....as in the skins suing Party for breach of contract?

[/ QUOTE ]

I got this same e-mail

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

All Eurobet affiliates received notification that even the Eurobet managers did not know this in advance. It caught everyone with the pans down

JAque

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

[ QUOTE ]
All Eurobet affiliates received notification that even the Eurobet managers did not know this in advance. It caught everyone with the pans down


[/ QUOTE ]

Not everyone.

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

[ QUOTE ]
All Eurobet affiliates received notification that even the Eurobet managers did not know this in advance. It caught everyone with the pans down

JAque

[/ QUOTE ]

And their pants down too!

It appears the skins/affilates did not know this was coming. They may have suspected something was afoot for the future, but totally unaware of exactly what or when. It does seem that Party kinda "backdoored" this in last night.

Wondering if the lawyers for Empire/skins have been summoned from the golf courses and TV's tuned to football/NASCAR/etc. today to get busy on some sort of legal response to this.

Also, if the skins would sue to regain access to the full Party network, isn't it possible a judge could rule in the skins favor and force Party to take them back? Presumably, any legal actions would take place in Gibralter.....and know nothing about the legal system there.

Edit: Having read through the post Diablo linked, if the contracts had in fact expired the skins are probably SOL. But if they still had a few months left.....they may have some options. Would be interesting to know exactly when those 2-year contracts were due to expire.

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
All Eurobet affiliates received notification that even the Eurobet managers did not know this in advance. It caught everyone with the pans down

JAque

[/ QUOTE ]

And their pants down too!

It appears the skins/affilates did not know this was coming. They may have suspected something was afoot for the future, but totally unaware of exactly what or when. It does seem that Party kinda "backdoored" this in last night.

Wondering if the lawyers for Empire/skins have been summoned from the golf courses and TV's tuned to football/NASCAR/etc. today to get busy on some sort of legal response to this.

Also, if the skins would sue to regain access to the full Party network, isn't it possible a judge could rule in the skins favor and force Party to take them back? Presumably, any legal actions would take place in Gibralter.....and know nothing about the legal system there.

Edit: Having read through the post Diablo linked, if the contracts had in fact expired the skins are probably SOL. But if they still had a few months left.....they may have some options. Would be interesting to know exactly when those 2-year contracts were due to expire.

[/ QUOTE ]

The skins most likely have no legal recourse. Party wouldn't make this huge change if their contracts didn't allow it. Considering the skins have technically been in breach of their contracts with Party (by allowing rake back), they are more likely to get sued by Party than vice versa.

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

I find it hilarious that so many posters here seem to think that Party, a multi-billion dollar publicly traded company, just sort of decided on a whim to cut off the skins without talking to the skins or looking at the contracts or anything.

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I find it hilarious that so many posters here seem to think that Party, a multi-billion dollar publicly traded company, just sort of decided on a whim to cut off the skins without talking to the skins or looking at the contracts or anything.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree, i guess they were in the contract negotiation, and the negotiation broke down, and Party had to pull the trigger.

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

[ QUOTE ]

Not everyone.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, that first reponse was so surreal. Almost everything he said, the exact opposite happened; and it happened within 96 hours.

Kinda like the gov't ignoring Bin Laden as a threat in Aug. 2001.

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I find it hilarious that so many posters here seem to think that Party, a multi-billion dollar publicly traded company, just sort of decided on a whim to cut off the skins without talking to the skins or looking at the contracts or anything.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, never thought they acted on a whim. This appears to have been very well planned from their end, and carried out in a way that as the poster stated, caught people with their pants down. Neither the sites nor the affiliates seem to have known this was coming yesterday.

It's the apparent secrecy and sudden action that makes me wonder if the skins may have some legal recourse. They may very well not. It will depend on the contracts, and to a degree, the skill of legal counsel for all involved.

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

[ QUOTE ]
It's the apparent secrecy and sudden action that makes me wonder if the skins may have some legal recourse. They may very well not.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think they have any recourse. They had a contract to play on the Iglobalmedia shared table platform. Guess what? They're still there.

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

[ QUOTE ]

I don't think they have any recourse. They had a contract to play on the Iglobalmedia shared table platform. Guess what? They're still there.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are probably right......if so, they had their contract very well worded. The skins could argue they entered into the contract with the understanding that "shared platform" meant "shared with Party platform" not a separate platform for the skins only. Not sure that argument would hold up though.

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I find it hilarious that so many posters here seem to think that Party, a multi-billion dollar publicly traded company, just sort of decided on a whim to cut off the skins without talking to the skins or looking at the contracts or anything.

[/ QUOTE ]

El D, the number of people that truly know nothing of the business landscape they are trying to make some $$$ from continues to astonish me!

Anyone that read thru PartyGamings financial release last month and listened to the CEO interview (available on cantos.com) knew something like this was coming, and soon!

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

Cantos.com article

Q.
You currently white label on behalf of 'skins', so first of all, what is your skins policy going forwards, and is PartyPartners your solution?

A.
Let me just start answering that by explaining the difference between what a skin is and what an affiliate is. An affiliate is someone who drives traffic to our sites. Someone might have a website called bestplacetoplaypoker.com. Someone goes to that site, they get redirected to PartyPoker and for that, they typically would get a commission on the "rake" generated by that player over time.

We have over 5,000 active affiliates (and an active affiliate is an affiliate who would get paid a cheque last month), which is a core strength within our marketing armoury.

At the same time a skin, of which we have four, is a white label. People play on their sites when they go on the screen and they see there, for example, Empire Poker but, behind the screen, is all the technology and all the tables of PartyPoker. So that is the difference between an affiliate and a skin.

Obviously your question about skins is a timely one. There were some very compelling reasons for us having skins when the business started, to drive player liquidity. Those compelling reasons don't exist today and from that point of view, we've made it clear that it's not our intention to add more 'skins' going forwards.

Re: Party fiasco - Surely someone must have known?
 

Actually, I would highlight these two statements...

"We have over 5,000 active affiliates... which is a core strength within our marketing armoury."

"Obviously your question about skins is a timely one. There were some very compelling reasons for us having skins when the business started, to drive player liquidity. Those compelling reasons don't exist today..."

If you actually listen to the interview, the power of these two statements hits home even more!