Party vs skins - a rationale discussion
 

So now we have separate and unequal sites - Party and everyone else. What does this mean to the quality of play?

I would suspect that more novices will play at Party - leading to an average lower quality of play.

The tricky calculation will be related to how much difference there is. I suspect that quality of competition will out weigh rakeback considerations.

It will take some time to test this hypothesis. I suspect that over the next few weeks we will better understand this dichotomy.

In the meantime, remember the famous saying:

When God gives you lemons, make lemonade

Re: Party vs skins - a rationale discussion
 

[ QUOTE ]
I would suspect that more novices will play at Party - leading to an average lower quality of play.


[/ QUOTE ]

Your deductive reasoning skills are amazing.

Re: Party vs skins - a rationale discussion
 

Sarcasm is the best you can do?

Re: Party vs skins - a rationale discussion
 

The real question is what will the skins do to attract new players?

Party spends big money on advertising to attract new players.The skins used rakeback to steal Party's big rake payers while letting them continue to play on Party's tables. Party has effectively killed that little loophole by providing the skins with their own tables.

Do the skins have the means or will to seek out new players(fish not rakeback seekers)?
How many non-rakeback players do they have now?

Re: Party vs skins - a rationale discussion
 

Here's a thought...

Most of the winning players will get crappier rb and move to Party Poker

Leaving the skins...

so the skins will be full of donks

possible?

probably not =[

Re: Party vs skins - a rationale discussion
 

markets are efficient, In a month or so you will be able to make about the same at party with no rakeback, or on the skins with rakeback. It will be less on both than we could make last week, unfortunately. That's my guess.

Steve

Re: Party vs skins - a rationale discussion
 

And another thought...

Smart poker players will realize that fish are more valuable than RB, so they will all move to Party. So, the skins will be easier.

I think what Party is thinking is that the skins primarily operate based upon RB from strong players. The strong players will realize that since Party spends the money to attract the fish, the fish will be on Party and the everyone will end up moving back to Party. The skins die, and Party will happily ever after.

Not happy about this, but it IS what I would do if I was Party.

The only reason the skins exist today is because of RB, not because of any advertising they do. The skins evolved into a parasite and now the host (Party) is trying to kill them.

What do you think the percentage of the players on the skins didn't originally come from Party?

Of course, I hope I'm wrong.

--------------------Jeff