[robinsons]

[ QUOTE ]
As an invester I'm concerned that Party would have a 10% of gross revenue cost for player retention that really isn't retaining players. Once an affiliate brings the player to party, continuing to pay for that player 5 years down the road to a 3rd party is just silly. What value does the affiliate provide in this case? How can you justify that type of expenditure?

Over abd above this you will likely put together a retention plan for these customers anyway, plus you have a set cost for player aquisition. You are in effect paying for new players and paying double for old ones.

[/ QUOTE ]

The great thing about the model from party's perspective is that paying this way (% of MGR) they only pay the affiliate some of the revenue that the player generates, rather than paying $100 for someone who deposits, plays a few hands and then gets bored and cashes out. It also rewards affiliates who get players who are more likely to play a lot on the site.