[excession]

It's a pretty open and competitive market. The cost of entry isn't that big and there are a lot of sportsbook/betting companies with plenty of money interested in getting into it; it's the getting of 2000+ players online at the same time to make a site viable that is trickier, unless you use an existng network.

The reason that sites get away with rake increases is that Joe Average player just doesn't notice them - they are a stealth charge. I think that's why historically the sites don't offer rakeback very openly but use cash bonuses instead (so as not to draw attention to the rake). The logical thing for sites to do is some sort of automatic sliding scale rakeback deal- the more rake generated the higher % goes back to the player - to encourage the higher stake and regular players - but that just doesn't sell as well as 'we'll give you $100'.

Actually Party has one aim now which is to maintain/increase its share price. The spat with Empire/Eurobet damaged it even if it does increase revenue.

The abolition of bonuses is really going to hurt the Party player numbers too - very soon PokerStars will be the No. 1 room by player numbers. I think Party are dropping the ball to be honest..I see their scheme - force out the skins and then they can abolish bonuses and offer 2c/hand at best to those who ask, thus massively increasing their profit/player, but I think they understimate the mobility of the player base..

UB's reputation has been badly damaged by its actions in the PokerShare debacle (and it's not that big a room anyway these days).

The genuine networks, like Prima and Crypto, aren't set up so that there is one big player who can lean on the others if they are getting too 'generous' with the player base - and as more rooms join up to them you would expect to see increased competition for the player base...

I'm not sure 'corporate greed' is working out that well for those that are enagaging in it..