The opposite of rake back

[FlFishOn]

Party and all skins get together and run their player database and pull out these players: Longterm winners (a steady cash-out trail) that multi-table. Each player is given a simple choice, you now pay quadruple rake or your account is closed. You choose.

If I was in charge I'd consider it. Where you gonna go? You wanna play in my well stocked fish pond I want you to pay your fair share.

There would be a serious gnome stampeed but that's not gonna get it done long term. You will find it difficult to open new Neteller etc. accounts every two months. As a winning multi-tabler you leave a data footprint that's damn easy to spot.

Think of what happens at Party. The fish now bleed their chips off to the site instead of the multi-leaches or the leaches cough up a little kickback. It's the American way!
The fish will also have better games, likely boosting the site overall.

Feel free to construct your own nightmare.

[Custer]

A big question facing the industry is "What is the biggest constraint on play, time or money?"

If its money, then your scenario and any that limit winners make some sense. If its time, however, any site pushes away the high volume multitablers will really hurt itself.

[archmagi]

[ QUOTE ]
any site pushes away the high volume multitablers will really hurt itself.

[/ QUOTE ]

but the argument is that the multitablers won't leave, because they have to play where the fishes are.

[FlFishOn]

"But the argument is that the multitablers won't leave, because they have to play where the fishes are. "

Just so. How much would a $80K / year winner kick back in order to secure his income stream? It's easy to figure if you can quantify the value of his 2nd choice. I think it might be as much as 20 - 30%.

[Freudian]

Of course there is a point where the expected return of playing against poor players isn't worth the extra rake.

Besides this, the fishyness of Party is vastly overrated. Many high volume players would earn as much on Prima and Crypto.

[FlFishOn]

"Besides this, the fishyness of Party is vastly overrated."

Certainly true but where else can you play as many tables as easily? A large portion of Party's attraction is the volume of hands that can be played per hour.

[JRussell]

[ QUOTE ]
Besides this, the fishyness of Party is vastly overrated. Many high volume players would earn as much on Prima and Crypto.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is so true. It's amazing that more people don't realize this.

[poker-penguin]

[ QUOTE ]
Besides this, the fishyness of Party is vastly overrated. Many high volume players would earn as much on Prima and Crypto.

[/ QUOTE ]
SHHHHHH!

[Rudbaeck]

[ QUOTE ]
Many high volume players would earn as much on Prima and Crypto.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd love to play on Crypto, but the software is so slow. When a 6-max game of 3/6 (where there are no whores who take the full time to decide to milk the hourly bonus) deals fewer hands per hour than a 10-max game at Party I just cry.

[sumdumguy]

[ QUOTE ]
A big question facing the industry is "What is the biggest constraint on play, time or money?"

[/ QUOTE ]
More often entertainment money is the issue. If budget were not an issue, recs with little time play higher limits.