Rake increase... my thoughts

[grouchie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

The $3 rake is pretty much on par with the rest of the market (i.e. Pokerstars) right?

[/ QUOTE ]

No. I'm not sure about other limits, but,

Stars takes $83.93 off a 3/6 6m table every 100 hands.
Party takes $112.26.

[/ QUOTE ]

but what are the average pot sizes for those samples?

[MicroBob]

Boycotting or complaining about the $3 max-rake would have the same effect as boycotting or complaining about the fact that they take any rake at all.

They will just laugh at you and not care.
To think otherwise is silly.


Hypothetical example:
A baseball team raises their average ticket price from $14 to $17.
9-zillion fans call and write to complain about how unfair it is that they have to pay more to support their favorite team.
Baseball team says "oh...We didn't know that the fans wouldn't like it. Lets lower the price back to $14. Actually, screw that, lets just let all the fans in for free."


I agree with the original poster's sentiment that you should jsut deal with it (either play there...or head somewhere else..your choice).
I would not be surprised if some sites started pushing the rake up to $4-max at some point (somehow, some way) and if they decide to do that there STILL isn't anything that anyone can do to stop it.


Play your best game...determine whether you think it's the most worthwhile place to take your business...head elsewhere if it isn't.

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
Boycotting or complaining about the $3 max-rake would have the same effect as boycotting or complaining about the fact that they take any rake at all.

They will just laugh at you and not care.
To think otherwise is silly.


Hypothetical example:
A baseball team raises their average ticket price from $14 to $17.
9-zillion fans call and write to complain about how unfair it is that they have to pay more to support their favorite team so they all decide to not go, and the baseball team standing to lose millions lowers their price back to $14

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

now whether or not we as a group have the power to do that, is debatable. But to say there is nothing we can do about it, is jut wrong

[MicroBob]

Except that in the baseball example the idea of everyone leaving has NEVER happened.

I worked in minor-league baseball for several years.
Many times this exact scenario would play out....some of the loyal fans would threaten to never come back and would cuss-out the front-office for raising their precious ticket-prices.
The front-office is in the business of customer-relations...but they could care less about whether 100 or 1000 fans actually SAY they are leaving.


Conceiveably...if you got all the high-volume 2+2'ers to leave party and skins completely you could have some leverage to earn a higher rake-back (via something like O-Doyle's high-volume type of organization).
But I think even this is a long-shot.

The incentives they will provide for players to come back will be in the form of marketing, advertising, affiliate-type promotions, occasional bonuses, etc.
Lowering the rake will NEVER be considered by Party as an option to entice new players to try it out....or former players to return.

It just ain't gonna happen.

[Wynton]

Does anyone really believe that there is more than a .00001 chance that anything we could do, alone or together, will make a difference?

I can't criticize anyone for making the effort, but c'mon now, recognize the obvious fact that Party is in control here.

[helpmeout]

I think it'll have an effect on the number of extra tables people play because their edge will be much lower.

This cant be that bad.

[Bellagibro]

[ QUOTE ]
Does anyone really believe that there is more than a .00001 chance that anything we could do, alone or together, will make a difference?

I can't criticize anyone for making the effort, but c'mon now, recognize the obvious fact that Party is in control here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well I still like to be kissed before I get f*#ked

[KidPokerX]

agreed.