Affiliates informing on Affiliates

[Flawed]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
however, the ones giving rakeback are much worse for poker cost increases than those who do not.

[/ QUOTE ]

Granny, Please explain this to me:

Affiliate A brings in players to Party Poker.
He keeps his 20%/25% for himself.
Cost for Party poker = 20%/25%

Affiliate B brings in players to Party Poker.
He gives back 75%/90% off what he gets from the site.
Cost for Party Poker = Still 20%/25%!!


How is that worse for the poker cost?

[/ QUOTE ]

Affiliate A brings in new players who probably never knew about party poker, so affiliate A makes party 75% If not for affiliate A party would not have 60k players

Affiliate B brings in players who were planing on signing up with party so it costs party 25% or they have players open new accounts which costs party or the real affiliate that reffered them 25%

who cares if the real affiliate is ripped off 25%? well if they werent their average pay out would be a lot higher so party would not have to offer even more to their affiliates like they have been doing. so even if affiliate b steals a player from affiliate a it costs party money.

[GrannyMae]

How is that worse for the poker cost?

it is just moving players around to different trackers, costing everyone money.

[GrannyMae]

much better explanation here froggy.

[Czech_Razor]

[ QUOTE ]


Affiliate A brings in new players who probably never knew about party poker, so affiliate A makes party 75% If not for affiliate A party would not have 60k players

Affiliate B brings in players who were planing on signing up with party so it costs party 25% or they have players open new accounts which costs party or the real affiliate that reffered them 25%

who cares if the real affiliate is ripped off 25%? well if they werent their average pay out would be a lot higher so party would not have to offer even more to their affiliates like they have been doing. so even if affiliate b steals a player from affiliate a it costs party money.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry, but the analysis for Affiliate B is flawed. If rakeback weren't available, I would still signup through a non-rakeback affiliate, such as 2+2. I'd rather give a fraction of my rake to 2+2 than to Party. So again, how does rakeback change that someone is going to be taking a piece of Party's rake?

@

[Synergistic Explosions]

I think Party could lose a lot of players if they indeed do close all the rake rebating affiliates accounts. Once the big rake producers don't get their rake rebates from their affiliates, they will no doubt move somewhere else where they can get one.

[jrobb83]

[ QUOTE ]
How is that worse for the poker cost?

it is just moving players around to different trackers, costing everyone money

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong, Granny, it's costing affiliates money. It won't cost me money untill Party starts raising the rake, which ain't gonna happen because the online poker market is very competitive and pretty homogenous.

[MrFroggyX]

I understand your point.

But I think you have some flaws in your way off thinking:

Flaw 1:
A lot off signups would not signup with Party or skins if it weren’t for the Rake Back Deals. Instead they would stay with some other site that they might like better.. e.g. PokerStars, Paradise and so on. That means that Party gets a lot off action from Players that would not otherwise play on Party.

Flaw 2:
I'm an affiliate. I give rake back to people. My signups consist off: About 25% signups from this forum. 25% Signups from another Swedish forum. And 50% real life people. Friends and Family. And Friends Friends. Would they have signed up for Party or Empire if it weren’t for me? Maybe.. But not very likely. (Beacuse they hade never heard off party or empire.. lol)

So please tell me, Why would I be a bigger scum than the [censored] greedy affiliates that trick other people to click/ insert their code and not telling the signup how much money they makes? That is something I don't understand.

I don't understand why a thing that is good for the poker community, that brings more money back to the players and the poker community as a hole, is frowned upon by other players? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[lefty rosen]

Party had many money making deals for players when they first started ie minimum balances every month. They had lower 1 table tourney fees on the 100 dollar tables. They had way more bonuses. At this point they are a bunch of fat cats who look for more ways to drain the blood out of the bad players who frequent the site. I can't forget their smarmy 2/4 rake increase and now their equally smarmy jackpot over taxation...... [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[LinusKS]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand why a thing that is good for the poker community, that brings more money back to the players and the poker community as a hole, is frowned upon by other players? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Because if Party just gave rake-back to players, instead of going through affiliates, everything would be above-board, and a lot simpler.

[jrobb83]

[ QUOTE ]

Party had many money making deals for players when they first started ie minimum balances every month. They had lower 1 table tourney fees on the 100 dollar tables. They had way more bonuses. At this point they are a bunch of fat cats who look for more ways to drain the blood out of the bad players who frequent the site. I can't forget their smarmy 2/4 rake increase and now their equally smarmy jackpot over taxation......

[/ QUOTE ]

None of this is a significant increase in the cost of playing poker. The jackpot tables aren't a rake increase, just a different, slightly more expensive product.

The Party execs are fat cats, which is why they took away some of the promotions that they had when they were starting out. And I really don't mind whatsoever them maximizing their profit at every opportunity. You do the same to them. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]