Basic math

[EvanJC]

i too disagree

[SomethingClever]

[ QUOTE ]
More to the point, every one of these outraged MTTAGs will go back to Party without rakeback, myself included.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe that those who play 4+ tables of 10/20 and up will.

I sure won't though, because I can find lower limit games that are just as good elsewhere.

[grinin]

One of the best posts this year!

Congrats, great thoughts!
It's a shame we do not have a representative to present our side of the labor dispute. I think the only way we can do this is to not play at Party until some acceptable from of rakeback is implemented. That is pretty much what I had planned to do anyway, however I expect a lot of our fellow proletariat will not be able to ween themselves from the Party teat so easily.

[mtdoak]

Here's what I don't get. Every multitabler who plays lets say 10 hrs a week should be that much more important than the casual player, because winners and losers alike all pay rake. Why should sites pay to have high volume players? Same reasons why casinos give more comps to high rollers. Because the profit margin on each multitabler/high volume player is huge. Look at how much rake you have in Poker tracker. Its huge. Giving 25% of that back to a player who contributes that much rake is fine, because, they are still making 75% of their rake, which is much much better than 0!!

[Sniper]

[ QUOTE ]
10% account for 70% of Party's revenue and people are arguing that multi-tabling TAGs are irrelevant. It's ridiculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

2 points...

1. only a small percentage of the 10% are multitabling tags.

2. those 10% were playing on party, not empire [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[StellarWind]

[ QUOTE ]
Here's what I don't get. Every multitabler who plays lets say 10 hrs a week should be that much more important than the casual player, because winners and losers alike all pay rake. Why should sites pay to have high volume players? Same reasons why casinos give more comps to high rollers. Because the profit margin on each multitabler/high volume player is huge. Look at how much rake you have in Poker tracker. Its huge. Giving 25% of that back to a player who contributes that much rake is fine, because, they are still making 75% of their rake, which is much much better than 0!!

[/ QUOTE ]
Reread my post with the following in mind.

From an economic perspective the winning players in a poker room are workers and the losing players are the real customers.

I have never suggested that the good players are more important than the bad players. The opposite is true because without players who lose money there is nothing. Nevetheless the winning players perform a valuable function and Party needs to think about us. They don't need to shower money on us but it is in their best interest to remain competitive with other poker rooms and other careers.

I also think that in the short run it would be wise for party to do a little extra because of the impending war for market share. In the last few days I've seen a number of smaller sites that would become much more competitive if they could attract just a few more pros to play in their marginal games. For example, one site oscilates between no 5/10 games and five full tables. If they could just keep that game running more consistently it would attract more fish and become a self-sustaining profit center. The increased revenue would allow them to spend more on marketing and software and begin taking the next step up the ladder.

The last thing party should be doing is making it easy for its competitors to grow. When it comes to competition an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

[bobdibble]

If anyone has any ins with Party managment, they should forward them StellarWind's thread.

[arcticfox]

You are missing one important part - for every multi-tabling TAG who leaves, there will be a new winner who will decide to start playing more poker to take his place. Why? Because the number of fish at Party will not reduce due to the abolition of rakeback, and if a load of profitable TAGs leave then there will be a load more players who were not that profitable when the better TAGs were around who will now be making all the money and increasing the hours/tables they play. Its actually more imporatant for Party to keep having the fish there than getting the pros there as so long as the games are eaisly beatable, new pros will be popping up to take the money for all those people on their high horses about rakeback.

Plus Party will undoubtedly introduce some sort of direct rakeback system not through affiliates which may not be as generous as old rakeback but will give high volume players a reason to stay.

[scotty34]

I would consider the "workforce" of a poker site more to being a prop player. I think a good equivalent for us is strippers. The strippers pay the strip club a fee to perform, and they make a ton of money from all the meatheads around the table throwing it at them. The meatheads get their entertainment, the stripper gets her profits (on good nights), and the strip joint always gets their cut. Win-win-win [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[arcticfox]

Thats a good analogy, but remember that the strippers go where the most meatheads are who tip the best, not where the daily rate they have to pay is the lowest!

[img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]