Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Internet Gambling > Internet Gambling
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 10-06-2005, 04:55 PM
Supersetoy Supersetoy is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 109
Default Re: my letter to party (long), and their initial response

Some of us didn't even get a bonus this month.

I will post the response I receive to my email here.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-06-2005, 05:05 PM
Freudian Freudian is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 24
Default Re: my letter to party (long), and their initial response

[ QUOTE ]

I must be the only one not comparing this to a deposit bonus.
I did NOT have to make a deposit.
I do NOT have cashout restrictions while I clear this bonus.

For someone like me, and I suspect the majority, I dont want to have to deposit money each time a new bonus offer comes around. And I suspect the fish dont either. It appears that this offer will be embraced by the players that you make your living from, and not the people that make their living.

I appreciate a bonus that is based entirely off of my play and not on my ability to increase my bankroll through a deposit.

[/ QUOTE ]

Making a deposit is not something that has ever deterred me or the vast majority here from using a bonus. So that no deposit is needed is pretty much a non-factor.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-06-2005, 05:09 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: my letter to party (long), and their initial response

[ QUOTE ]
Making a deposit is not something that has ever deterred me or the vast majority here from using a bonus. So that no deposit is needed is pretty much a non-factor.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough. I suspect this bonus will be appreciated by 90% of their players, and trashed by the other 10%. (10%/90% on 2+2 [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] )
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-06-2005, 05:33 PM
buriedbeds buriedbeds is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 22
Default Re: my letter to party (long), and their initial response

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Making a deposit is not something that has ever deterred me or the vast majority here from using a bonus. So that no deposit is needed is pretty much a non-factor.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough. I suspect this bonus will be appreciated by 90% of their players, and trashed by the other 10%. (10%/90% on 2+2 [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] )

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree entirely; if your argument is that most people who play on there are NOT 2+2 types (i.e. obsessive poker players who would actually know the exact number of hands thay played in any given session/hour/day/week/month), then it's an even worse promotion. The average player you're describing does not play the 10,000+ hands/month required to earn the bonus. That's a WHOLE lot of play when you're going with a single table of .5/1-3/6.

If it were a rakeback promotion that worked *incermentally*, maybe you would have a point. As it is, this is just an extraordinarily annoying bonus (regardless of whether or not I have to deposit in order to get it).

Worst. Bonus. Ever.

-bb.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-06-2005, 05:41 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: my letter to party (long), and their initial response

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Making a deposit is not something that has ever deterred me or the vast majority here from using a bonus. So that no deposit is needed is pretty much a non-factor.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough. I suspect this bonus will be appreciated by 90% of their players, and trashed by the other 10%. (10%/90% on 2+2 [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] )

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree entirely; if your argument is that most people who play on there are NOT 2+2 types (i.e. obsessive poker players who would actually know the exact number of hands thay played in any given session/hour/day/week/month), then it's an even worse promotion. The average player you're describing does not play the 10,000+ hands/month required to earn the bonus. That's a WHOLE lot of play when you're going with a single table of .5/1-3/6.

If it were a rakeback promotion that worked *incermentally*, maybe you would have a point. As it is, this is just an extraordinarily annoying bonus (regardless of whether or not I have to deposit in order to get it).

Worst. Bonus. Ever.

-bb.

[/ QUOTE ]

Aha, you would have a point if everyone had to play the same number of hands to clear it. It appears to me, from reading others numbers, that they gave every player a different bonus amount/hands required. The total I am required to play is pretty consistent with what I play normally, slightly higher. I am guessing they pulled my past info and put that number in. If thats the case, then the average player will love the bonus because he only has to play what he normally does.

Very.decent.bonus.and.much.appreciated.by.some
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10-06-2005, 05:45 PM
Nick-Zack Nick-Zack is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 161
Default Re: my letter to party (long), and their initial response

[ QUOTE ]
Am I the only one that thought this new bonus promo was cool?

[/ QUOTE ]

I play mainly SNG's so this bonus is great for me.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-06-2005, 05:52 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: my letter to party (long), and their initial response

[ QUOTE ]
Making a deposit is not something that has ever deterred me or the vast majority here from using a bonus. So that no deposit is needed is pretty much a non-factor.

[/ QUOTE ]
I believe the idea, wrong or right, is this:

Player A no longer plays at Party. Party wants him back, so they offer him a deposit bonus.

Player B plays at Party. Party wants him to continue to play, so they offer to give him FREE MONEY for playing at the same rate he has in the past.

To Party, player B should be ecstatic, because they don't have to change their playing habits but still get free money.

However, a number of people will ONLY play where they get free money the cheapest. These people probably racked up their hands in the past not just because they liked playing at Party, but because they were chasing significant bonuses.

Unfortunately, a strong negative response might lead Party to conclude that retaining those users would be too expensive to even bother with in the future. It can't be that significant a percentage - and definitely much smaller than the number of casual players they'd like to lure back with deposit bonuses.

In fact, Party might even be trying to identify those users so that they can stop offering them bonuses altogether. I wouldn't be surprised to see even smaller bonuses, or none at all, to players who don't clear the current points-related offers.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-06-2005, 05:56 PM
buriedbeds buriedbeds is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 22
Default Re: my letter to party (long), and their initial response

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Making a deposit is not something that has ever deterred me or the vast majority here from using a bonus. So that no deposit is needed is pretty much a non-factor.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough. I suspect this bonus will be appreciated by 90% of their players, and trashed by the other 10%. (10%/90% on 2+2 [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img] )

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree entirely; if your argument is that most people who play on there are NOT 2+2 types (i.e. obsessive poker players who would actually know the exact number of hands thay played in any given session/hour/day/week/month), then it's an even worse promotion. The average player you're describing does not play the 10,000+ hands/month required to earn the bonus. That's a WHOLE lot of play when you're going with a single table of .5/1-3/6.

If it were a rakeback promotion that worked *incermentally*, maybe you would have a point. As it is, this is just an extraordinarily annoying bonus (regardless of whether or not I have to deposit in order to get it).

Worst. Bonus. Ever.

-bb.

[/ QUOTE ]

Aha, you would have a point if everyone had to play the same number of hands to clear it. It appears to me, from reading others numbers, that they gave every player a different bonus amount/hands required. The total I am required to play is pretty consistent with what I play normally, slightly higher. I am guessing they pulled my past info and put that number in. If thats the case, then the average player will love the bonus because he only has to play what he normally does.

Very.decent.bonus.and.much.appreciated.by.some

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, mine's not consistent with what I play on average in a month, though it is an amount I have done before. Many, many, many, many, many other people have said that it is not consistent with what they play in a month on that single site. As best I can tell, it is at least partially random.

Furthermore, the amount required of me is particularly inconsistent with the fact that I've started playing more and more SNGs. It is an absolutely abysmal promotion, it seems, for everyone who does not fall under your specific circumstances. Particularly because the amount of raked hands you'll have to play is among the lowest I've seen. Mine is in excess of twice your amount, and I do not play anywhere near full time - I have a job and at least a little bit of a life (that distracts me from my poker playing, as opposed to the other way around... [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] ). Additionally, your bonus is for more than mine is, yet, by your logic, I should get a bonus of at least twice yours since I play so much more than you do. The whole thing is absurd and seemingly at least partially arbitrary. If it wasn't, everyone on here would not be so upset.

In your specific case, however, they seem to have hit the sweet spot in terms of payoff/realistic ability to meet goal. Enjoy. I, and many like me, however, am not going to throw a gigantic monkeywrench into my life so I can meet this absurd raked hand requirement for very little payoff. As a semi-serious player, I'd found up until now that just playing at the one site, which gave me a good bonus once a month, was enough to make me happy. For the first time, it looks like I might be finding another place to play. Not because I particularly want to, but because it just makes more sense to put my play where it pays the best. Which, it seems, might no longer be PartyPoker.

-bb.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-06-2005, 07:04 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: my letter to party (long), and their initial response

[ QUOTE ]
Mine is in excess of twice your amount, and I do not play anywhere near full time
Additionally, your bonus is for more than mine is, yet, by your logic, I should get a bonus of at least twice yours since I play so much more than you do.-bb.

[/ QUOTE ]

Either I have been drinking or you are seeing imaginary numbers.

[ QUOTE ]
the amount required of me is particularly inconsistent with the fact that I've started playing more and more SNGs.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
and I do not play anywhere near full time - I have a job

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
As a semi-serious player, I'd found up until now that just playing at the one site, which gave me a good bonus once a month, was enough to make me happy.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are a player that plays nowhere near full-time, plays mostly sit&gos and will leave if he doesn’t get an easy to clear bonus every single month.
Somehow I don’t think party is going to be crying if you leave.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-06-2005, 07:35 PM
NiR NiR is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 75
Default Re: my letter to party (long), and their initial response

am i the only one who thinks this will be the EASIEST BONUS TO CLEAR? deposit 500$ wait a week and bam u get 1000 pts. wait a couple days and deposit another 500$ ..wait a week and bam another 1000$ and the points u have remaining just play and earn them... simple!!! im a genius.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.