Rake increase... my thoughts

[krishanleong]

[ QUOTE ]
strive to move up in limits faster to reduce the punishing rake.

[/ QUOTE ]

Such a better solution.

Krishan

[DMBFan23]

yeah there are some zoo threads about this, but their new rake structure was designed to make bonus clearing harder, and they made the change silently right as they offered their reload bonus. very shady business. I'm not sure how much it affected the 5/10 games there

[flair1239]

Guys,

How does a Poker site make money?

How can they show a yearly increase in revenues?

Either by having people play more hands, adding new players, or increasing rake. Also to a lesser extent having existing players move to higher levels.

There are many more viable sites than there were a year ago. A quick glance through bonus whores, or other industry sites should bear this out.

So while the industry is growing, the growth is spread out over more sites. I can guarantee you that in the last year, the cost of maintaining a site has gone up, people have asked for raises, different vendors have raised rates, more effort has had to be put into advertising, a mass exodus of high volume players from Party poker to the skins [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img].

Party has shareholders to answer to, who expect yearly revenue/profit increases. Other sites that are not public have investors to appease or in the case of some sites parent companies that place certain demands on them as far as revenue.

I can practically guarantee you, that by this time next year there will be at least one if not two more increases in the rake cap. Party has already broken this ground by raking the 50/100 games for $5. Simaliar increases are sure to follow Maybe the new cap will be $3.25 or something like that.

So get used to it.

[pheasant tail (no 18)]

"For christ sakes, I just won $247 when I spiked my gutshot on the river. I knew that I should cold call the turn"

[ QUOTE ]
The most productive thing you can do is not think about it. Stick you head in the sand. Nothing you can do will change anything and the ill will/waste of energy IMO is counterproductive to playing good poker.


[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are largely right. We are in a real difficult situation. The reason that we can/will not take our business elsewhere (for the most part) is that losing players do not know the value of that extra $1 taken out of a 10 BB pot, or even a 3BB pot probably. If bad players/compulsive gamblers were good consumers w/ their gambling $, only like 2% of us (and not I) would make enough to bother w/ all this effort.

Lets just hope that PP uses the money to market more aggressively so that the games don't get much tougher.

[Alobar]

this is exact thought process that will have them pretty soon raking a max of $4 of $5. Will you'll choose to ignore it then too?

[SomethingClever]

I think Party et al is toast as soon as online gambling can be based in the US.

[gildwulf]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free--if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending--if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained--we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us! They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength but irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Patrick Henry. Nice.

What are your thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

If by holy cause of liberty you mean 'we're angry cause some huge corporation cut into our profit margins':P

-z

[DMBFan23]

and by invincible you mean 'basically forced to take it in the deuce hole'

[baronzeus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Seriously, these guys just don't care.

[/ QUOTE ]


Exactly.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's really not that simple. Arbitrarily assigning them motives and convictions (or lack thereof) because it makes you feel better about what's happening doesn't help. They may have, and likely did, put an incredible amount of thought into this. Maybe they didn't. But completely dismissing their abilitiy to care or think is stupid.

[/ QUOTE ]

You missed the point of my statement. Whether or not they put a lot of thought into this is not the point. If you put all the 2+2ers together, the hands we put into party is probably less than 5-8%. Moreover, most of the 2p2ers will stay with party regardless---i.e. most of us can't boycott because all the fish are on party and we need money.


Now take those 2-5% of hands that party MIGHT lose and compare it to the millions of extra dollars they are making with the increase in rake. You'll see that it isn't even close.


So my point is that if I was the president of Party gaming and I approved this change, I wouldn't give a [censored] about a several thousand players that might boycott if I increase the rake.

[gildwulf]

[ QUOTE ]
and by invincible you mean 'basically forced to take it in the deuce hole'

[/ QUOTE ]

NH...especially the use of deuce in a poker forum in this context.