Corporate Greed Changing Face of Online Poker Forever

[Synergistic Explosions]

[ QUOTE ]
What do you suppose would be good for you as a player, thinking industry wide?

[/ QUOTE ]

What would be good for all players is for sites not to have the mindset they can raise and tweak rakes on a quarterly basis to increase net revenue. They should be thinking more in terms of increasing volume of players. But they aren't it seems. Rake increases are more the norm now than the exception.

Rake increases could one day make it unfeasible for me to continue playing. So yes I'm worried about this trend we are seeing.

[randomstumbl]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What do you suppose would be good for you as a player, thinking industry wide?

[/ QUOTE ]

What would be good for all players is for sites not to have the mindset they can raise and tweak rakes on a quarterly basis to increase net revenue. They should be thinking more in terms of increasing volume of players. But they aren't it seems. Rake increases are more the norm now than the exception.

Rake increases could one day make it unfeasible for me to continue playing. So yes I'm worried about this trend we are seeing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Card rooms provide a service. Bigger cardrooms provide a better service and are able to charge more for it. This is really basic economics.

[excession]

It's a pretty open and competitive market. The cost of entry isn't that big and there are a lot of sportsbook/betting companies with plenty of money interested in getting into it; it's the getting of 2000+ players online at the same time to make a site viable that is trickier, unless you use an existng network.

The reason that sites get away with rake increases is that Joe Average player just doesn't notice them - they are a stealth charge. I think that's why historically the sites don't offer rakeback very openly but use cash bonuses instead (so as not to draw attention to the rake). The logical thing for sites to do is some sort of automatic sliding scale rakeback deal- the more rake generated the higher % goes back to the player - to encourage the higher stake and regular players - but that just doesn't sell as well as 'we'll give you $100'.

Actually Party has one aim now which is to maintain/increase its share price. The spat with Empire/Eurobet damaged it even if it does increase revenue.

The abolition of bonuses is really going to hurt the Party player numbers too - very soon PokerStars will be the No. 1 room by player numbers. I think Party are dropping the ball to be honest..I see their scheme - force out the skins and then they can abolish bonuses and offer 2c/hand at best to those who ask, thus massively increasing their profit/player, but I think they understimate the mobility of the player base..

UB's reputation has been badly damaged by its actions in the PokerShare debacle (and it's not that big a room anyway these days).

The genuine networks, like Prima and Crypto, aren't set up so that there is one big player who can lean on the others if they are getting too 'generous' with the player base - and as more rooms join up to them you would expect to see increased competition for the player base...

I'm not sure 'corporate greed' is working out that well for those that are enagaging in it..

[BaggyAnt]

What will be really intersting to see is the reaction of players if OnLine rooms were to increase the rake on STT's and MTT's - at the moment it is pretty obvious to ALL players what Rake is being taken - IF they could get away with rising the tournament/STT fee with no noticeable affect then the companies will have carte blanche to do what the hell they like

[rusty JEDI]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We try only to impress players ... We are not beholden to the fads of the public capital markets and hitting daily or monthly net income figures.

We make money, yes. We would like to make more, through provision of online poker services. That is our underlying business, not marketing or selling shares to public investors.

Truepoker CEO

[/ QUOTE ] your really impressed us with the rake increase [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Adding decimals to the system for small blinds and what not was always claimed as too much work for the programmers. However, at the opportunity to increase rake they found a way.

rJ

[excession]

I rememeber when Paradise was No. 1 - Party are overestimating their advantage - the only reason so many folks played there was the generous bonuses - with them gone we'll see what happens to their numbers..if the numbers drop the hardcore players will follow the fish..if PS started some sort of sliding rakeback for regular players they could take over Party as No.1 in a few weeks IMHO..

If Party ever loses No 1 spot their share price will crash and they will have to use all that capital they are sitting on to 'buy back' the players with (guess what) tempting new bonuses..

[Uglyowl]

There are sites out there offering great deals to players right now. Party, Truepoker, and UltimateBet just aren't them.

Take your business elsewhere and you will be happy [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[FlFishOn]

"... is for sites not to have the mindset they can raise and tweak rakes on a quarterly basis to increase net revenue..."

You suggest removing the capitalism from business. That is childish in it's simplicity and also impossible.

[FlFishOn]

"...the companies will have carte blanche to do what the hell they like..."

This is typical lefty pap.

YOU allow a company to do something! YOU buy their gasoline at $3 a gallon! YOU pay $3 a hand rake! No company can survive by screwing all it's customers (Unregulated monopolies like utilities excepted).

[Self Made]

"Unregulated monopolies like utilities excepted?" In the US? They're heavily (and illogically) regulated, government guaranteed monopolies actually. In fact, monopolies are pretty much a myth, except for those created by government. Microsoft? Not without competition, and they'll lose out eventually. Remember the government's antitrust case against IBM? Settled after IBM was no longer a monopoly... due to natural competition. Monopolies are fleeting in capitalism. The only ones that last are the ones created by government.

And what's this about Party eliminating bonuses? I never heard that. I think my affiliate link still gives 20%.

And Party lost value because of their growth warning, not because of anything to do with Empire.

And Empire's the best-run company in the business. Declining share price doesn't change that. Stop complaining about the share price. Do you hold it? I hope they stay independent, or are a buyer (e.g. Playtech), because in the long run the best management will produce the most valuable company. I'd hate to see Empire's talent working for the people at Party... unless Party has the sense to put the Empire people in charge of marketing... or everything.