Paying less rake sites

[GrannyMae]

Where is all this marketing cash coming from?


2 banner ads and one print ad is not so much money. while i hate to say this, it probably came from the operators pockets and will be recouped with the revenue from the membership fees paid in the first two to three months. i hope they don't dip into player funds to cover it, but they should not need to.

the whole point here is that they are charging a monthly fee (which goes to $30 next month), they pass on the money movement charges to the players, and therefore their only real expenses are these few initial ads. i don't think we will see them advertising 'everywhere' like party. they will advertise in CP and here, and hope that word of mouth does the rest. the word of mouth crew just needs to tone it down, or the concept will be poisoined by the method of delivery rather than the product itself.

let the room build on its own merits instead of forcing it down our throats. it will take longer to get the 1,000 regular player base needed to move to the next level, but there will be much less hate directed toward the style of the current campaign.

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
saw your avatar pic of armstrong, alobar. Hey, lance - or rather the US postal - better watch out for their old team mate, roberto herras in the mountains. He could break some cyclists there.

I'm putting some $$ on roberto for the whole thing (25-1 Ladbrokes) [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I really like herras....I don't think he has the time trail skills to win it all tho, but it will be fun to watch him in the mountains now that he is his own boss. This is definately going to be the toughest tour for Lance, there are a handful of people that could legitimately win. I kinda wouldn't mind seeing Ulrich win it either, coming in 2nd place 4 times to lance must really suck!

[Dingo Puppet]

Post deleted by Mat Sklansky

[GrannyMae]

watch your mouth hoppy

[MrDannimal]

It's simple for most of the posters here. All issues about site reliability aside (will I get paid? Is it clean?), it comes down to one thing:

If we earn more paying rake per hand then we do not paying any rake, we stay put. If someone can make $10/hr at Party, (even if it would be $12/hr if they kept their rake) but only $8/hr at PayNoRakeWhoo!.com, then they should stay at Party.

And there's the sticking point. Fish don't know the math behind rake. They don't know how much it costs them. For crying out loud, they don't know you can get hand histories, or that you can trak your play with PokerTracker, or that if you read some quality books you can get better.

So for the time being, any no-rake room is going to have the "cream" of the crop. The people who know rake eats into earn, and are good enough to care. I don't want to play against those people! Sure, the very good players can win more or less anywhere. Most of us aren't them. Most of us are the average/good player who can beat "good" games, but would struggle at games with 4 or more average or better players.

So it's a catch-22. To draw players, you need fish, and it's VERY difficult to draw fish to any new site, because fish are by nature unaware of the main strength of the new site (no rake).

I think any structure that helps the average/better players without hurting the fish is a good one (in this case, the house is conceding profit to the better players). Then again, I think zero-emission engines are a great idea. I'm not buying a car with one until it has a real cost equivalent to the car I have now (environmental concerns aside).

[Syntax]

[ QUOTE ]
So for the time being, any no-rake room is going to have the "cream" of the crop. The people who know rake eats into earn, and are good enough to care.

[/ QUOTE ]

The good players know all about the rake and where the best games are but they are going to play at a site against the best of the best instead. Hmmm, interesting idea. The sharks would rather play against other sharks then pay any rake. Im going to have to think about this one for a while. Syntax out.