Party CFO conversation: Trip report

imported_anacardo · #1 10-10-2005, 02:17 PM

An anonymous 2+2er friend of mine just got off the phone with Party's CFO. Here's what he had to say:

-PartyPoker regards the high-volume, serious gambler as an acceptable, but sub-optimal customer. They see their future growth primarily in terms of the new casino platform they're launching - they want the recreational gamblers playing blackjack, roulette, etc.

-Party split from its skins precisely because of its plans for a full-scale casino platform. They couldn't put the skins' customers on the casino platform for whatever reason, and for some reason, keeping casino players in the poker network is too difficult. (Sorry for the vagueness; he was pretty tight-lipped throughout.) As such, they have chosen this time to start regarding the skins not as partners, but as competitors.

-Party is genuinely surprised by the negative market reaction. They thought their obvious genius would be a big hit today. [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]

-Party is not ruling out rakeback, but has no immediate plans. I don't know how that jibes with the affiliates' impression that this will all be resolved successfully within the next few days.

That's pretty much it.

In short: My impression, along with the impressions of a lot of other people, I guess, was that Party regards us primarily as a hassle, and that they see their business model as catering to an ever-rotating group of recreational gamblers. This conversation would seem to strengthen that impression.

(BTW: I know literally nothing else. Please do not PM me to hit me up for secrets that I don't have.)

#2 10-10-2005, 02:20 PM

So basically they are deciding that their highest volume customers are behind the low volume ones?

Preferring to focus on the dwindling stream of new gamboolers that will dump in a casino rather than on a poker table?

Great.

Wonder what will happen to starluck.

Thank you for the post and information.

jakethebake · #3 10-10-2005, 02:30 PM

[ QUOTE ]
So basically they are deciding that their highest volume customers are behind the low volume ones?

[/ QUOTE ]

High volume, but also much lower margin because they play through skins.

lacky · #4 10-10-2005, 02:39 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Preferring to focus on the dwindling stream of new gamboolers that will dump in a casino rather than on a poker table?

[/ QUOTE ]

sounds the same as all other casinos. the poker room is there to bring in costumers and is a minor money maker in most casinos, sounds like party is trying to transform itself from a poker room to a casino. I don't like that choice, and think it's short sighted, but it's clearly what they are trying for.

[ QUOTE ]
So basically they are deciding that their highest volume customers are behind the low volume ones?

[/ QUOTE ]

All party has to do to keep high volume players is provide soft games. I would love the bonuses and rakeback and TV's shipped to my house to go on forever, but even with all that gone I woke up the next morning and went to work playing poker, just did it on party instead of Euro. If the fish go away and the games get bad we will all leave. If they stay good we will all stay. Clearly they know that too.

Steve

Baulucky · #5 10-10-2005, 02:20 PM

Nice input.

scotty34 · #6 10-10-2005, 02:21 PM

I don't see why they don't realize that if all the "pros" left, the next best chunk of players would start to win all the money. Many of them would realize how much money they are making, and decide to "turn pro" themselves. Because poker is a game with a range of skills, not just simply "sharks" and "fish", it is an inevitability that there will be winning players who take money from the crappier players and take it out of circulation.

imported_anacardo · #7 10-10-2005, 02:23 PM

Right. These guys seem to have a really poor grasp of the nature of professional gambling from a player's perspective. Don't they have consultants for these things?

phillydilly · #8 10-10-2005, 02:24 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see why they don't realize that if all the "pros" left, the next best chunk of players would start to win all the money.

[/ QUOTE ]

maybe thats why they dont care about the "pros", because they will always be there. If all of twoplustwo leaves, then a new bunch will spring up with "should i go pro questions".
I guess this makes sense, If one group of pros is always going to be replaced by the next, why cater to it?
what you really need is fresh money coming in

imported_anacardo · #9 10-10-2005, 02:26 PM

It seems to me that some stability is preferable to constant turnover in one's customer base, esp. when you'd be giving up next to nothing.

Maybe I'm just weak-tight?

Shaun · #10 10-10-2005, 06:37 PM

The market will adjust to Party's "treachery" and there will still be viable options for pros. This is a minor inconvenience. Frankly, whatever makes it harder for pros and better for fish is fine with me. I want the pond to remain stocked.