Hey Dikshit

[Sintax]

Business 101

[ QUOTE ]
Studies have shown that the cost for acqusition, on a per customer basis, may be 5 to 10 times that of customer retention. Such numerical advantages also extend to winning back former customers. For instance, research has proven that there is a 5 to 20 percent chance of converting a prospect to first-time customer status, yet there is also a 20 to 40 percent chance of reacquiring a defected customer.

[/ QUOTE ]

You know what to do...

You're forgetting the fact that pros are mostly useless customers, since they don't put any of their own money in. What Party is looking for is new money, not people to take money out of the system forever.

Common sense 101

[Photoc]

So in your reasoning, most B&M rooms should kick out all the pros because they contribute nothing and take money out constantly.

[Sintax]

Wrong. They put hundreds of millions of dollars of their own money into partys coffers each year. Perhaps you missed the post with the press release where PartyGaming admits that 10% of its customers contribute 70% of the rake?

B&M's are very different. It's a matter of scale - pros are needed to start new games and keep old ones going. Plus, the rake is much bigger in B&M.

But once you've got thousands of players online 24/7 and every variation of the game available on multiple tables, pros aren't really that important.

The problem that Party appears to have is getting new money to deposit and existing customers to continue to deposit. Only money regularly deposited into the system contributes to the rake. In that regards pros contribute very little, so they are 'acceptable but sub optimal customers' as quoted in another post.

[daveymck]

Party needs to do three things to grow its income.

1 Get new players.

2 Retain the players it has.

3 Earn more money from the current base.

I suspect at the moment the measure and things they are looking to put in place are more aimed at 3, it may conflict a bit with aim 2 and piss off some players but I suspect in a couple of weeks when everything has calmed down and the waters become less muddy that things will be back to normal except the skin multi tablers will be party multitablers probably with less of a rakeback/loyalty bonus but with some.

[ QUOTE ]
Wrong. They put hundreds of millions of dollars of their own money into partys coffers each year. Perhaps you missed the post with the press release where PartyGaming admits that 10% of its customers contribute 70% of the rake?

[/ QUOTE ]
No, I didn't. I just didn't interpret it to fit my worldview.

People who cash out regularly and show a profit are not a source of rake. Please understand this before continuing to read. In the short term, they do generate action, and if you've got unlimited numbers of customers continually depositing, pros are great. But if your bottleneck is attracting new money and getting old customers to continue depositing, pros aren't very good.

Do you understand this concept?

[Sintax]

[ QUOTE ]
People who cash out regularly and show a profit are not a source of rake.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats one of the stupidest things I have ever heard. Every single cash player on that site is a a source of rake. I don't care if you care if you lose all your money, never cash out, or if Dikshit hand delivers a check to you. If you play with real money, you have an MGR. The more you play, the higher that MGR is.

Wake up and smell the rake man.

Do you know the meaning of the word 'source'? Do you understand the context I used it in?

Pros generate action, that's all. Over the long term a profitable pro IS NOT a source of rake. Please get back to me when you can understand this fairly simple concept. Thank you.

[Freudian]

[ QUOTE ]
B&M's are very different. It's a matter of scale - pros are needed to start new games and keep old ones going. Plus, the rake is much bigger in B&M.

But once you've got thousands of players online 24/7 and every variation of the game available on multiple tables, pros aren't really that important.

The problem that Party appears to have is getting new money to deposit and existing customers to continue to deposit. Only money regularly deposited into the system contributes to the rake. In that regards pros contribute very little, so they are 'acceptable but sub optimal customers' as quoted in another post.

[/ QUOTE ]

How much money the players have in their accounts at any given time is largely irrelevant. If they play or not is what counts.

Or are you seriuosly suggesting that it would matter if I deposited $1k each week if I still had the same playing habits?

As long as the poker economy on a site has enough money to avoid big bottlenecks, depositing and withdrawing are non-factors.