|
|
#11
09-02-2005, 09:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: does Party 6-max rake-increase help tight NL100 & under players?
[ QUOTE ]
If every player got 95% rake-back then Party would STILL be making a profit (albeit a pretty darned small one). [/ QUOTE ] It would be interesting to see what the margin is like for Party, but I think it is definitely less than 95%, so they would lose money in that scenario. I'm going to guess that 25-35% of the rake goes to overhead/advertising/etc, but thats a total guess. 
|
|
#12
09-02-2005, 10:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: does Party 6-max rake-increase help tight NL100 & under players?
They're pulling in about $1-million per day.
No way that 35% of their gross revenue goes towards advertising. Yes way that more than 65% of that is going straight into their greedy little hands.
|
|
#14
09-03-2005, 06:44 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: does Party 6-max rake-increase help tight NL100 & under players?
[ QUOTE ]
They're pulling in about $1-million per day. No way that 35% of their gross revenue goes towards advertising. Yes way that more than 65% of that is going straight into their greedy little hands. [/ QUOTE ] Well, we already know their primary source(s) of advertising costs them 25%-30% or more of the rake. Think about it.
|
|
#15
09-03-2005, 09:47 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: does Party 6-max rake-increase help tight NL100 & under players?
This math is pretty trivial. It would hurt basically anyone. Say you get a 33% rake back deal. On a six max table you would be getting 1/3*1/6 = 1/18 of an average pots rake back every hand you are in. So you would have to be only winning 1 in 18 pots to be breakeven rakewise. Even if you are really tight you probably win between 1/8-1/7 pots.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
