Why TAGs are undesirable

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think 92% of accounts showed a profit from January 1st to December 31st.

[/ QUOTE ]

This has got to be a typo, right?


Great post regardless.

[/ QUOTE ]
Thanks

Yes, it was a typo. I fixed it.

[Chillout]

--deleted--

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
If everyone will play an equal number of hands: fish

If each TAG will play 10x as many hands as each fish: TAGs

Which do you think is closer to reality?

(obviously, if an empty player pool is filled with TAGs, the TAGs will leave, so I think the PP situation is different)

[/ QUOTE ]

I would say your assumption is wrong based on the fact that 80,000 TAGs would be playing there within 4 weeks of these fish turning up.

Edit : If it was my site I might consider protecting my fish by offering less possible tables, I know this wouldn't be popular with you guys but if I marketed well and the games had a lot of fish in them this kind of idea would balance the games out a little more imo.

Mack

[Freudian]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If everyone will play an equal number of hands: fish

If each TAG will play 10x as many hands as each fish: TAGs

Which do you think is closer to reality?

(obviously, if an empty player pool is filled with TAGs, the TAGs will leave, so I think the PP situation is different)

[/ QUOTE ]

I would say your assumption is wrong based on the fact that 80,000 TAGs would be playing there within 4 weeks of these fish turning up.

Edit : If it was my site I might consider protecting my fish by offering less possible tables, I know this wouldn't be popular with you guys but if I marketed well and the games had a lot of fish in them this kind of idea would balance the games out a little more imo.

Mack

[/ QUOTE ]

Now that Party is a traded company, showing short term profits probably is much more important to them than trying to micromanage the balance between fish and sharks.

So that they did increase the table limit was probably a no brainer for them. They are growing and showing profit but the stock price is falling.

[mackthefork]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If everyone will play an equal number of hands: fish

If each TAG will play 10x as many hands as each fish: TAGs

Which do you think is closer to reality?

(obviously, if an empty player pool is filled with TAGs, the TAGs will leave, so I think the PP situation is different)

[/ QUOTE ]

I would say your assumption is wrong based on the fact that 80,000 TAGs would be playing there within 4 weeks of these fish turning up.

Edit : If it was my site I might consider protecting my fish by offering less possible tables, I know this wouldn't be popular with you guys but if I marketed well and the games had a lot of fish in them this kind of idea would balance the games out a little more imo.

Mack

[/ QUOTE ]

Now that Party is a traded company, showing short term profits probably is much more important to them than trying to micromanage the balance between fish and sharks.

So that they did increase the table limit was probably a no brainer for them. They are growing and showing profit but the stock price is falling.

[/ QUOTE ]

I basically agree that showing short term growth could be more important now they are listed. However there are two types of growth;

a) Managed sustainable growth, that will compliment the business in the future and add to it's long term profitability.

b) Non-sustainable growth, based on false economy and ultimately damaging the long term success of the company.

In my opinion adding too many TAGs is a case of b), and also I think one TAG playing eight tables is very little different than four playing two tables. I just think it's fairly easy for the make-up of a sites player profile to become irreconcilibly imbalanced, and that it would lead to a steady decline in the number of players and hands played.

Mack