POKERSPOT-My Final Word

[Jim Easton]

[ QUOTE ]
He would never name it due to the barrage of "AVOID AT ALL COSTS" posts it would garner.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly.

silybum's response to the 'he won't succeed' charge is that he is consulting with a pokerroom. How much of a success is he if his name can't be mentioned in connection with the site?

I guess it is time for someone (Lorinda?) to do some research into what site it is.

[Silybum]

The barriers to enty in the online poker biz are pretty low. The
overwhelming one is that the big guys have the players already there to
keep the action going around the clock. Any competitor with a lower rake
would need to get A LOT of people there QUICKLY so that the action doesn't
fizzle out before it gets momentum. Whoever does it successfully will get
filthy rich very quickly, and when an opportunity like that exists,
there'll be no shortage of attempts at it. I'm sure somebody will succeed.

The second big barrier is gaining the players' trust, so they know they
will be able to get their money back out. I'm guessing that a successful
competitor will have to recruit a high-profile poker star to overcome this
barrier.

[CrackerZack]

[ QUOTE ]
The second big barrier is gaining the players' trust, so they know they will be able to get their money back out. I'm guessing that a successful competitor will have to recruit a high-profile poker star to overcome this barrier.

[/ QUOTE ]

And avoid tainted crooks like Dutch Boyd.

FWIW, lower rake is really a great thing for all of us, but the fish generally just don't care. Look at LA. Highest rake? Commerce. Best games? Commerce. Because its the biggest room and is semi-famous and the players want to play at the "big room". Nits and nut peddlers travel to other rooms to save .50 on rake when they can. So if you stop the Dutch crusading, you'll probably get support for your lower rake stuff. But you'll need a lot more than lower rake to bring in the players that matter, the fish. Party can keep raising its rake as long as it has all the fish, it sucks, but they have the greatest commodity.

[moondogg]

I think the problem here is that a lot of people think that players care about the rake. You hear a lot complaining on this site, but it is mostly from RakeFree.com shills such as yourself. IMHO, the silent (vast) majority of players really don't give a damn. Nobody is going to get "A LOT of players QUICKLY" using some alternative rake method. The only people you may interest with these schemes would be better players who understand the impact of the rake. Fish are not going to flock to this site, and so the better players aren't either. I would guess that some better players may like the idea of a smaller rake, but that does not outweigh the lack of profitability of a site that has no fish and is run by an lying prick who is either a thief or an idiot. I understand that poker sites really don't care about the better players, there are so few of them, it's not really worthwhile spending the effort to make them happy. But if you aren't attacting fish in droves, you will fail miserably. Frankly fish don't care about rake, just like they don't care about losing. Just try explaining the rake to them in terms of hourly rate expection and it's impact on pot odds decisions.

Just my three cents,
Mooney

[Jim Easton]

[ QUOTE ]
The barriers to enty in the online poker biz are pretty low.

[/ QUOTE ]

True, about all it takes is money.

[ QUOTE ]
Any competitor with a lower rake would need to get A LOT of people there QUICKLY so that the action doesn't
fizzle out before it gets momentum.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, but lower rake will have little effect on a player's decision to play there.

[ QUOTE ]
when an opportunity like that exists,
there'll be no shortage of attempts at it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed.

[ QUOTE ]
The second big barrier is gaining the players' trust, so they know they will be able to get their money back out.

[/ QUOTE ]

This barrier is even bigger for Dutch.

[ QUOTE ]
I'm guessing that a successful competitor will have to recruit a high-profile poker star to overcome this
barrier.


[/ QUOTE ]

Didn't Doyle pay Highlands' players out of his own pocket? Compare this to Dutch. Dutch could have sold the software and paid the players their money, and be able to start another site with a great reputation for paying the players (his 3 year non-compete would just about be over). As it is, he has this huge cloud over him.

[hmmmmm]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the problem here is that a lot of people think that players care about the rake. You hear a lot complaining on this site, but it is mostly from RakeFree.com shills such as yourself. IMHO, the silent (vast) majority of players really don't give a damn.

my three cents,
Mooney

[/ QUOTE ]

I worked in the poker industry for year, both B&M and online, and I can't tell you how many times I have heard a player ask - AFTER PLAYING FOR MONTHS - how the rooms make their money. They are blissfully unaware of any rake at all.