At Party: January 2005 sign-ups, less than 30% still play there(+more

[grinin]

I think Dikshit and whoever his advisors are were geniuses in their timing of the IPO. Their only mistake was not to sell 49% of the company and net 2 Bill instead of 25% and 1 Bill.

We probably are going to see a couple things in order to placate the new minority owners. I think the rake increase in short handed was one. It is an immediate increase in profitability. Unfortunately for us there will be efforts to increase Party's profitability across the board. Fortunately, there will also be increased effort to bring in new players.

Games will get tighter and more difficult to beat as the growth of the industry slows. Fewer TAGs will be profitable and will get "real jobs". As the growth rate stabilizes there will become an equilibrium of TAGs who will be able to beat the game and new fish arriving daily to support them.

[Timer]

[ QUOTE ]
So let's get this straight: A large, thriving, successful business doesn't keep growing exponentially, and now it's doomed?



[/ QUOTE ]

Of course not. But what it is NOT is a growth stock, as it was touted. Anyone could see that, but the question remains how long will it take until the owners become fully vested.

[grjr]

[ QUOTE ]
and techniques for analysing its player base to ensure that it concentrates on those that will be most lucrative.


[/ QUOTE ]

Apparently Party has already started this as shown by the account specific bonuses this month. I've stepped up my cover play a little in order to try and get a better bonus next month. Hopefully they won't figure out that they've never made a dime off of me.

[theben]

i dont like this. if pp starts to crumble, less reloads!

[FlFishOn]

" Unfortunately for us there will be efforts to increase Party's profitability across the board. "

All Party grinders will get pinched. It had to happen. The choice is to feed your BR or the stockholders. Guess which one Dikshit will choose?

[BottlesOf]

[ QUOTE ]
'A couple of thousand expert poker players are winning loads of money from the thousands who are just not very good at it,' says Greg Feehely, leisure analyst at Altium Securities. 'They will wise up and go and put their money on the horses or play an online casino game.'

[/ QUOTE ]


This stuck out.

[cardcounter0]

Did anybody ever think that bad customer service, buggy software, service interruptions, and increased rake *might*, maybe, just have a little something to do with it?
[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[FlyWf]

'Offset'? Multitabling good players still pay rake, right?

"When a guy plays a casino game online, he is at -EV, but he doesn't have eight tables of that -EV attacking him at once."
This is nonsensical. That's not a fine point, it's irrelevant. Why would any indvidual infrequent player care how many other tables that grinder on the button is playing?


Also, the starting comment is ridiculous. At least with poker you can get better, why would someone realize "Crap, I'm getting my ass handed to me by these guys. I should go play blackajack"

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
'A couple of thousand expert poker players are winning loads of money from the hundreds of thousands who are just not very good at it,' says Greg Feehely, leisure analyst at Altium Securities. 'They will wise up and go and put their money on the horses or play an online casino game.'

[/ QUOTE ]


This stuck out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fixed His Article.

[KaneKungFu123]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
'A couple of thousand expert poker players are winning loads of money from the thousands who are just not very good at it,' says Greg Feehely, leisure analyst at Altium Securities. 'They will wise up and go and put their money on the horses or play an online casino game.'

[/ QUOTE ]

the bolded part is very false and misleading

[/ QUOTE ]

i agree.