This needs to be settled, vote on Empire here

[Phill S]

that wasnt the question as i interpreted it.

given the choice of banning or not, from a business sense banning is best.

i agree that other methods should have been taken, but thats business for you.

[mack23]

[ QUOTE ]
Who could possibly vote that this is good business policy? The far better solution is to restrict reload bonuses to regular players.

[/ QUOTE ]

60% of the voters so far. I really can't believe it either! Not too many marketing or business majors out there it appears. I'm starting to get worried that PP and skins have many players brainwashed into thinking they can do whatever the hell they want to and players must just go along with it or get banned.

[Vern]

Hey, I am one of the players that got axed and regardless of what the OP or meow-meow stated, I, like the vast majority of players banned, have never bitched or complained about the fact they gave me the boot. That is why I voted that it is a good business plan, Answer the question posed Vern

Most of the threads with complaints have not been about getting axed but the manner with which Empire put the plan into action. That manner could barely instill confidence in those that did not get axed. The posts have mostly argued that a warning ahead of time would have caused the player to act differently with regard to play time, or at least honesty in providing a reason for termination would have avoided the PR mess generated by the closings.

So, to answer your biased poll, no, I cannot see how any rational person would '...think it's bad business to ban players who are costing Empire money?' but had you also bothered to include a question as to the manner of action on Empire's part you might have actually gotten at the root of the problem. Likewise I cannot see how any rational person could answer this question 'no': "When closing down the account of a person only playing on their site for the offered bonuses; Do you think it's bad busniess to ban a player's account without warning or explination and when not stone walling, only responding to inquries by implying the player had engaged in 'wrongful' or 'suspicous' activity?"

Vern

[LinusKS]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Who could possibly vote that this is good business policy? The far better solution is to restrict reload bonuses to regular players.

[/ QUOTE ]

60% of the voters so far. I really can't believe it either! Not too many marketing or business majors out there it appears. I'm starting to get worried that PP and skins have many players brainwashed into thinking they can do whatever the hell they want to and players must just go along with it or get banned.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fun Fact: 81% of Empire-defenders are "ditto-heads."

[supersub]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Who could possibly vote that this is good business policy? The far better solution is to restrict reload bonuses to regular players.

[/ QUOTE ]

60% of the voters so far. I really can't believe it either! Not too many marketing or business majors out there it appears. I'm starting to get worried that PP and skins have many players brainwashed into thinking they can do whatever the hell they want to and players must just go along with it or get banned.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am a marketing major and I voted yes. I have not followed this to the letter but as far as I understand it, empire is banning people that costs them money.

These same people are the players that thinks this is a marketing fiasco. The "real" players understands why Empire is doing this and they also understand that the money saved will probably somehow be used to keep the profitable customers happy.

[Vern]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Who could possibly vote that this is good business policy? The far better solution is to restrict reload bonuses to regular players.

[/ QUOTE ]

60% of the voters so far. I really can't believe it either! Not too many marketing or business majors out there it appears. I'm starting to get worried that PP and skins have many players brainwashed into thinking they can do whatever the hell they want to and players must just go along with it or get banned.

[/ QUOTE ]

I am a marketing major and I voted yes. I have not followed this to the letter but as far as I understand it, empire is banning people that costs them money.

These same people are the players that thinks this is a marketing fiasco. The "real" players understands why Empire is doing this and they also understand that the money saved will probably somehow be used to keep the profitable customers happy.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem was, when it started happening, none of those 'real' players knew anything and neither did the players (myself included) that got the axe. Empire could have come out smelling like a rose had they announced they would be terminating accounts of players that it became apparent were only playing for bonuses. No one could then offer a rational arguement for a bad busniess move, not even those that got the axe. Heck, we are not arguing it was a bad business move to axe bonus chasers, our comments are more to the manner, which in the beginning scared players regardless of whether they were banned or not.

Vern

[afk]

I agree with you there Vern. Things would have been a lot better had they just been honest right off the bat and saying why they were banning the accounts.

[Miggo]

Whether it's good business practice or not, I don't know, I think you'd have to look at the financial statements of the company in the future and see.

I just wanted to make the point, that if a retail store did this, they'd be taken to court. If I went into Wal-Mart and just bought sale items, and then Wal-Mart decides to not allow me in the store because I only buy items that are on sale, I think they'd be on CNN that night.

[MicroBob]

haven't read the whole thread.


[ QUOTE ]
as far as I understand it, empire is banning people that costs them money.

These same people are the players that thinks this is a marketing fiasco.

[/ QUOTE ]


I play on empire a lot...and still play there although not quite as much. And I also think it is a marketing fiasco and a terrible decision.


Even Party itself hasn't done anything like this.
Nor has Stars or crypto or pokerroom or anywhere else.

If it is really such a great plan to ban these players (as opposed to any other options they could have chosen) then they are the only ones to have figured this out.


Stars and crypto's bonuses kept me coming back.

I decided I like Stars enough to continue playing there in the absence of customers.
That was part of the strategy of their re-load in the first place. To attract some of their current customers.

For quite awhile they were not making any revenue on my play there. I was pretty much bonusing there only.


Crypto could have had a chance to win my business too by continually bringing me back to check them out.
Unfortunately for them...I don't particularly care for the software there.
However...that hasn't stopped me from occasionally giving them another shot during another bonus-clear.


I don't like what Empire is doing one bit but they will continue to have my business because I'm in the royal-flush club and the benefits are too good to pass up even if their points structure is idiotic.


I get the free $100/month (no raked-hands requirement), occasional RF club freerolls, a free TV will be coming shortly, and they also have some raffles giving away various pries like a laptop or digital camera.
So I'll continue to play there with some of these incentives.


But everything they are giving me compared with the amount I am playing there isn't exactly lining their pockets either


Obviously empire is well within their rights to ban whatever players they want. But those who think they are actually gaining EV out of banning these players are not really correct
...they could have done other things to stop any of the trivial losses they have suffered while perhaps doing more to attract the players to stay there longer during non-bonus times.

Or they could just take the patient approach like stars and other sites and continue to bring the vanishing players back until they decide, like me, that they like playing there regardless of whether a bonus is offered.
With some of their VIP incentives they could potentially have done thing with some customers.

[CountDuckula]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Who could possibly vote that this is good business policy? The far better solution is to restrict reload bonuses to regular players.

[/ QUOTE ]

60% of the voters so far. I really can't believe it either! Not too many marketing or business majors out there it appears. I'm starting to get worried that PP and skins have many players brainwashed into thinking they can do whatever the hell they want to and players must just go along with it or get banned.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, you can subtract one "yes" and add it to "no"; I misread the question. D'oh! [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

I think it's reasonable for them to keep people from playing there just for bonuses. However, I agree with those who are saying they simply should avoid offering them to everyone; they should pick the players they want to keep around, and offer the bonuses to them only.

I have to admit, though, I'm half hoping they'll ban me and send me $5 for the 19 cents or so I happen to have there right now.... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

-Mike