Ok so Full Tilt has some clever ads and marketing, is that enough?

[Jurollo]

After looking at the site I posted about earlier I realized that the Olympic thing is a shameful, yet brilliant marketing idea. But ads and star lineup of pro's aside, can FT legitimately crack the top 4 (even 5 counting prima) poker rooms within, say 1 year. I would think they would have to offer some huge bonuses and get some fishy play. Their cartoony software looks like jetsetpoker which I have seen before, not sure if they are skins of each other or not. I am skeptical that a new room can offer THAT much more to pull away customers from the other rooms but I guess we'll all see in time. I think the one thing that FT has done really well so far is pump some ad money in, with a good, albeit sneaky campaign, and get a ton of recognizeable stars to push their room, is this gonna be enough to test some of the established rooms? anyone have any thoughts?

[gabyyyyy]

Speaking of which. Why the hell are there so many poker sites?

It is not like they compete or anything. All have almost the same rake structure. All have virtually the same promotions. Why not just have one site for everyone? It's not like there is a cap on the amount of players a site could handle.

For your question. No I do not think Fulltilt can take over the big 4.

[Synergistic Explosions]

[ QUOTE ]
All have almost the same rake structure

[/ QUOTE ]

Gabby, you are 100% wrong saying something like this. We both know this is not even close to the truth. For instance, at Party/Empire and the skins the rake is 100% higher at 5.00 and 50% higher at 12.00. That's not the same as anybody else. That's highway robbery for low limit players. Anybody who plays low limits at Party is either an ignorant fool or an uninformed consumer. The rake there will eat you alive twice as fast as anywhere else.

Then, there's a sight that dosent charge a rake but a small monthly fee instead.

So don't ever say all sights charge almost the same rake again!!!! It's not even close to being a true statement.

[Jurollo]

I think if there was one huge site it would obviously be bad for us too because competition is good for the consumer (player). Basic economics principal, less competition the more power the retailer gets to fix prices higher (rake), etc.

[Nottom]

I don't know if they will be able to atract the players or not, but after playing in one of their beta freerolls I think they may have the best tourney structure of any online site.

Not terribly surprising considering who is behind it.

[Stew]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
All have almost the same rake structure

[/ QUOTE ]

Gabby, you are 100% wrong saying something like this. We both know this is not even close to the truth. For instance, at Party/Empire and the skins the rake is 100% higher at 5.00 and 50% higher at 12.00. That's not the same as anybody else. That's highway robbery for low limit players. Anybody who plays low limits at Party is either an ignorant fool or an uninformed consumer. The rake there will eat you alive twice as fast as anywhere else.

Then, there's a sight that dosent charge a rake but a small monthly fee instead.

So don't ever say all sights charge almost the same rake again!!!! It's not even close to being a true statement.

[/ QUOTE ]

These things happen when one doesn't think before one types...it's habitual in the case of the referenced poster.

[WSOPWinner2005]

Why don't we all become drones ?

That's what this post amounts to, there are different sites out there due to competition which is a GREAT thing for us. Even if rake stays where it is... A change of sites does wonders when you are getting sick of the grind.

I say, The more the merrier if they can succeed

[Sundevils21]

[ QUOTE ]
Anybody who plays low limits at Party is either an ignorant fool or an uninformed consumer.

[/ QUOTE ]

I suggest you try it before you make that statement. You clearly have never played party low limit.

[Synergistic Explosions]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Anybody who plays low limits at Party is either an ignorant fool or an uninformed consumer.

[/ QUOTE ]

I suggest you try it before you make that statement. You clearly have never played party low limit.

[/ QUOTE ]

It took me six months of playing there before I realized they nicked me for an extra 5 grand in rake over what most other sites charge at the same limits.

It seems you don't understand how rake affects your totals. For instance, if you play 1000-1500 hands a day and win 100 that are raked the extra .25 That extra quarter here and there, means 25 bucks a day, means 750 per month, means 9 grand per year.

Put it this way, would you enjoy using a toilet that REQUIRED you to throw ten quarters per hour into it so it would flush? Personally, I'd use the upstairs bathroom that didn't charge the extra fee to use.

[Synergistic Explosions]

[ QUOTE ]
After looking at the site I posted about earlier I realized that the Olympic thing is a shameful, yet brilliant marketing idea. But ads and star lineup of pro's aside, can FT legitimately crack the top 4 (even 5 counting prima) poker rooms within, say 1 year. I would think they would have to offer some huge bonuses and get some fishy play. Their cartoony software looks like jetsetpoker which I have seen before, not sure if they are skins of each other or not. I am skeptical that a new room can offer THAT much more to pull away customers from the other rooms but I guess we'll all see in time. I think the one thing that FT has done really well so far is pump some ad money in, with a good, albeit sneaky campaign, and get a ton of recognizeable stars to push their room, is this gonna be enough to test some of the established rooms? anyone have any thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

No signup bonus and free rolls offering $20 bucks. Wow, could a site be more cheap during their first week? They made a huge blunder IMO. I don't think these guys could crack the top ten in a year at this rate. Players expect value when they choose a new site. This one isn't even on the radar screen yet.