Stars raises rake of HU,hypers,spin&go - Page 2

From 2+2:


>https://twitter.com/PokerStars
>
>200k followers. Seems like a good place to voice your displeasure.

Bejamin1 here - this is just my theoretical rant on the situation. Not like I can prove any of the conclusions I draw, but I have a feeling I'd be right in the end.

I'm going to present my point of view because it seems like there are a good deal of players who think raising rake is actually a good decision for Pokerstars. In my opinion it's simply a ploy to generate additional short-term revenue and boost the stock price. It won't benefit the games at all.

In a zero sum poker economy what happens?
-Many players win
-Players brag to their friends about how much $$$ they are winning
-Friends deposit because "holy crap poker so cool easy money I'm gonna be the next Matt Damon" from Rounders

That's the sex-appeal of the game for recreational players. That's what it's always been. The idea of bragging to your friends about how you're winning. Even just moderately average players can win.

Now, obviously a rake free climate won't exist. And in-software advertising revenue generating model + greatly reduced rake however, is the best possible future for the poker economy. Many players have success. Lots of word of mouth. Lots of bragging and lots of new deposits. That's how the game spreads and grows. If Pokerstars were less greedy, they'd make more in the long term AND the game would survive just fine.

Right now, something like what 5% maybe 1% of players will be winning players over 100K+ hand samples? Most fish play maybe 15,000 hands in a year or some random number like that. They're still paying 10pt/bb rake too at that rate, except with their level of play most of them are dramatically losing players and only a few make money and cash out. That's not good for the poker economy. You want weak players, casuals, and fish to be winning fairly often and cashing out and bragging about it. That's hugely important to the poker economy to keep it growing.

Reduced rake is a win for everyone long term, including Pokerstars. They need to be more creative about their revenue. And frankly, they should eliminate the vast majority of "Pokerstars Pros" and support only a key few. It's ridiculous how many they are - vast majority of fish have no idea who these people are. I don't mind giving randoms on the final table 5k to wear a Pokerstars hat or whatever, but semi-permantly sponsoring a bunch of people who nobody gives a shit about is a waste of money.

Lastly - and maybe this will come as a surprise, but Pokerstars should basically eliminate Supernova Elite status and possibly Supernova as well. The FPP system should stay the same, but allow for reasonably acquireable bonuses at the highest rate for everyone. Make it work out to 40% rakeback for everyone or just two levels with Platimum being 25% RB or whatever it is and Supernova being 40%.

Why you ask? Well guess what, insane amounts of mass grinders does what to the games? It creates a climate with every reg sitting on 20 tables and playing mindlessly, not chatting, not interacting, etc... It creates unbalanced fish to regular ratios because people simply have to play this many tables to get decent rakeback.

If you just provide most players with good rakeback without having to play insane amounts (chopping off the 20-30% extra SNE grinders have been getting) then you will create softer games. There will be no incentive to play 50 tables. They'll be incentive to play 4-8. Play well, and battle vs. other regs/casuals. This is especially true in a rake reduced climate. The edges will be more reasonable so good players can actually play each other.

A climate of massive rake + the only good rakeback is Supernova X3++++

What does that do? It forces players to play insane amounts, for minimal edges, and essentially become rake churners. They win a bit of money, and churn most of the rest of it back into rake. It's a bad cycle for the poker economy and it's not good for anyone.

Pokerstars should be aiming to make the games great and to have as many people as possible bragging to their friends about winning. That's what keeps this great game going. It's not anything else. I couldn't give less of a F*** that Nadal plays on Pokerstars and most other people don't either. They see it as gambling and losing because nobody talks about winning anymore. They just talk about how hard it is and how its rigged etc etc etc.

Build a positive climate where people realistically think they can win and regulars aren't forced to seat script, and play 10 billion hands to acquire rakeback. That's how you improve things. The rest of this is just bollocks.

Or you can be short-sighted and do what Amaya is doing... which is squeezing as much money as possible out of this game until it dies from being choked to death. They aren't helping anything, and they have zero long-term vision.

The only thing that will fix this is dramatic change from Pokerstars. Or unregulated bitcoin poker rising to power with the vision to use lower rake to attract lots of winners and people who can then go brag about where they won.

On October 30 2014 00:57 Trav94 wrote: Like people in the 2+2 thread have stated. This is a huge opportunity for sites like 888 and PartyPoker to get their shit together.

This. Let's get some real competition going again ffs.

Just going to add this - those supporting are in the 2p2 thread so people here can mostly ignore that lol.

On October 30 2014 00:57 Trav94 wrote: Like people in the 2+2 thread have stated. This is a huge opportunity for sites like 888 and PartyPoker to get their shit together.

888.com has 4$ cap rake, so they dont care about poker being a game of skill so much.

PartyPoker has shown many times they have no idea how to run a business or act as professionals.

On October 30 2014 09:49 Skoal wrote: 276.3m net for ps+ftp according to their report, and that number has been on the decline for a while now jump ship and avoid bustoness or potential law trouble or technology/bots or who knows wat pass it off to amaya who wants it for completely different reasons well played jews, well played

On October 25 2014 11:48 Defrag wrote: $218.4mlnin net income (compared to $189.9mln in 2013) and $246.4mln in net cash from operating activities (again, up from $207mln in 2013). This is quite a heavy growth rate.

On October 30 2014 10:24 RunGoodMan wrote: Bejamin1 here - this is just my theoretical rant on the situation. Not like I can prove any of the conclusions I draw, but I have a feeling I'd be right in the end. I'm going to present my point of view because it seems like there are a good deal of players who think raising rake is actually a good decision for Pokerstars. In my opinion it's simply a ploy to generate additional short-term revenue and boost the stock price. It won't benefit the games at all. In a zero sum poker economy what happens? -Many players win -Players brag to their friends about how much $$$ they are winning -Friends deposit because "holy crap poker so cool easy money I'm gonna be the next Matt Damon" from Rounders That's the sex-appeal of the game for recreational players. That's what it's always been. The idea of bragging to your friends about how you're winning. Even just moderately average players can win. Now, obviously a rake free climate won't exist. And in-software advertising revenue generating model + greatly reduced rake however, is the best possible future for the poker economy. Many players have success. Lots of word of mouth. Lots of bragging and lots of new deposits. That's how the game spreads and grows. If Pokerstars were less greedy, they'd make more in the long term AND the game would survive just fine. Right now, something like what 5% maybe 1% of players will be winning players over 100K+ hand samples? Most fish play maybe 15,000 hands in a year or some random number like that. They're still paying 10pt/bb rake too at that rate, except with their level of play most of them are dramatically losing players and only a few make money and cash out. That's not good for the poker economy. You want weak players, casuals, and fish to be winning fairly often and cashing out and bragging about it. That's hugely important to the poker economy to keep it growing. Reduced rake is a win for everyone long term, including Pokerstars. They need to be more creative about their revenue. And frankly, they should eliminate the vast majority of "Pokerstars Pros" and support only a key few. It's ridiculous how many they are - vast majority of fish have no idea who these people are. I don't mind giving randoms on the final table 5k to wear a Pokerstars hat or whatever, but semi-permantly sponsoring a bunch of people who nobody gives a shit about is a waste of money. Lastly - and maybe this will come as a surprise, but Pokerstars should basically eliminate Supernova Elite status and possibly Supernova as well. The FPP system should stay the same, but allow for reasonably acquireable bonuses at the highest rate for everyone. Make it work out to 40% rakeback for everyone or just two levels with Platimum being 25% RB or whatever it is and Supernova being 40%. Why you ask? Well guess what, insane amounts of mass grinders does what to the games? It creates a climate with every reg sitting on 20 tables and playing mindlessly, not chatting, not interacting, etc... It creates unbalanced fish to regular ratios because people simply have to play this many tables to get decent rakeback. If you just provide most players with good rakeback without having to play insane amounts (chopping off the 20-30% extra SNE grinders have been getting) then you will create softer games. There will be no incentive to play 50 tables. They'll be incentive to play 4-8. Play well, and battle vs. other regs/casuals. This is especially true in a rake reduced climate. The edges will be more reasonable so good players can actually play each other. A climate of massive rake + the only good rakeback is Supernova X3++++ What does that do? It forces players to play insane amounts, for minimal edges, and essentially become rake churners. They win a bit of money, and churn most of the rest of it back into rake. It's a bad cycle for the poker economy and it's not good for anyone. Pokerstars should be aiming to make the games great and to have as many people as possible bragging to their friends about winning. That's what keeps this great game going. It's not anything else. I couldn't give less of a F*** that Nadal plays on Pokerstars and most other people don't either. They see it as gambling and losing because nobody talks about winning anymore. They just talk about how hard it is and how its rigged etc etc etc. Build a positive climate where people realistically think they can win and regulars aren't forced to seat script, and play 10 billion hands to acquire rakeback. That's how you improve things. The rest of this is just bollocks. Or you can be short-sighted and do what Amaya is doing... which is squeezing as much money as possible out of this game until it dies from being choked to death. They aren't helping anything, and they have zero long-term vision. The only thing that will fix this is dramatic change from Pokerstars. Or unregulated bitcoin poker rising to power with the vision to use lower rake to attract lots of winners and people who can then go brag about where they won.

What a wonderful post I'm not a high volume player, I play enough to support myself and have lots of time for other stuff (training mma primarily), but lately I've felt like the Stars VPP system is just... bad. I enjoy playing poker, I enjoy studying poker, but with the way the VPP system works I feel like if I study or play some game that isn't my main game etc, its time I could have spent reaching another vpp milestone.

What's also really strange to me how no poker site seems to have looked at the recent trend in gaming towards achievments and other social features used for player retention, and thought: "Hey, poker is a game... and we play it online, we could do this too!". People could have profiles, get badges or what not based on stuff like join date, hand milestones, display their best tournament finishes, there's so much you could do here.

I suppose that while poker and gaming seems closely linked to me, at the corporate level there's not much overlap.

On October 30 2014 13:20 dogmeat wrote:

hahaha

lol.. greenstar

I think this is pretty good decision by pokerstars, theyll make a lot more money with these changes.
Im still waiting for anonymous zoom.

tian you have some good ideas there
also i think there's going to be a phoenix rising.

why doesn't lp start it's own thing?

^LOL

How much money do you think a new pokersite would need?

On October 31 2014 04:25 napoleono wrote: ^LOL How much money do you think a new pokersite would need?

Afaik around €30,000-40,000 if you want to start a room on existing network like ipoker etc.

Going with your own network, like PokerStars, I expect those numbers to be in tens of millions.

Yep, huge barriers to entry. And they are a great service, don't get me wrong. But fuck them man....

I'm planning on going out west soon, withdrawing my (lol) roll, and play plo on partypoker or some other site with a kickass deposit bonus/decent traffic.

I don't even want to think how much I've paid this site over the last seven years.... 200k? More? Fuck if I know.

I'm wearing my 1 mill vpp badge for the next little while, see if it changes how people play against me haha

Just out of interest, any info on how the new rake compares to party/ipoker/other major sites? I think for hu cash / 25/50, pokerstars rake is now in line with party/ipoker (it was lower before)

edit: when party still had 25/50

maybe they want FT to be the cashgame site (at least for HU)