PPA enters into partnership with HogWildPoker.com?

[DonkeyQuixote]

Originally Posted by LetsGambool

They didnt endorse the site.

I wish the PPA got 27% revenue share as well, but Hogwild would be insane to do that deal.

The only reason HogWild would be insane to do "that deal" is that they clearly did not have to pay that much.

Nobody asked them to pay anything in terms of real USD, which the PPA seems to be in need of, or in future rev share, which would only become due as real USD if it is earned in the future. instead, they get some measure of exposure/endorsement for nothing out of pocket except some theoretical, self-valued freerolls*.

(*If a site offers a $1,000 prize package for some tourney package, it can slice that up as many ways as it can for the same $1,000 value .... yet claim in advance that, "based upon 50 participants" the freeroll entry is worth $20.)

I disagree 100% with your assesment of the value of what the PPA could get, without ever touching anything like selling data or the like. I disagree so completely about the tangible real USD value is on the table for the PPA, that I'm going to take this offline.

[testcase]

How is this site able to pay members for winnings a tournament? Isn't that gambling or did they find a loophole.

[PokerXanadu]

Originally Posted by testcase

How is this site able to pay members for winnings a tournament? Isn't that gambling or did they find a loophole.

Same as the subscription-based sites like ClubWPT: they are operating under sweepstakes laws. The payouts are sweepstakes prizes, not payouts based on entry fees. Do a search in the Poker Legislation forum for "sweepstakes" if you want more info (or if you suddenly have the bright idea that someone could legally run a tournament-only site where players pay a tiered monthly subscription for a fixed quantity of sng or MTT entries).

[testcase]

Originally Posted by PokerXanadu

Same as the subscription-based sites like ClubWPT: they are operating under sweepstakes laws. The payouts are sweepstakes prizes, not payouts based on entry fees. Do a search in the Poker Legislation forum for "sweepstakes" if you want more info (or if you suddenly have the bright idea that someone could legally run a tournament-only site where players pay a tiered monthly subscription for a fixed quantity of sng or MTT entries).

Thanks thats what I thought it was, a loophole, you gotta love America

[Doc T River]

Originally Posted by testcase

Thanks thats what I thought it was, a loophole, you gotta love America

It's not a loophole.

[sajeffe]

Originally Posted by DonkeyQuixote

Thanks for the clarification, but don't sell yourself short by looking only at today's HogWild or Zynga or Pureplay business models or by underestimating PPA members' future value to online start-ups like HogWild, SouthPoint, MGM. I am not advocating selling/providing data, but rather smart marketing on behalf of PPA fundraising.

I have always been a proponent of getting the PPA members as the sole funding basis for the organization.

To answer your point about the current model fo US-based sites, and LG as well, think ahead .....

Before you promote a deal like HogWild, make a deal today that locks in a PPA share of the future value of the players who join today's site ..... Real money, raked poker IS coming, secure PPA payment for marketing/endorsing/supporting members' traffic.

Do not give away members, refer them, endorse a site, or do ANYTHING for anything less than a hefty PPA funding cut of their expected future value, AND make that rev share deal with EVERYONE you might think is going to get licensed.

I thought we didn't want PPA to be funded by the poker rooms. The whole point of having membership dues is so they can eventually become strictly player-funded, right?

I do like the idea of poker rooms offering benefits/freerolls to customers who are paid PPA members though.