lol, runescape is an online game, very similar to warcraft

What kind of online poker games do they spread? What deposit and withdrawal options do I have?

none, sorry, im not the OP who mentioned RS

are you sure?

Haha I know

yes, runescape is a quest based game that is cheaper (looks that way too) than warcraft

I don't care what the cost. There's no way they're not making money hand over fist. Right now, 2:15am on a Thursday morning FTP reports 14,577 tables running. Let's say the average $0.50/hand and 100 hands an hour per table. That's $700,000/hour in revenue. They don't buy materials. They don't have manufacturing cost. They don't have shipping cost.

WTF?!? The cost of running the online site is a drop in the bucket in comparison. Not even worth mentioning!

...wait, what? When did this happen? I don't remember the rake being above $5. (Then again, it's been a couple months at least since I played the 1/2.)

Yes, those play money table are very profitable.

Last year PartyGaming spent $140m running the company. If you would to see a breakdown of this "drop in the bucket" do a google search. Its public information.
Thanks for contributing to the dumbest repeated theory on 2+2.

I think better bonus/rakeback schemes would do more good for whole economy than lowering rake, because they would appeal to fish too. 2 major sites are probably worst in this.

This TILTS me so badly. I'm playing 100NL now and the tables are swarmed with these IDIOT shortstacks sitting with $20 and waiting for a 99+/AK to shove allin PF. I incidentally call them with AK or TT and am always a looser! And so are they of course because pots under $60 are fully raked.

EXAMPLE
POT $40 RAKE $2
They 99 - 55%
Me AQ - 45%

Their av. profit: $0.90
FTP av. profit: $2

I use a site to look up their winnings and the outcomes SICKEN me so badly.

Something like:

Profit: $100
Rake paid: $2,500
Rakeback: $750

Do these idiot ZOMBIE shortstacks work for FTP?

A google search? Sorry can't find details on FTPs expenses and profits. Can you post a link?

ROBBERY below

I'm pretty sure he meant the party numbers, not FTPs (as they are not publicly traded company)

if you can't beat the micros at 5ptbb/100 at 6m you're just not a good player imo


anyway, to all the people who think bandwidth and costs for withdrawals/deposits is high:
why doesn't a poker room charge for withdrawals and bandwidth costs separately
bandwidth would cost less than $15 a month (see every other game other than poker)
withdrawals cost like $5-$50 (see FTP's MGR hits on withdrawal)

do you really think it would add up to thousands?
of course not

A few years ago, SnGs were fishy up to 3-digit-buyins.
Right now it's hard to beat the midstakes.

When I see SnG-pros, not able to claim winnings at the High Stakes, how should this end?
Even at the 16$ or 27$ are some regs and it's getting harder to beat them.
3 years ago 16$ were so fishy you wouldn't even complain about 20% rake, still would have been beatable.

Some of the top-players should get something started...SnGs are getting less and less profitable.
Look at what good players did a few years ago and what they're going through right now.

We should pesuade some sites to lower the rake.
IMO you cannot beat higher SnGs with more than 5%.
Or just a handful players can and it still makes variance too high.
we need a change

first...

That s why I played on WSEX back then as long as possible. 100% rakeback back then but nobody plays there anymore.

The cure is more "new money" in the game.

not happening.

OK I see your point. I haven't had the pleasure of reading this theory debated. So let's just say for the sake of argument that only 10% of the tables are revenue generating. So, instead of $700,000/hour their revenue is $70,000/hour

70K*24*365 > 613,000,000 >>>>>> 140,000,000

I think 10% is ultra-conservative.

They're making money hand over fist and operating costs are but a drop in the bucket.

They're operating a web application! They aren't buying product and enhancing the value of that product through some kind of manufacturing process and then shipping the product somewhere in the hopes that somebody will buy it. Gee, that's a lot of cost they don't incur.

They first take payment (have your money on account). Just the interest alone is worth millions. Then they siphon money away off the tables. Their operating cost is directly related to the size of the player pool which supports their efforts. Without players their overhead would be next to nil. They recoup their start-up cost probably more than once a day.

The fact they are spending so much money in operations is a testament to how much they are taking in in revenue.

I know it is taboo in these conversations to actually use real data rather than fictitious hyperbole, but the 2008 PartyGaming annual report is here:

http://annualreport2008.partygaming.com/?id=29369

+1

Yeah, the fish don't care if they're being raked in the ass without lube. They're losing their money anyway. The fish want lots of free bonuses, freerolls, guaranteed MTT prizes, etc. So they go to the sites that offer them these things. Sites can't offer these things without taking a certain amount of rake, though.

Only the grinders care about rake, but they also need to follow the fish. A rake-free site isn't going to have many promotions to attract fish, so of course it's not going to do well.

Scaling rakeback would be great, for those who are truly high-volume, high-raking players, but that'll never happen.

There should be a monthly ceiling on how much you are paying. Poker players should start lobbying gaming licensors to add stipulation on granting a license that says the maximum the site can charge from a player in one month is, for example, $1,000.

Yeah, that would be great.