Organized player strike FTW. If the French did it we should be able to pull it off as well! gogogogo

this this this

i agree

How about a mass sit-out at a different site every week and all keep chanting in the chat boxes, would this get a point accross?

No, you're not and it's steamed me for a long time. It makes me sick seeing $30K pots with $3 rake and then one of mine in micros having the same rake pulled from my winnings...sick and ridiculous. Also goes along with raking split pots where we "both" lose and the site wins.

Tell me about it, makes me sick when durrrr gets raked 3 dollars off his 100k pots (50 cents if headsup *puke*) when the same is taken out of my micro pots. We need more money, not them. -_-

What's the exact point of all this?

2+2ers already know all about rake.

As for the casual player, why on earth would we want to educate them? Keep them dumb and happy ldo.

If there was some sort of specific proposal on the table that could get the poker sites to sit up and take notice, maybe I could support that.

Maybe.

But this whole thing just seems silly and counterproductive.

I'd take fish knowing about rake anyday if they reduce rake to 1-3%

Well see it this way... if know one really cared enough about the rake and if most players were uneducated the rake would easily increase, like it did for a local website that I play on...rarely.

They increased the rake HUGE and you get NO rakeback at all. It's a big joke.


Stars offers a decent program but paying tens of thousands of dollars to play poker is NOT fair at all. You aren't guaranteed to win anything and support/advertising does NOT cost that much at alllllllllllllll.

So any suggestions of action?

any love for a mass sit-out? Surely it would be bad for sites if loads of players were sitting out and protesting in the chat boxes

There is a restaurant nearby that I think is way overpriced. So here is what I do...ready...?

I don't eat there.

Shocking, I know.

What I don't do is eat breakfast, lunch and dinner there while complaining about the price.

Yeah, I can see all the regs (aka 'the sites rake') leaving would send the rake plummeting, great thinking. Really can't understand why everyone shoots these threads down, point??

The one reason why sites pull off this cartel is that most players are ignorant as to how much they really pay. Meaning sit-out strikes with chants in the chat boxes would rock the boat, do they really want their players wising up to this?

Sevenfold. The problem isn't a specific website or setting. It's everything.

That is why we are at such a huge disadvantage here.

I actually quite like the idea - a sort of viral marketing campaign against rake!

Juk

Problem being educating 2+2 regs to the high rake is pointless. Most already know and still play a ton every day, including myself.

Only way to make a difference is to make it favourable for sites to lower rake, any ideas how to do this?

I vote sit-out protests

Grunching here but the issue is: Are sites setting rake at an optimal level? All of this is a supply and demand business decision. There is no use in arguing whether rake is too high to prevent players from moving up, or whether it is immoral or greedy to charge the rates the sites do. The only issue the sites care about (rightfully so) is maximizing profits. If there is ever any hope to get sites to lower rake, we need to put forth a clear and concise outline of WHY it would benefit the sites to lower rake. I have yet to see anyone convincingly do this, and until then, sites are not going to lower rake. I have no idea whether sites are optimizing the rake level or not, my guess is neither do they. However, in business, it's usually a bad idea to start lowering prices unless there is convincing evidence that this is in the best interest of the long-term health and growth of the entity doing so.

would consistent protests with enough players achieve this?

This.

I'd like the supermarket to charge me less, that way I make more.

I'd like the gas station to charge me less, that way I make more.

I'd like poker sites to charge me less, that way I make more.

Do you really think the folks running these sites have no clue what their sweet spot is for rake?

They run a business, and are entitled to a profit. We all think the service is worth it, because we all continue to play.

Until people leave in droves becuase the cost is percieved to be too high, the rake will remain in place as is.

You want to take a stand? Stop playing, and stop paying rake.

Until you do that, this is all hypocritical mental masturbation.

So its a business that sets prices according to profits, so what now?

this will do f*** all as most 2+2 regs are actually removing money from the sites

I am already accomplishing what I want to. Get people talking and just get something going dude.


yes, everyone wants to make more.


But, poker is the most expensive thing I have ever payed for in my entire life. Comparing it with a restuarant DOES NOT make sense.


The rake is definitely way, way too high. I just want to take the first step here. Raise consciousness.

I agree with the free market economics 101 discussion in the past few posts, however, I hope the rake free poker room they are discussing in another thread happens. That would bring about the competition we so desperately need; the Wal*Mart coming to town and driving down prices effect. (ok probably bad analogy but o well)


**edit: Oh, and one thing that could be done is creating a URL to type in the chat box during the proposed strike on the sites. Everyone sits out and people type in something easy to remember like "furake.com" or something and the fish and everyone else go there and learn what we are trying to accomplish. I agree that educating the fish is kind of a bad idea, but I think it's the lesser of two evils. Also, spamming that site in the chat box might tilt the sites and break some T&C's so might not want to have too much $$ in account if you're gonna do that!

I think sit-out protests just end up pissing people off... ?

Whereas I agree educating 2+2er about rake isn't going to do much good, the idea of some kind of marketing campaign (viral or otherwise) to highlight high rakes could do a lot of good.

The sites currently rely on the fact that the majority of the players are uninformed about rake, but if the issue were to be highlighted better for these players then the sites may have no choice but to start to compete on rake (something which they so obviously don't want to do atm...).

The fact that the big affiliates and most of the poker news outlets are largely funded by the high rakes means it's not likely to get much poker-media coverage from those angles, but some kind of well thought out viral campaign may well be able to create a big internet "buzz" about rake to the stage where there is nothing they or the sites can do about it.

Juk

I guess in the minority here, but I'm really not the least bit unhappy with the current rake structures. Some of the smaller networks even offer 50%+ rb
when you add up all of the added value. The rates online seem far less usurious to me than the 9$ cap at my local $1-$2 game (refuse to play). When, even without rakeback or promotions, skilled players are able to make somewhat more than is being raked, I don't really see what the problem is? How many fish 4 table?? So they are paying ... I think average rake is 11bb/100 @ 25nl, no lets use 50nl ... 10bb/100. Even if they are two tabling and getting in 100h/hr/table, then they are still only paying $10/hr. Some people pay more than that to go bowling!! Rates are low enough that ppl can play the micros for a living. What exactly is the problem?

I'm unconvinced that this proposal would be beneficial to the poker economy. Rake is still pretty high at MS/HSNL. I play with the hopes that I can one day make it to MSNL. I'd be pretty upset if, having paid the increased rate at the micros for my entire career, the cap went up 66% once I got there. You are aware that the edges in these games are much smaller?!? TBPH, I'd probably just quit poker altogther if your proposal was implemented. (Edit again: do not want to deal with the variance of a 3bb/100 winrate. It is bad enough already, thanks. Have you considered looking at attainable winrates instead of rake figures??)

Look at how much nanonoko pays already just for one example...

Any MSNL/HSNL'er wanna come in and pull a Warren Buffet to try to change my mind? (He's wrong too btw, but for altogether different reasons.)

Edit: ... and I'm one of the people playing the micros for a living.

Im surprised no one brought up the point that lowering rake could also have a negative affect. While don't get me wrong i would love lowering rake, heres why it wont happen

1.) advertisements cost $$$ we need these to keep fish coming back
2.) sponsorships / endorsements same
3.) cost of running a large business (not really too much in this case but for A+ customer support it costs $$$)
4.) Payment processors (biiiiig chunk of change here) they lose tons here. If this wasnt the case I could make an arguement for lowering it.

They may rake billions but they dont keep all of it. They give a decent % back as rewards and they also spend on the above. Their bottom line is a lot lower than you think.