Thanks for the support guys. Let's keep this thread up.

Yes, sites have maximised profits, fish are paying the most and winners winning the least to keep all games going. And we're happy about that?

It's WAtr's 'thas the way it is' attitude and sarcastic posts that keep this BS going. Sites need regs and a union including these and all lovers of online poker would have an affect, depends how much you all want lower raje though.

+ 1 mirrion!!!
Only way to make it happen and it will happen if we unite!

Boycott is really the only option here. I mean what else is there to do that actually has a shot. The nonchalant people ITT just saying that won't work without another solution need to gtfo.

I think rake is a higher problem at the lower stakes. Rake was definitely a factor when I played 100nl and below. After that it sorta becomes an afterthought.

best solution is to play better + move up faster IMO. As long as one of the top 3 sites doesn't lower rake by a large %, nothing will change. Obv it'd be good if they lowered rake, but there's a tiny chance it happens unfortunately.

So who is actually going to do something then rather than just moan in this thread?

Boycott is not really an option I think. Sure a little group of the total player pool could boycott, but the rest of the player pool says: "F it, less regs playing now, so I'm playing for sure !", or just: "I don't give a F about rake, I just wanna play!". And will play anyway.

Maybe we can make a website to sign a petition, or make some standard email who everyone can use to send to there online pokerroom. If we get enough people to send emails/sign petitions this would maybe get the ball rolling in the right direction.

only thing that will lower rake is more competition and more sites to choose from.

there are already a ton of sites. just not all US. afaik most of them are about the same.

also i think stars and ft rake wasn't much different after uigea than it was before most skins bailed out of US. at least up until the recent changes on ft.

This.
I'm gonna use an AFAIK also cause I'm not 100% sure but I think most non-US'ers have sites available that offer a much higher percentage of rakeback or rewards, and they are not sites like our alternatives (WSEX/BETFAIR, etc) they actually have traffic.

I would imagine if the largest market was thrown into the mix it would even be more competitive. As it stands now, it could be argued that a reason FTP and PS have not had to offer lower rake or a higher RB % is because they allow Americans which in turn make them much larger sites and some people choose traffic over RB/rewards. This is also why I think what happens to Americans also affects others, but that could be argued as well.

We also know that the sites spend a ton in processing fees for Americans so if it ever becomes open to everyone here etc, I think the competition will create a lower cost to the players all the way around.

^^ That's assuming the Gov doesn't **** us though and that def can happen. All you have to do is look at France, Italy, and our own Gov's propensity to **** us and it's a very viable threat to the rake never being lowered, even through open competition.

But most of the Euro sites charge more rake in the first place, which means they are raking the fish who don't have RB deals even harder, which is what I think most in this thread are fighting against. PS and FTP have the lowest rake structure of all sites. Half of Euro sites use euro tables (Boss, Entraction, Ipoker) which are ALOT more rake.

Also Cake, Merge and Cereus are about the same size as average Euro networks and you can probably get 50%+ deals on Cake and Merge and I know UB used to do basically unlimited reloads and promotions on top of there 30% RB

Admittedly I did not know much about foreign sites (foreign to my location that is), so thanks for clarifying Invertible.

I didn't know they ran the affiliate scheme, meaning I thought RB was included, or a rewards program built in like Stars has (that's basically RB). So yea, they do rake higher if they use the euro or GBP and if most don't have RB then it's obvious rake is a huge problem other places as well.

Do you think adding a market the size of the U.S. would help lower effective rake? Or would it only help the sites make more money? If it's the latter then I think there's gonna have to be a point where a coalition of players/poker advocates, start making EVERYONE aware of rake and it's affects. It would have to be a campaign, even funded for advertisement etc.

I truly think that's the main issue, as I've seen it first hand. I've informed live players of the rake and the fact that you can ask for it to be lowered when playing short handed (you have to ask btw, cause their too scummy to just make it the rule) and I've seen those same people whom knew nothing of it before, snap ask the dealer to adjust the drop now. I have many more examples similar to that one actually including comps, time charges refunded, etc.

There is an opportunity coming which will likely evade players once again. Several states (CA, NJ, FL, others) are moving rapidly to begin intrastate initiatives. Legislation is being crafted which may/may not include rake caps, mostly it is concerned with revenue splits between the sites and the government.

Currently, rooms do not include ingame advertising presumably because of the unclear nature of legality. Once a site is blessed by a state government, there is no reason why introducing ingame banners won't become a major revenue source for the sites. Plus, in an intrastate world, the pool of sites will essentially be a monopoly on that market.

My guess is these statewide initiatives will get rolling with nobody even discussing this and the outcome will be high rakes (captive market) + the sites will begin to generate large revenues (which they will keep) from advertising. If there were a true player's organization, maybe they could get involved with the state efforts but its probably too late for that.

Poker hits a key demographic (young males w/money) and presents them with several static windows. Not putting car dealer, appliance big box stores and real estate ads on these windows once poker is legal is Internet marketing fail (there is an opportunity here for the next ancillary poker business if you are a web entrepreneur, most of the money being made in poker is not in playing the game.)

It's a scary thought. We kind of saw an example when the boom happened and the players had no representation and got screwed out of almost all monies and marketing opportunities etc. Then the WPT bans the players from wearing logo's etc.

It's almost like we can be our worst enemies. The players, the very ones who play and promote the game, make it popular... get shafted by the providers, governments, etc.

Should there even be a PPA that is pushing for and uses most of it's capitol pushing for legislation before we even have a true players advocacy group? I mean, it's starting to look like the providers have taken what is supposed to be the Poker Players Alliance and turned them into their own tool that may be used to further their agenda. I don't claim to know much of what I'm talking about here but I would not be surprised if the sites are the biggest contributors.

IDK man. The problem is poker is such an individuals game and it's just not in the players interest to form a union with each other. EG's right though that this is the time and the further we get buried the harder it's going to be to get ourselves dug out.

What I do know is what we have now and it's hard to imagine it getting any better http://www.pokertableratings.com/pok...imit-hold%27em

I agree with this. The rake at the lower stakes have always been a rapefest.


Diggin the new avys.

Since players are so willing to pay a massive amount of rake, how can there be a way to tap into that and just add a very small fee that would go straight to a players advocacy group or coalition?

I understand players not wanting to be involved but wouldn't that work in theory? If it was only 1% of what we are paying out for rake now it would amount to millions of dollars and that money could be used to lobby, negotiate, represent, inform, even provide.

I just don't know how it would go forward but obv something like a union run site where 100% of profits from rake went to the union or something, at least then you wouldn't be asking poker players to do anything they are not already doing.

Could a union run site be exempt from laws and taxes as a "donation" type format, or how's this, can I get a "poker church" in the house? It's taught me a lot about life and I study it much more than a religious text or w/e People are allowed to grow and use peyote and much stranger things under the protection of religious freedom laws. Seriously, let's start a fkn church!

Either that or we should all just move to Switzerland or something.

slacka already started one in sttf. love your blog btw!

no rake, just charge 10% tax on all cashouts

boom, how can this not work?

Because fish and/or dumb people would see it as unfair upon first glance? I agree it's a great idea at microstakes, I doubt the nosebleeders would love it though.

Pretty sure absolutely everyone pays way more than that now. Guys making $200k+ are certainly paying more than $20k in rake. Don't know how fish would see it as unfair when $0 < whatever they're paying now although I can see it being an issue when they score a good weekend. Maybe just make it "Rake Free" and 10% cashout fee for people that are listed in the site's database as net winners with possibly a smaller fee for net losers like 5% so they can look around, compare apples and oranges, and think 5% is standard.

Just to give you the opposite view, fish wont really be a fan of this model. They don't really care whats best for them, they just think, "well if i bust my account, I don't have to pay anything, but i have lost all my money anyway. But if I win, I have to pay a 10% fee". Fish only care about that high they get when there winning.

The rake model is actually a great business model, sites have shown that by the amount they can charge without the majority noticing. It's a hidden fee that most are used to paying if they play at the casino's anyway. If players are going to lobby for anything, then it should be for a lower rake system.

The zero rake site doesn't charge a donk/fish anything until they get in the black. So a super dumper on a hot run if he cashes out won't pay that that tax until he is in the black.

GTFO with that. An across the board rake cut is what is needed. The big sites are making way too much in profits off of its players.

fyp