I think you missed my point.

That point is, I have a choice to consume their product or not. If they want me as a customer they have to provide me with a product that is attractive to me. If that product is **** disguised as cake then I will not be a customer for long.

I will utilise my free market choice and go elsewhere.

A wise decision.

probably not . at least 98% of them.

a) micro stakes tables getting raked 9999bb/1000 hands for years (so the last few remaining pure fish that deposit an average of 20 bucks dont have a slight chance of jumping the stakes and sitting on a mid stakes table)on a declining market year after year and ppl getting maximum 20% back from that and nobody makes a move/boycott.

b) 500 ppl that mostly pay maximum of a 0.5bb cap on a 70bb pot getting their 70% rakeback cut in half and everybody loses their mind.

c) on boycott thread
the demand is: pokerstars reverting the SNE rakebacks.
suggestions(aka we dont give a **** cause we are so shortsighted)are: lowering the micros rake

the suggestion should be the demand and maybe more ppl will join imo and i dont support neither i am against the boycott

I think you have done an excellent job of trying to keep people appraised of why so many of these changes are detrimental to all, not just that mystical 2% people keep referring to. I think if more people knew who Raidalot is irl, they might be inclined to give more weight to his wise assessment of the new Amaya philosophy.


On a personal level, just want to say I appreciate your efforts.

Amen to that. When the SNE's pay a tiny rake in percentage terms to begin with, then whine about it getting cut in half while everyone else has been paying 3x more rake for ages.. well, let's just say my sympathy is very limited.

You guys weren't striking about micros cash players getting shafted by Stars for years so why should we really give a **** now you're the ones getting the shaft?

70% rakeback was ridiculous, sorry.

Cheers, appreciate it!

Others (especially those welcoming these changes) should read this article on Raidalot (Talal Shakerchi) and his views on Amaya. And take note that this was written 15 months ago!:

http://calvinayre.com/2014/11/04/pok...to-greedstars/

+1

(1) and (2) are not so likely to happen, and if (3) happens ('players' meaning mostly 'regs')... where should I (and other patrons of other sites) play so that I could still show a short-medium-term profit (as I'd like to quit after winning $50K-ish) / have a decent chance of going on a heater?

That's the problem with Amaya's market dominance - rec player bases of other sites (even if taken as a whole) are so small that they can't really feed so many regs at once. And even if they did (and Stars/FTP regs weren't nauseated by the sight of other rooms' software), Stars would become the most profitable site to play at in absence of the 2% elite if it's gone totally.

But here's the thing - pokerstars 'greed' only became an issue to the supernova players when it was their profits getting cut. Now they try and peddle BS like this affects us all when they were silent for years over high micros rake. Where was the community solidarity then?

Plenty of players other than micro-stakes have complained about the high rake in those games. I attended a meeting at Stars HQ on the IOM where we continued the discussions that started on the forums. Obviously people are going to be more vocal though when issues concern themselves more directly- in all walks of life. It's natural for a player to have less interest in other players' interests, but it's foolish and shortsighted to take your view of f*** the others.

This issue with micro rake was adressed over and over again for years. And guess who adressed it and was very vocal about it ? Guys who play for a living aka higher vip tiers you ungrateful prick!

I personally couldnt care less if you pay 20bb/100 at NL2 and yet i (and many others) mentioned over and over again that rake at micros is a joke and needs to be changed asap

In any case, it does affect everybody. Players at all stakes wanting profitable games need:

a) Decent but not great players moving up having beaten lower stakes.
b) 'The Dream' of moving up Brian Townsend-style to be sold to young hopefuls and for it actually to be something that is legitimately doable.

So yes, overly-raked games at any stake are a very big concern for all of us.

Let's face it, there's never been anything like the uproar that there is here. Where were the SNE strikes over high rake at 25nl? Yet they want the micros players (and everyone else) to strike now they're the ones taking the pokerstars dick for once?

Whether the new Amaya philosophy is detrimental to all or only 2% is largely irrelevant. Amaya obviously think it is not detrimental to their business.

Individually we can either accept that philosophy and continue to play there or move on. That's the only real option players/consumers have. Continually whining and complaining about it is pointless. There is no meaningful dialogue between players and Amaya and no evidence that they even care what we think.

Each player should just decide if it is worthwhile to keep playing there or not. Then act accordingly.

There's never been any uproar quite like this because this is potentially a killer blow for online poker. I wouldn't expect micro-stakes players to strike, although fair play if they do. I would though expect them to be a lot smarter than you and appreciate the bigger picture.

I'm not sure why it's so hard to differentiate between whining/complaining and actively educating players whilst correcting the Amaya PR nonsense.

Online poker is dead because a few SNE's took the dick? I think not.

These things have a habit of equaling out. With high rakeback you get reg filled games. With low rakeback you get soft games. Yes it blows if you're an SNE, but those guys have had it too good for far too long. Even if stars keeps 90% of the money they save, the slight redistribution of wealth is still welcome, and needed.

You are precisely the type of player Amaya are hoping believe their PR. Good luck!

It doesn't matter what even very vocal group wants. The thing that matters the most is what's possible. They made their decision to cut the cashback for regs heavily. They are not going to revert the changes. The reason doesn't matter really whether it is their huge debt,greed or something else.
The boycott have little sense because the agenda and what the regs want (revert many of the key changes) is not on the table.
So thats the big problem. Instead of fighting for what is possible the boycott strive for a goal that is not going to happen.

If the games become unbeatable they won't run, and Amaya will be forced to make a change. You know, just like last year when they tried a rake increase, only to backpedal when volume dried up. Hopefully if the volume dries up this time, they'll have to decrease the rake to get games going again.

I'm much more in favour of a system where the best players are rewarded, rather than the guy who has the most time to grind out volume. And trying to tell a 25nl player that his games are gonna get much tougher because Doug Polk no longer gets his VPP's when playing against a Chinese millionaire is insane and just as deceptive as what you're accusing Stars of.

The problem is that you are pushing off a lot of what you have to say as fact when it's really nothing more than just speculation from your part. Just so you don't think I'm one of those uninformed players that you keep referencing to I'm going to link a post I made almost a month and a half ago on this website below with my take on what I thought would happen.....

However, I don't post it ten times a days all over twoplustwo and quote it as fact. All this doom and gloom is also way over emphasized in alot of your posts when that's a bit extreme considering that the majority of other networks already had or moved towards a similar VIP model to that which Stars is now at in 2016. In fact I play on alot of these other networks and PokerStars still has lower effective rake and a better rewards system than most of them. Are these networks also doomed now? Are these former SN+ players going to destroy all the games on all the other networks as well post these new changes?

Raidalot's opinion on this issue is a great one just as many of his opinions were regarding 3rd party software but I didn't see any of you backing him up in that thread when it went against your own personal interest.

Do I expect PokerStars as the market leader and a monopoly under a huge debt in a weakening market to be overly generous to players right now? Nope, not really, but I'm not exaggerating and spouting this off as if it's the end of online poker while pushing off my opinions onto others as if they were fact.

Sorry boys, I don't respect your views. My biggest flaw, that reduces how efficient I am with my time, is that I spend too long talking to Jehovah Witnesses rather than just closing the door.

Stars no longer covers the SNEs rent bill for the month so apparently this is the end of online poker for everyone, rofl.

Remember when the same lot said spin and go's were unbeatable too only to have someone make 8k in a month for a prop bet?

At least you can be sure the Jehova's aren't trolling and actually believe what they are telling you. So probably better listening to them than reading much of NVG.

As someone who at times shares the same "flaw," I can say first handed that time does indeed remove a lot of that "fuel," especially when one frustratingly realizes that their own interpretation of events is not always what everyone else believes. Do I read your posts and truly believe you are fighting for the good of 5NL players everywhere? Not really. Perhaps as an unintended side benefit of your perception of your beliefs, but not directly.

Assuming you are telling the truth about leaving them as a customer then you are showing the convictions of your beliefs, which is pretty much all one can do as a consumer, and if others choose to follow or not follow - that is their choice, and they may be making the right choice for themselves even if they disagree with all or parts your sweeping theory on the situation. Flatly dismissing those who disagree as essentially "sheeple" shows the frustration of the situation, but does not really help with making a point.

Anyway, I agree how this whole thing was handled left a lot to be desired, but I will also be surprised if this end of the world as we know it is really that much different than the many others this industry has faced over the years.