Exactly this! It's 2019 and the clients are as boring as excel sheets.

Dreyfus wasn't the first thinking about this, "Hands of Victory" was announced b/f. i think they finally managed to get out a product, so lets see. but HoldemX failed badly and PS' power up (while still running), wasn't a game changing either.

That's still rake, you're just shifting it from players paying a small fee for each pot they win to players making lump sum payments periodically.

Only difference is the former is guaranteed.

guys, when you have the funding please contact me, ill help you with the software part)))

How about a rake free poker room that’s sustainable because of advertising. Advertise the hell out of the room on the TVs banners etc

It would likely cost more to promote/advertise the site than it would bring in by selling ads on the site's client window.

You've taken the already unworkable (and previously discussed) idea of an advertising model, and made it more unworkable.

Hearthstone is addictive during the first year or two because of the achievements plus they have some additionals; some for pay and some can be earned with missions. Players feel they have got something. That is even when new and better cards come and the old become less good or expire. People like to play with a top deck that isn't free or takes a lot of work to achieve and all that cost them time and money and give enough in return.

How is it at Stars? One has some basic avatar picture and don't even sort of remember if there is any chat and so on. Could be ready-made lines of chat that can be earned also (Hearthstone, Eternal). Better avatars than can be earned. Microgaming has some achievements that I think are good. 888 can throw snowballs etc. on the opponents that I think is good. Drinks, cigarettes, other.

Good notes functions, all colours possible, other tags, country flags. House session HUD (loose, aggro). Server notes and same available with mobile GGnetwork as an example. Stars has zero for mobile players who additionally play against HUDs and notes. Stars has a good notes function, just could be better still. GG has some issues with hanging notes funtion that some multitable players find more difficult and is a bit on the way when using a mobile. Stars has always been the best there.

If the stars are good, depends on a place; they were good at Stars but are an intimidation and humiliation factor at Chico. Silver and gold avatars can be better depending on how they need to be achieved. In Hearthstone, one can achieve a golden one stuffs, avatar, cards like the back of the cards in poker. Those are permanent achievements but when they are with cards (or promotions) that expire like some top list and whatever.

Stars has/had some specials one can have on the avatar or so if having achieved something; that increases the social feel of the game and are achievements like at Microgaming.

No doubt a lot can be done to make poker more social and get achievements like that.

1) you won't make nearly as much from ads as from rake
2)even if you could make a lot from ads why wouldn't you rake it?
If you're an intelligent person why would you start a site, sell ads, put a ton of time effort money etc into getting fish onto the site which you need to be sustainable just to let winning players siphon off the money for free? it makes zero sense whatsoever.

This idea that some benevolent person is going to fall from the sky to grant poker players, some of the most parasitic people on the planet a rake free printing press is beyond delusional.

I'm here.

Dont care what any of you nerds say

Dnegs was right. More Rake is Better

Keeps the better players away

Prove me wrong

Rich people don't get rich by being generous

When you present an idea that's obviously really stupid, the burden of proof is to prove yourself correct, not on a stranger to disprove you. You can't just go 'the moon is made of camembert. prove me wrong'.

A completely rake free poker room is obviously impossible, since you are going to have to pay for a lot of expenses, such as the security of the poker room.

The truth is people just got a lot better at online poker.

It's like if you play Fifa online. The players are playing on there all the time and the standard of play is very high and they aren't even playing for money.

Its true that thermodynamically speaking poker does require energy cost. But "depending on how things were fundamentally arranged..." I think there could be a difference between the cost and the rake paid which could be lower or higher depending on the arrangement.

It depends on who you ask of course. But this is where I think most players, recs and pros alike, would agree, whereas sometimes owners of sites (and players hired by those sites to promote agendas) might think that higher rake is better.