Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now

12-11-2014 , 08:50 PM
Stars has employees posting in riggie threads with passion yet can't answer simple question about spin and goes or comment on the gong show that is the " players" meetings.

Pokerstars, why do u not provide a payout audtil daily weekly or monthly of what you ACTUALLY pay out in spin and goes. This is not an unrealistic request at all. Even basic lotteries provide this transparent info yet you feel the need to hide it.
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
12-17-2014 , 06:30 AM
They likely have some employees posting in this thread as well from shill accounts? Otherwise its hard to see why players would post so much bull****. Seems like the thread was bombed with such posts in the beginning.

Good questions Wacka, full disclosure on spin and goes please.

Good thread OP.
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
12-17-2014 , 07:15 AM
I support this
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
12-26-2014 , 12:22 PM
I will be putting half of my poker time to nlh next year, working it further, that is a major work for years, but as the lh and plo situation is dangerous, i need to put half of my efforts to where it sure matters for life as i cant just hope that things will stay good at plo, much less at lh.

Will have more sites to play also, when i am mopping some donks at random sites, that is one additional plus here, but going through major education now the third time, is not what i wanted to do, but i feel this is the way to make sure i dont get rake killed, have enough games, many sites, many forms of nlh, though needing additional study, and finally i probably add 8game as i know about all those games then well enough and can as well mop them up also.

Funny how sunny i am about this new change as it costs me years of effort, but it gets me out of the narrow trap and i feel like taking the challenge of moving up at nlh and mopping up the goods it gives and be covered for life. If i fail, i have lots of nlh options, random sites and the 8game if it runs.
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
12-26-2014 , 07:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by StoptheGreed
More games run because there are winning poker players who play huge numbers of tables with the losing players. Winning players pay rake too! More tables running makes more money for Pokerstars. Pokerstars make huge sums of money off the winning players too, which is fine. The point is the poker eco-system becomes imbalanced if too much money is drained out to the operator and the economy will shrink.
Do you understand that the ultimate source of players profits and the rake is the same, the losing player? This means that winning players are in competition with the site to get the losing players money.

If players withdraw more money then there is less money for PS. If players withdraw less money then there is more money for PS. It's pretty simple, just follow the money. If you're not depositing you're not helping Amaya.

Losing players don't play more hands because of the pros. Pro's "paying rake" is a technicality and a phrase that doesn't tell the whole story which needs to include what happens to the pot after it's won. If a loser wins it it goes back into play and eventually to rake. If a pro wins it it gets withdrawn to pay his rent.

If it becomes known that the games simply can't be beaten long term and if that fact causes people to stop depositing(some wont), that is a significant consideration but don't think that withdrawing/winning players are good for Amaya. Amaya rightly looks at your withdrawal as lost potential rake/profit.

If I were Amaya I would massively increase rake at higher limits then force winning regs to move up limits until they lose all their money or get to the highest limit then either ban them outright or let them play but pay that much higher rake. If a reg starts whining, "I can't win up there" I would suggest he redeposit so he can keep trying.
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
12-26-2014 , 10:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by zica
Do you understand that the ultimate source of players profits and the rake is the same, the losing player? This means that winning players are in competition with the site to get the losing players money.
Zica, I would rather use the word "symbiosis" to describe the relationship between a room and a very active player (either addicted losing gambler or winning players), rather than "competition" because they need each other.

The room revenue is not dependant on 1 variable but on 2 variables.
It is not: (rake%) -> room profit
but:
(rake%, player activity) -> room profit

They need a certain level of activity at the table to turn players' money into revenue. So if Amaya make enough players unhappy and they leave their site, their overall revenue will be affected if the decrease in activity offsets the increase of the rake%.

So if they increase the rake by 10% but ~9.5% fewer hands are played then they are losing revenue.

Last edited by Donkey111; 12-26-2014 at 10:51 PM. Reason: Added example
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
12-27-2014 , 12:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donkey111
Zica, I would rather use the word "symbiosis" to describe the relationship between a room and a very active player (either addicted losing gambler or winning players), rather than "competition" because they need each other.

The room revenue is not dependant on 1 variable but on 2 variables.
It is not: (rake%) -> room profit
but:
(rake%, player activity) -> room profit

They need a certain level of activity at the table to turn players' money into revenue. So if Amaya make enough players unhappy and they leave their site, their overall revenue will be affected if the decrease in activity offsets the increase of the rake%.

So if they increase the rake by 10% but ~9.5% fewer hands are played then they are losing revenue.
Donk, deposited money can only go 2 places, to rake or to player withdrawals. If the player pool were miniscule then winners may be useful but player pool is massive. Fish don't play more hands because of winning regs presence obviously. If you claim that they do then explain how and why. The more winning regs play the more money the fish lose and faster because some of their money is going to the winning reg.

The site benefits when bad players run hot move up limits and run hot some more before losing it all back because they had an exciting time and will have a story for the water cooler. How likely is this in the presence of 6 winning regs vs all bad gamblers? The answer is clear, Amaya needs winners like a hole in the head.

If all the grinding regs left the fish would have a more exciting experience. Some would run hot, move up and pay higher rake before running cold and losing it back again. They wouldn't lose their money as quickly and so may play more.

This seems so clear to me that I suspect some in this thread are intentionally misleading.

"if Amaya make enough players unhappy and they leave their site, their overall revenue will be affected if the decrease in activity offsets the increase of the rake%."

You need to recognize that there are two types of player, one who deposits and one who withdraws. If withdrawers leave it's fine because they are taking. If depositers leave it's death because they are giving.
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
12-27-2014 , 12:45 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by zica
Donk, deposited money can only go 2 places, to rake or to player withdrawals. If the player pool were miniscule then winners may be useful but player pool is massive. Fish don't play more hands because of winning regs presence obviously. If you claim that they do then explain how and why. The more winning regs play the more money the fish lose and faster because some of their money is going to the winning reg.

The site benefits when bad players run hot move up limits and run hot some more before losing it all back because they had an exciting time and will have a story for the water cooler. How likely is this in the presence of 6 winning regs vs all bad gamblers? The answer is clear, Amaya needs winners like a hole in the head.

If all the grinding regs left the fish would have a more exciting experience. Some would run hot, move up and pay higher rake before running cold and losing it back again. They wouldn't lose their money as quickly and so may play more.

This seems so clear to me that I suspect some in this thread are intentionally misleading.

"if Amaya make enough players unhappy and they leave their site, their overall revenue will be affected if the decrease in activity offsets the increase of the rake%."

You need to recognize that there are two types of player, one who deposits and one who withdraws. If withdrawers leave it's fine because they are taking. If depositers leave it's death because they are giving.
There is one point I agree with: it is important that the fish doesn't lose too quickly else he has a bad experience and leaves the site never to be seen again.

But I disagree on the fact that the focus on losing players is the end. It is a means to an end, the end being high revenue. To that end, a room has to strike a difficult balance: make sure the fish doesn't lose too quickly (else he leaves) but also that the pro doesn't win too little (else he leaves): 100 players are playing 10 times more hands and generating 10 times more rake (aka revenue for the room) than 10 players.

Sure you can say it is better if all players are fish and the rake is extremely high but then it makes poker a bad, unbeatable casino game where only gambling addicts are playing. Not sure it is a good long term approach but I am willing to be convinced otherwise.
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
12-27-2014 , 12:47 AM
Regarding the OP, I think it lacks focus. It should focus on Amaya's potential loss of revenue.
For cash games:
annual revenue (per stake) = %rake x number of hands per annum x average pot size
For tournaments:
annual revenue (per stake) = %rake x number of tournaments per annum x number of players per tournament

That's the only language Amaya understand. Items like the poker dreams, or the ethos being "we are poker" will be too abstract values for their analysts.

Also the OP is too focused on us, the players. It should be focused on how we, the players, will lower Amaya's revenue.

Amaya's revenue, Amaya's revenue, Amaya's revenue... the be-all, end-all of all discussions with Amaya.

Last edited by Donkey111; 12-27-2014 at 12:52 AM.
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
12-27-2014 , 01:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donkey111
Regarding the OP, I think it lacks focus. It should focus on Amaya's potential loss of revenue.
For cash games:
annual revenue (per stake) = %rake x number of hands per annum x average pot size
For tournaments:
annual revenue (per stake) = %rake x number of tournaments per annum x number of players per tournament

That's the only language Amaya understand. Items like the poker dreams, or the ethos being "we are poker" will be too abstract values for their analysts.

Also the OP is too focused on us, the players. It should be focused on how we, the players, will lower Amaya's revenue.

Amaya's revenue, Amaya's revenue, Amaya's revenue... the be-all, end-all of all discussions with Amaya.
I'm sure Amaya is really happy that they all these financial wizards to help them out with their business.
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
12-27-2014 , 11:15 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by StoptheGreed
TLDR version: Due to recent Pokerstars changes this is a petition to support higher rewards for Zoom and lower micro/small stakes rake for reasons explained in the post below. Please use this thread to voice support for these two options and sign below (maybe with your lifetime VPP count if comfortable with this) if you agree to these changes. Please keep discussion about different solutions to the other relevant threads to avoid derailment of the direction of this thread. Thanks.

Pokerstars has recently made a number of changes that have inarguably negatively impacted the most frequent cash game players on Pokerstars. Rake has been increased for Spin & Go’s, knockout MTTs, HU turbo SNG’s, HU cash games, the $5,000 reward is gone from SNE, long-standing promotions like Battle of the Planets withdrawn ($258,000/month) and a new tax of 2.5% currency conversions on deposits/ withdrawals has been added.

I have always had the highest praise for Pokerstars previously as a business and I want to state that I understand the majority of decisions taken to move forward and strengthen their business model. The decisions taken have boosted revenue from the Oldfield Group 8% and EBITDA by 19% in Q3 with Amaya revenue jumping to $239,000,000 for Q3 (link: https://ca.news.yahoo.com/amaya-gami...150327404.html)

I am a long-time 2+2er and have been a frequent and dedicated customer of Pokerstars for several years. I am in contact with a network of people who are in a similar situation to me. When I talk to these people they all share the same concerns - Pokerstars is making changes mostly driven by a thirst for short-term profit at the expense of the long-term maintenance of online poker games. The Pokerstars that was widely adored by its players gained its admiration by an excellent business model professionally executed by people who knew poker, which gave back to the players and listened to the frequent player community. I am hoping that Pokerstars listens to the recent uproar from the community recently and have tried to compile a reasonable argument for why effective rake should be lowered in the cash game sector.

It is well known and agreed upon that a game can be so heavily raked that the potential skill differences between players can not realistically be great enough to overcome that draining force. In cases like these the players are essentially playing a casino game - they have no chance to win in the long-run but as long as they play - the operator makes money. I think introducing casino games in disguise (i.e. Spin and Go’s) is a bad direction for Pokerstars and goes against their underlying ethos of ‘We are Poker’. The decision to offer casino games seems almost inescapable from a business perspective (if a little sad for poker purists) but the introduction of a casino game masquerading as poker is what I am opposed to. Innovation is good as long as its for the right reasons and built for the sake of mutual gain of customer and business. If new games are offered that are constructed in a way so no players involved will ever practically make money in the long-term then they should not be presented as poker games. Poker is often differentiated legally from other forms of gambling by the ability of skilled players to profit in the long-run.

Pokerstars has always marketed itself as selling the ‘poker dream’ with professional players on its payroll that live the apparent ‘poker dream’. Increasing rake and offering new games with very high (arguably unbeatable) rake makes it harder for players to achieve that dream. If information on win rates at low and micro stakes available on this forum are to be believed - the dream is already almost unobtainable at micro and small stakes (link: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/15...-zoom-1461881/). The closing of the skill gap between players, loss of markets and easier availability of great training material means the poker landscape is more competitive and tougher than the ‘boom years’.

Phil Galfond argued the point clearly when he said “If it gets to the point that a gifted college kid depositing $100 has no chance to grind cash all the way up to $50/$100, we all have a problem.” (link: http://www.pokernews.com/news/2014/1...ease-19706.htm). Pokerstars sells the dream and yet is making changes that are turning that dream into a distant reality.

At the most recent Pokerstars players meeting one representative GoGetARealJob (Ville Savonlahti) was asked by the community to get answers on differences in win-rates between zoom and normal games as there is a wealth of information posted on 2+2 showing win rates at zoom are lower than normal games. He was specifically told by Pokerstars he could not comment on comparisons between the two games and had to remove part of his report. He asked what measures Pokerstars uses to determine whether a poker economy is unhealthy or unbeatable and was denied permission to give the answer due to the Non-Disclosure Agreement. Ville also asked to see reports of rake taken vs deposits at PLO50 where there has been information posted on 2+2 suggesting almost none of the high volume players are winning post-rakeback (link: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...5&postcount=27) and Pokerstars were unable to provide this data despite having over 24 hours to run the query. This report was not forwarded on to the representative after the meeting either.

The argument was given by Pokerstars at these meetings that Zoom games were growing in popularity so there was no chance of any rake reduction or relief. With all due respect, this seems dangerously short-sighted and could be jeopardizing any potential growth by draining too much money from the economy. In the current environment with lots of potential markets closed off to Pokerstars shrinking the player base down - the last thing the economy needs for growth is the takeover of a fast-fold game that reduces edges further and prevents money flowing up the economy that stimulates growth. Pokerstars has stated it will use the further profit to encourage more sign-ups of new depositing players but this is of no use if they are depositing into a stagnant system where deposits are eaten up by rake at low stakes and no one has the thrill of a prolonged winning streak.

My argument would be to ask Pokerstars for a compromise to all the changes that have negatively affected its longstanding customers and make allowances in these two forms:

The first would be a meaningful increase in rewards to players playing Zoom games - a clearly lower edge game that increases the hands played per hour by every player that gets involved (i.e. bleeding out casual depositors quicker to astronomical levels of rake at low stakes and freezing the flow of money from low mid stakes to high stakes as rake is pouring in to the operator).

The second would be a real decrease in rake for players at micro and small stakes cash games up to the $100 level. In PLO, where rake is highest in bb/100, data shows rates of 10 to 18bb/100 (link: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...8&postcount=23). Depositing players at these levels have to fight against near impossible odds to turn a profit and all it takes is a small relief so casual depositors can survive a bit longer. Breakeven players turn a small profit and spread the good word (it’s easier to win at Pokerstars!) and the economy can be nurtured for sustainable growth that benefits everyone.

I want to stress that I ask for these compromises not out of anger about recent changes to Pokerstars’ business model that are mostly reasonable and reflect the changing direction of the company. I ask for these compromises out of a deep concern for a game (and livelihood) that I love and care about and a fear that the company I have respected and admired has placed short-term objectives over the more long-term picture. Pokerstars has listened to the community in the past and together we have agreed changes that have benefited the whole system - I hope that Pokerstars chooses to listen now and not turn its back on its dedicated customer base.

If PokerStars is not listening to us as a group I think we have to do more to spread our play to their more fairly priced competitors (e.g. networks with 60%+ rakeback deals from sign-up) but I hope it doesn't have to come to that discussion. This is simply a request for a reasonable compromise from Pokerstars after a stream of decisions that have hurt its regular players (who are a huge chunk of Pokerstars’ revenue - 60% of revenue comes from players who signed up between 2001 and 2010 - link: http://www.forbes.com/sites/nathanva...bling-is-34/4/)

I ask that those supporting this motion against PokerStars sign this thread - with their lifetime VPP count (if you can) and that we take suggestion for other changes in the threads dedicated for that subject.


Mods, please leave this thread in NVG for max exposure to our community.

Wait you mean Pokerstars wasnt set up to make PLO $50 multi tablers money? Im getting so fed up of people complaining about the rake and how a 5% increase makes the games unbeatable. Theres millions of people that are registered on Stars and that play their games The micro cash game grinders do not make up the majority. Pokerstars is not in business to make the low limit grinders money. Grinders are able to make money as a function of Stars being in business. The great thing about free enterprise is that the public will ultimately show if Stars moves are sustainable or not by if they continue playing there. If in 6 months Stars no longer has the traffic they have now and profits have fallen then they will be forced to reverse back to old rake and business model. As to the casino games and sports betting. How can this surprise anyone. This may come as a surprise but poker is gambling. Its just like sports betting. If you put in the work (which most wont) a few can beat the lines maker. Most just bet to make a game more enjoyable to watch. Pokers the same. Most people deposit a couple hundred to play some tournys or cash games and the rake means nothing as their deposit will probably be lost within a few sessions anyway. You think after the fish gets felted with his 9-6 off suit he thinks about how much rake he contributed? Introducing casino and sports is not about making short term profits. Its completely the opposite. Its building a long term profitable business model. If you own a shirt store would you not introduce ties and cuff links? as those are products that will be bought by your same customer. Well think about it. How many poker players on Stars also have a sports betting account elsewhere? I'm going to guess at least 60% or more. Ill go a step further and also say Amaya was probably only able to secure the financing to buy Stars based on the pitch of introducing casino and sports. Without that in the pitch I doubt they would of secured financing.
My advice to everyone thats worried would be move to LA and play live. Theres games here in LA that you can make $500 a day at with your eyes closed. Playing 15 tables of PLO $50 and grinding $7 pots all day is an insane waste of time.
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
12-27-2014 , 11:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bollocks11
Wait you mean Pokerstars wasnt set up to make PLO $50 multi tablers money? Im getting so fed up of people complaining about the rake and how a 5% increase makes the games unbeatable. Theres millions of people that are registered on Stars and that play their games The micro cash game grinders do not make up the majority. Pokerstars is not in business to make the low limit grinders money. Grinders are able to make money as a function of Stars being in business. The great thing about free enterprise is that the public will ultimately show if Stars moves are sustainable or not by if they continue playing there. If in 6 months Stars no longer has the traffic they have now and profits have fallen then they will be forced to reverse back to old rake and business model. As to the casino games and sports betting. How can this surprise anyone. This may come as a surprise but poker is gambling. Its just like sports betting. If you put in the work (which most wont) a few can beat the lines maker. Most just bet to make a game more enjoyable to watch. Pokers the same. Most people deposit a couple hundred to play some tournys or cash games and the rake means nothing as their deposit will probably be lost within a few sessions anyway. You think after the fish gets felted with his 9-6 off suit he thinks about how much rake he contributed? Introducing casino and sports is not about making short term profits. Its completely the opposite. Its building a long term profitable business model. If you own a shirt store would you not introduce ties and cuff links? as those are products that will be bought by your same customer. Well think about it. How many poker players on Stars also have a sports betting account elsewhere? I'm going to guess at least 60% or more. Ill go a step further and also say Amaya was probably only able to secure the financing to buy Stars based on the pitch of introducing casino and sports. Without that in the pitch I doubt they would of secured financing.
My advice to everyone thats worried would be move to LA and play live. Theres games here in LA that you can make $500 a day at with your eyes closed. Playing 15 tables of PLO $50 and grinding $7 pots all day is an insane waste of time.
Do you think poker would be the same if all the players realized that the site takes 99+% of the cash game money out? Your points on free enterprise are off too, Stars has, and will likely always have, a monopoly. The barriers to entry are so high no one is going to come and try and compete. They will drag online to it's death with their model and there is nothing we can feasibly do about it (quite possibly would die at any level the rake could be set at that would allow a company to survive).
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
12-27-2014 , 11:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Mainfield
Do you think poker would be the same if all the players realized that the site takes 99+% of the cash game money out? Your points on free enterprise are off too, Stars has, and will likely always have, a monopoly. The barriers to entry are so high no one is going to come and try and compete. They will drag online to it's death with their model and there is nothing we can feasibly do about it (quite possibly would die at any level the rake could be set at that would allow a company to survive).
You say that like being a monopoly is a crime. It is not. It is not necessarily even a bad thing since a monopoly can be efficient. It's not their fault they have become a monopoly. Some businesses actually have a desire to succeed. And poker, by it's nature, leads to monopolies.
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
12-28-2014 , 01:20 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Mainfield
Do you think poker would be the same if all the players realized that the site takes 99+% of the cash game money out? Your points on free enterprise are off too, Stars has, and will likely always have, a monopoly. The barriers to entry are so high no one is going to come and try and compete. They will drag online to it's death with their model and there is nothing we can feasibly do about it (quite possibly would die at any level the rake could be set at that would allow a company to survive).
I just laugh at the outrage that a company that provides gambling in the form of poker has decided to offer their customers gambling in the form of casino and sports betting. Also there are hundreds of posts on 2+2 about poker sites attached to sportsbooks having tons of rec players and players trying to get back what they lost at sports. If Stars becomes a giant Bovada Mmmmmmm bring that on pleeeeze.
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
12-28-2014 , 02:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Mainfield
Stars has, and will likely always have, a monopoly. The barriers to entry are so high no one is going to come and try and compete.
How exactly are the barriers to entry for an online poker site so high that nobody can or will possibly compete with Stars?
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
12-28-2014 , 03:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bollocks11
I just laugh at the outrage that a company that provides gambling in the form of poker has decided to offer their customers gambling in the form of casino and sports betting. Also there are hundreds of posts on 2+2 about poker sites attached to sportsbooks having tons of rec players and players trying to get back what they lost at sports. If Stars becomes a giant Bovada Mmmmmmm bring that on pleeeeze.
Perfect username
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
12-28-2014 , 04:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by illdonk
How exactly are the barriers to entry for an online poker site so high that nobody can or will possibly compete with Stars?
its not so much that the costs of entry are so high its just a company would need a ton of working capital as it would take years to become any kind of threat to Stars and so the kind of money that would need to be spent over those years would make it hard.
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
12-28-2014 , 04:23 AM
so what?
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
12-28-2014 , 01:07 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDarkElf
You say that like being a monopoly is a crime. It is not. It is not necessarily even a bad thing since a monopoly can be efficient. It's not their fault they have become a monopoly. Some businesses actually have a desire to succeed. And poker, by it's nature, leads to monopolies.
Ya it's better for the amount of games if everyone is playing in the same client. But it also gives them a huge amount of control over the fee's taken from the games. The large barriers to entry are due to the extreme uncertainty in the future of online poker. It has changed a lot in the past 10 years, and looks like it will continue changing for the next 10 years (maybe some bot comes out or it drops another 14% over the next year).
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
04-26-2015 , 01:09 PM
Signed, 2,851,000 vpps
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
04-26-2015 , 01:22 PM
You can't trust this company or the shady people who work for it.
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
04-26-2015 , 02:12 PM
I just wish the fish would stay away. I play on another site and I'm so happy about that. There are other sites that are beatable, just avoid the ones with superusers in their past.
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
04-27-2015 , 10:59 AM
jesus alsk, u seem to try to bad mouth the company everywhere.

Why are you still playing on PS?
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
04-27-2015 , 11:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by vektor
I just wish the fish would stay away.
Quoted for bafflement.
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote
04-27-2015 , 02:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by zica
Do you understand that the ultimate source of players profits and the rake is the same, the losing player? This means that winning players are in competition with the site to get the losing players money.

If players withdraw more money then there is less money for PS. If players withdraw less money then there is more money for PS. It's pretty simple, just follow the money. If you're not depositing you're not helping Amaya.

Losing players don't play more hands because of the pros. Pro's "paying rake" is a technicality and a phrase that doesn't tell the whole story which needs to include what happens to the pot after it's won. If a loser wins it it goes back into play and eventually to rake. If a pro wins it it gets withdrawn to pay his rent.

If it becomes known that the games simply can't be beaten long term and if that fact causes people to stop depositing(some wont), that is a significant consideration but don't think that withdrawing/winning players are good for Amaya. Amaya rightly looks at your withdrawal as lost potential rake/profit.

If I were Amaya I would massively increase rake at higher limits then force winning regs to move up limits until they lose all their money or get to the highest limit then either ban them outright or let them play but pay that much higher rake. If a reg starts whining, "I can't win up there" I would suggest he redeposit so he can keep trying.
A lot of people for some reason will not accept this. I've been having this argument with people for a year. What Zica has said here is clearly correct and understanding this will lead you to understanding how little power we have
Pokerstars Profits Hugely at Expense of Players - Important for all Poker Players to Act Now Quote

      
m