yes the spins idea was just very good for amaya in terms of making more rake quicker in a more profitable way for company, and yes it does seem to attract some more gamblers at the begging, who see they can bink a milly.
But as a whole it totally destroys the economy long term.
Solid and good way to profit short term, massively horrible long term. Now that time passed by, they actually starting to understand that money went somewhere, so they are making cuts everywhere, instead of doing one most important change.
Well apparently thats the way Amaya is working with their business. Quarterly liquidity and profit is more important for shareholders than long term sustainability of the company gg.

Which is what makes it all the more ridiculous Amaya claims to have the longevity of the "poker ecology" at heart. All these rec spewing on their first hand in every 2x multiplier because they don't care, they just want to bink the big spin. And Amaya ships all the cash with the ludicrous rake.
Depositors lose their roll 40% faster now? Gee, I wonder why.

i'm waiting for them to say there's no rakeback because there's no rake, sparking a new era of high stakes action

Tbf there barely is any rake... wat you pay at 1k these days? 1.5bb/100?

Amaya only cares about shareholders profits and nothing more.

The game's up with Amaya in charge. These changes are the beginning not the end. Next they will be increasing the rake on MTTs so they become unviable long term as well. I recall that they wanted to re-rake all rebuys and add-ons last year.

why do you want to attract new players if they get crushed by regs in 12 minutes and leave the site forever with 0,67$ in rake?

1 - you need to make poker unbeatable. this way, only loosing gamblers will stay and the money will never leave the site.

2- attract new players into the new EV- poker .

If winning players cashout more money than the rake you are making with them, those players are not good for the business. YOU NEED TO get rid of those players.

WHY YOU DONT UNDERSTAND PEOPLE ?

I was just messing around with comment about my quote. and yes me bringing up live was sort of silly, dynamics there are just all different.

You do present articulate and well thought out comments about these changes and effect on SNGs. That along with trickle down theory (making cash games worse for recs) are the main points I've read ITT that if I were decision makers at Stars would take note. I believe most of the salient points that could be made on either side of that have been made.

Looking at this topic from 1,000 feet, 10,000 feet and 100,000 feet, I'll just close with the following.



1000 Feet - Effect of changes on games on Stars
There have been forecasts and supporting logic on both sides (though haven't seen anyone refute what you say about SNGS).

Time will tell. Stars future plans related to these topics are not privy to anyone ITT (well except BigSalmon )

also of note... Legislative and regulatory issues country by country are 10x important to quality of games (however one defines that), as the matters discussed ITT, though these matters are still important, as it relates to growth of online poker, regulatory/ legislative are just way way way more important.



10,000 Feet - Effect of changes on AYA and its shareholder value

I been thinking a lot more about this topic of late .

The juggernaut that was PokerStars is certainly not the same under AYA, they have kinks in the armor (#1 brand loyalty, #2 Balance sheet issues) that should be exploited from a competitive strategy standpoint by other sites. Stars out Party'd PartyPoker back in the day under an ownership team that was TOTALLY zoned into what poker players wanted, and had the luxury of being a privately held company in mostly unregulated markets.

Being a publically traded company forces current execs to think in 90-day increments. I've lived in that world. Those earning reports and conf calls come up every 90-days whether you want them to or not.

Baazov the genius? Baazov the idiot? Baazov the con artist? I really have no idea. I will say that pulling off that acquisition took a set of two ton kahunas and some serious maneuvering and salesmanship.



100,000 Feet - Evolution of Online Poker

Industries are dynamic and change.

Activision paying 6B for King/Candy Crush is a good sign of where online gaming markets are evolving. Esports is in its absolute infancy.

Say what you want about Dnegs, but he aint no dummy and wasn't at Blizzcon just because he likes to look at attractive woman dressed as Night Elves ( I play a human priest and nightelve hunter, just grind the AH and casual raid when new content comes up... well to be more honest only come on when new content as that's when its easiest to grind AH, lots of recs , never played hearthstone)

How online gamers market becomes more like online poker, or more likely how online poker becomes more like online gamer market remains to be seen. But, that is where the ba billions will be made over the next decade.

Unless there's a bunch of self serving gibberish from high volume players, or any more assertions that recs require a positive long term winrate to play, I prob have nothing more to add to this thread as I would just be repeating myself. also just noticed I top the leaderboard in # of posts ITT, so prob time for me to shhhh.

thanks for others for taking time to post. I did learn quite a bit about re: areas of online poker business I was never exposed to.

[1] That has been in the PokerStars EULA for at least 18 months that I know of. Not New. Was there long before Amaya.
[2] This is standard EULA boilerplate wording used almost word-for-word by many companies. Look up AT&T for example.
[3] The lawyers who write EULAs use standard templates these days so the same wording tends to pop up all over the place - the wording is not telling you anything worrisome re PokerStars
[4] This wording doesn't reduce PokerStars' responsibility to protect their customers from fraud & invasion of privacy. You still have all the normal consumer rights as agreed between PokerStars & the licensing bodies that apply in your jurisdiction. If your account somehow gets emptied due to poor PS security you will get reimbursed

You say that EULA "worries you a lot" - well don't let it. If ever you get scammed out of funds on the internet it will usually be as a result of poor security at your end - even the recent TalkTalk database debacle [where thieves took advantage of a poorly protected TalkTalk database] still required that the victims also fell for some 'social engineering' over the phone by the thieves. If you have been sensible in basic security measures re passwords, what sites you visit, using two-step authentication, not using your admin account for day-to-day computer operations, securing your wi-fi, not using your poker computer for surfing porn or banking [if you're high stakes] etc etc - you will be pretty safe

wait, what ?

OK no more random posts starting... NOW

PTLou we get it. You haven`t had a winning month online hardly ever in the last 7 years, and u envy and hate internet kids. Either that, or ur just one big solid troll.
Your live poker and bottom line will be affected pretty badly though if things fall apart for miles better than you online guys.

Alright here's my take on this situation especially wrt PLO.

The rake on Stars is so high for PLO that PLO25, PLO50 etc... are virtually unbeatable without getting some of that rake back, so in order to be able to make money, players mass table to bump their VIP status. This allows them to receive a level of rb that offsets the huge rake enough for them to turn a profit.

However, as pointed out by Stars themselves, this system has resulted in negative and perhaps unintended consequences. Due to the implementation of the VIP system, most regs started casting huge nets and depleting the ecosystem of it's resources (recs) when the reason for playing shifted from quality of play to quantity. The games became much less fun as well.

So I'm all for doing away with the VIP system altogether but the rake needs to lowered so that games are beatable without having to resort to playing 24 tables.

Removing the VIP system and reducing rake would:

A Help provide beatable games (not overraked) = regs are happy.

B Less incentive to mass table = good for the recs as the rec to reg ratio isn't so skewed and the playing experience is enhanced. Maybe that reg that was 24 tabling now has time to chat with the recs and doesn't time out so often. Or the rec gets a chance to play with other recs etc...

A+B = a better ecosystem which is good for all parties (recs, regs, Amaya).

So get rid of the VIP system and by doing so bring the fun back to poker for both regs and recs. Yet provide games that are beatable or risk alienating a core portion of your player base.

They're transitioning to a completely different model. A casino model. A lottery model. This is the first step and whilst I admire the sitting out sunday threadz, there's no going back. This isn't like previous attempts to up rake, or to add fees - this is a complete change in model. See my posts in DN thread for more, but they don't care about you. If they do care about you a little bit now, then they won't in 3/4 years. Poker won't be their main focus, or if it is then it won't be poker as we know it now.

Welcome CasinoStarz everyone

^^ Agreed

This is sadly spot on.

So there wont be as many on-line pros. Whats not to like?

Us recs could care less. Are we supposed to be sympathetic?

You internet geniuses are bleating cos its gonna be harder to make decent money from the fish, well what made you think you had a right to that living? What made you think on-line poker owes you a living? What makes you think Amaya should make Stars more profitable for you rather than more profitable for them.

You all need to stop crying about the changes (accepting that SNE benefits should be honoured as advertised). All these changes , and the end of HUDS made your earn harder? Boo ****** hoo.

Clearly you have no idea what you are talking about. Also stars is making it much less profitable for themselves and the fish with all these changes combined.
This is the worst thing to happen to poker since spin & goes.

It's not that there wont be or be less online pros.. it's the fact that it's going to be much tougher to be an online pro. And maybe it's not the dream for everyone to earn money online but i still think that the majority of players (recs & regs) like to earn money and not to lose.

If all of 'those players' jump ship revenues will drop enormously and Amaya goes bankrupt in a couple of months....

Not really sure why there is such an outpouring of anti 'pro' sentiment. Maybe it's bitterness/jealousy or something but it's kind of ugly that some are seeing this as a great move because it stiffs pro's

These changes hurt pro's, recs and semi serious players really hard now and for the long term.

Plus it seems to keep being overlooked by many. These changes are outright theft for next year.

The sne program is a 2 year program 10 months into it halving it in value is stealing.

Furthermore reducing the value of FPPs by 25% is theft plain and simple.

These things are undeniable even if you ignore all the other changes that are going to be bad long term for the health of poker.

long term stars can do what they want of course change the vip program the way they want.

However, essentially removing high stakes cash games and also reducing the vip program without the corresponding increase to the bottom end (lol 10% chrome) or reducing the rake in certain games (hypers, small stakes plo, limit poker) these games are now unbeatable for nearly all.

What's going to happen with all this extra money that's so good for the poker economy some vague ideas of perhaps reload bonus's or more marketing? If they don't picket it then it will be directed at spins!

Basically they are going to advertise the form of poker which recs lose the quickest at and is closest to a casino game.

As for poker thay we know and love the games which are still beatable got way tougher.
The guys grinding midstakes with rakeback now won't win due to the rake being so high.

Also to excerabate this guys playing high stakes will move down to where they get some form of rb.

Yeeeeeea say all the recs/semi serious players kill the rakeback/hud pro's!

Being too short sighted to realise those guys (who are very good players at those limits and not the hud bots you believe) will drop down a level to a stake they beat comfortably without rake back.

Those guys at the level below find there games got way tougher than before and drop down and so and so forth.

So the rec/semi serious player across any level/buy in they play now lose even harder and quicker because the level of competiton just got way harder.

So people feel that long term these changes are going to be really bad. If the pro stars changes people ITT can't see this then really I don't know what to say.

Be happy playing an unbeatable game aka casino games because hey if I can't win then screw the pro's.

Agree with your entire post until the above which I don't understand. If a mid or low stakes grinder needs 24 tables and 100k+ hands/mth to hit his monthly $$$ for rent, food ect. then how would he hit that monthly amount by playing at lower stakes? Especially the 10nl-50nl grinders from poor countries. They already play 24/7 so I doubt they can add additional volume to make their monthly $$$. Sure they will have a higher win rate playing lower but their $/hr will likely be less? The guys at these low stakes will no longer be able to play the high volume/TAG strategy (which needs the help of RB) so they have two choices:
1. Quit poker or work part time/play part time.
2. Move up in stakes, play less tables(because no RB advantage) and focus on higher win rate.

No idea how it actually plays out, just my prediction.

doubt theres any nl10 grinders playing for a living, regardless they can keep playing their strategy and just add new sites to pick up volume.

this change will be huge from nl100-nl2k i dont think below and over will feel it as much.

Poker isn't the only industry that has been affected by negative changes in the past decade. As much as it sucks, there's nothing you can do. The best will adapt to survive.

At the very bottom tiers Idk maybe your correct some of these player quit or go part time getting squeezed by this effect.

Or perhaps they can make up for volume with better win rates since they don't mass table.

Ironically it might be worse if they play less tables focus on win rates and also actually improve as a player (I am sure mass tabling stunts growth as a player)

They will only be replaced by better players coming down anyway if they go by the wayside as a result.

Check out a 10nl game on starts. You'll have 4-5 TAGs from Ukraine and you will go insane from boredom lol. These guys must be playing for a living as no one would do that for entertainment. And with the low cost of living how much does a 20-something need to cash out to make more than his minimum wage or unemployed friends?

These guys are also a huge reason why its almost impossible for new players to start at 2nl and work up to mid stakes. They have no chance to play/learn against other fish. They just get fleeced by these grinders. In turn the grinders never move up, instead they cash out every month, meaning no money moves up to mid stakes. If these grinders are forced out everyone benefits as micros are more fun and people can actually move up and lose money at mid stakes, making those games better.

But then this is also very logical so maybe the benefits would be short lived until the high-volume low-win rate grinders get good and start crushing.