The numbers we have seen so far suggest most potential pokerplayers only play very few hands.
The reason is very simple in over 80% of these cases; they lost and didn't like that.
All the reward systems should be changed from top down to bottom up.
Losing players should get extra incentives to play, winning players already have their incentives, because winning is always fun.
The reason poker isn't as big as it should be -apart from governments- is because pokersites killed it. They figured as long as they manage to attract new fish their model would work. But they forgot meanwhile they lost most fish forever and now the market has matured that is a big problem as their model accelerates the decline. With the current model online poker will die rapidly.
A new model however could start a second pokerboom.
A wild guess based on
the graph; twice as many winners could make the market 20 times bigger.
Quote:
Originally Posted by omnishakira
No way I pay a cent more just because you are too lazy to stop sucking at poker
Why would you not want to pay more to keep him sucking at poker?
No rakeback, but fishback.
The rake change would soften competition and increase traffic dramatically.