Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem

11-22-2012 , 05:12 AM
Tax excess withdrawals by 50%. Advertise the advantages. Give every new customer a great big warning sign about that. Give them the option to pay 3-5% on every pot instead. I really hope stars will use FTP as an experimentation field once the deal-me-in traffic dies out.

I for example don't play anymore for profits mainly, neither for gambooling it up. I play for the competition, testing my skills and my at-home calculations in various games against decent players. It just sucks that with the rake as it is, i'm bound to lose a lot of money doing that even if i beat the regs. Withdrawal taxes instead would be perfect with me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by POW
This will encourage grinders to play 4 tables and the rest on other sites.
no it won't. If stars and FTP combined allowed only 4 tables, i don't see where else these other sites should be.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 05:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noir_Desir
no it won't. If stars and FTP combined allowed only 4 tables, i don't see where else these other sites should be.
Agreed. From a software perspective, would be easy for Stars/ FTP to have a process which checks whether the other site is running. You could also do this for Party/ 888/ iPoker, at which point masstabling grinders would have nowhere to go. You don't even have to fully ban opening tables at multiple sites. If the check comes up positive ("the other site is open") at that point all points acquired could be treated as 'bonus' FTPs/ VPPs rather than 'base' FTPs/ VPPs- ie, they don't count towards rakeback/ tier levels. That would absolutely hammer grinders, who would lose SNE/ diamond/ whatever, while having no impact at all on low volume fish who may not even notice.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 07:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teppec
mean, look at the guy you are quoting. He played 33k hands at NL10. I mean, seriously. 33k hands...at NL10...in a month. Shoot me now. He's probably going to play 33k more next month, and the month after that, and after that, because unless he's absolutely destroying the stakes he can't move up. The rake drains away everything. It needs changed or altered, or even yes, lowered. Especially at nano/micro.
tables down there are stuffed with 33k hands/month players. used to be one or two per table on average, now it is about 4-5. most feed exclusively on getting more rakeback than you. that is, if you play them, someone from the site steps up to your stack and throws one of your chips over to them every now and then.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 07:40 AM
I really wish stars would reduce their rake at least a tad bit (on all stakes, esp small-mid-high), if they want to keep their business as a longterm sustainable developing adventure (good for both players and owners, since edges get quite small, and you dont want more and more regs leaving poker because they are breaking even, minus the rake, with all regulations, and post blackfriday)
We`ll see if Stars/ftp will look to respond to players now being a complete monopoly...
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 07:57 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by lancelott_
I really wish stars would reduce their rake at least a tad bit (on all stakes, esp small-mid-high), if they want to keep their business as a longterm sustainable developing adventure (good for both players and owners, since edges get quite small, and you dont want more and more regs leaving poker because they are breaking even, minus the rake, with all regulations, and post blackfriday)
We`ll see if Stars/ftp will look to respond to players now being a complete monopoly...
I don't see how "reducing the rake a tad bit" would make any long-term change to the business except immediate reduction in revenue to the operator hence less advertising money hence less fish.

Cash games will crash sooner than many think unless sites completely shake-up today's business model (pretty much identical across the board).
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 08:01 AM
basically most people on here are saying stuff like stars should drastically cut their rake for the long term good of the game without saying why it makes any sense for them
people are paying thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars a month in rake they arent just going to light money on fire for no reason and charge a few hundred

they also don't say what players should do for the great good of the game mainly bc they don't actually care about the greater good of the game they just want to make more money

basically what happened over the last few years if both the sites and players have worked together and done everything possible to hurt the long term quality of the games
the difference is stars is much smarter and making more money because of it, and the players are making less


as for the whole idea that if sites limit players to just a small handful of tables they will just play 24 tables across 5-6 sites:

that is laughable
so many players playing that many tables are actually not profitable (ie break even or slight losers)playing so many tables except for the extremely high % of rakeback they get
you take that incentive away and they won't be playing nearly as many tables bc they won't be making any money

its also a lot harder logistically to play across that many sites in finding the games to play, having enough money spread around multiple sites and the actual game play
you will be timing out a lot more, and folding hands as a result costing you even more money
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 08:15 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teppec
You know, you've made a lot of negative posts in this thread, but thank god you made some good points...eventually. Just try to realize that you can make good points or point out bad ideas without being an *******. Most people refer to it as civilized discussion. Try it next time you want to point out what you think is a bad idea.

As far as some of what you have mentioned, I can see where you are coming from in terms of lowering table counts, limiting or removing huds, and doing other things that lead towards games opening up. That makes things more fun, it keeps people coming back, and winners are still going to win.

However, you have to admit that the rake as is is doing it's part to stifle the poker ecosystem also. I mean, look at the guy you are quoting. He played 33k hands at NL10. I mean, seriously. 33k hands...at NL10...in a month. Shoot me now. He's probably going to play 33k more next month, and the month after that, and after that, because unless he's absolutely destroying the stakes he can't move up. The rake drains away everything. It needs changed or altered, or even yes, lowered. Especially at nano/micro.

And for the record, Rush is the only time I ever put in ridic volume as a poker player. And I did mine on 4 tables of rush. Before rush, I was (and still am) a 4-6 table guy at most, maaaybe 8 if my brain feels like it is on it's A-game. I much prefer to rely on watching what people do (you can't really do that if you can't see all your tables at the same time easily enough) and not relying on hud stats for every decision. I play fairly loose for a full ring reg most days, when I have time to play anymore. Please don't lump me in to the 24 tabling nitreg category, I am not and have never been one of those.
this really isnt that complicated
the fact anyone can play that many hands each money without blowing their brains out at those stakes is amazing

he should either stop wasting time with such a pointless endeavor and save a little bit of money up and play higher or realize he has a hobby which either costs or makes him a little bit of money each month

again people are forgetting the sites are providing them with a service

without them you couldnt play so many tables at once, and you couldnt play so low
these sites didnt set up shop as a favor to people

the reason he is paying "so much" is because he chooses to play so many hands at such a low level

2/4 and 3/6 limit are basically unbeatable live and yet people play them
why is it so hard to believe the same holds true for kindergarten stakes online?

someone pointed out that the nano stakes used to not be rake at all
im sure stars wised up and realized there is a whole segmant of players
who do nothing but deposit and lose money and stars is getting nothing in return for getting these players onto their site
that seems pretty stupid to me and obviously they realized the same thing

you can still play with play money for free-and as brutal as playing for play money sounds, it actually seems more appealing if the nano stakes have become overrun with mass multitablers

people want to have their cake and eat it to but in life where businesses are concerned that's not usually how it works

people make it out like these sites just print money with no effort and that the players are being gauged
if that were the case it would be so easy for someone to come in undercut them on rake and steal all of their customers, and yet nobody can do it
That's not a coincidence
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 09:19 AM
The idea that any poker site would penalize a player for playing on another site is laughable. "Oh, we see you're playing on another site right now. Allow us to penalize you if you also play on our tables so that you will be less likely to play and give us rake."

Sites may establish table limits on their own sites for various reasons, but they're not going to stop you from playing and giving them rake if you also happen to be playing on another site. They don't care about the poker ecosystem on other sites.

Also, the idea of taxing winning withdrawals at 50% and "advertising the advantages" is going to drive away waaaaay more fish than it brings in. The big advantage of table rake is that fish don't notice it. A fish can pay hundreds or even thousands of dollars in rake without even blinking, but as soon as they try to withdraw and get hit with a $200 fee they will go ballistic. If you try to advertise "hey, here's how bad table rake is screwing you, enjoy withdrawal fees instead!" all you're going to do is make fish aware of the rake and discourage deposits.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 09:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clever Nickname
The idea that any poker site would penalize a player for playing on another site is laughable. "Oh, we see you're playing on another site right now. Allow us to penalize you if you also play on our tables so that you will be less likely to play and give us rake."

Sites may establish table limits on their own sites for various reasons, but they're not going to stop you from playing and giving them rake if you also happen to be playing on another site. They don't care about the poker ecosystem on other sites.
Between Stars and FTP this is obviously and demonstrably wrong...
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 09:31 AM
^ Borg: you didn't comment on my reasoning behind a per-hand flat-rate as opposed to a per-hand pot percentage. This would keep sites' profit the same and discourage tight play in favour of action play. Don't you think flat-rate per-hand tables (with the flat rate being based on the average amount raked per hand on the raked tables) are at least a reasonable idea?
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 09:42 AM
not sure it's in the sites best interest to be too long term focused.

This is a young industry and large portions of the market can be cutoff at any time due to local law changes.

If I was running Stars I'd be raking the crap out of games and diversifying into live tournamounts and gambling venues.....oh hang on
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 09:58 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by maton808
not sure it's in the sites best interest to be too long term focused.

This is a young industry and large portions of the market can be cutoff at any time due to local law changes.

If I was running Stars I'd be raking the crap out of games and diversifying into live tournamounts and gambling venues.....oh hang on
And a group of players making up a large percentage of hands played and have given years of loyalty to the game are ok with letting this slide?
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 10:06 AM
Quote:
people make it out like these sites just print money with no effort and that the players are being gauged
if that were the case it would be so easy for someone to come in undercut them on rake and steal all of their customers, and yet nobody can do it
That's not a coincidence
No just an incidence that rake is hidden from fish very well so has little to no affect on the market when it changes
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 10:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squibz
^ Borg: you didn't comment on my reasoning behind a per-hand flat-rate as opposed to a per-hand pot percentage. This would keep sites' profit the same and discourage tight play in favour of action play. Don't you think flat-rate per-hand tables (with the flat rate being based on the average amount raked per hand on the raked tables) are at least a reasonable idea?
i honestly don't think it makes much of a difference either way- it may even have the opposite effect
i think it takes something really egregious for play to tighten up bc of the rake on a hand
i just dont see people folding a hand pre that they would play otherwise if it wasnt for the rake in online games

ive seen it in time games (winner of the first hand over x pays everyones time for the half hour) because in a situation like that you could easily play 25-50 pct of the pot in rake for that one hand (5-10 big blinds)

one poster said he payed about 1 cent per hand to play nano stakes
if im wrong he can correct me but ill assume that's 6 max so on average the site was making about half a big blind per hand in rake (this is probably a very high estimate as im sure he had some pretty decent rakeback)

there may be some rare cases where people fold a hand bc of rake (ie broadway with no flush possible on board and someone shoves 10 dollars into a 20 cent pot) but those are few and far between

i still think time is a way better option as people who enter a lot of pots shoudnt be the ones carrying the burden of paying significantly more rake when they are the ones who create action to begin with

the 10/6 isnt playing so tight bc of the rake
he is playing so tight because he is playing way too many tables and has no skill and is exploiting a flaw in the system, or he is a bot

he would still play next to no rake because someone who plays a 10/6 style rarely sees flops
a large % of the time he raises people just fold and pots arent raked preflop

in the example i gave on cake where players were getting over 300% rakeback it was players like this
cake used the dealt method
they would play even tighter- maybe 8/5

My numbers my be slightly off as its been a while but i remember breaking down the numbers

In a 6 max game we got about 100 hands an hour
about 65% of the hands had flops and were raked
of those probably 2/3 were max raked, and the rest were raked b/w 1-3 dollars

So in a table hour we would each get credit for about 25 dollars an hour in paid rake

Depending on what rake race you were in , how much volume you put in, what bonuses they had you would get back b/w 50-95 pct rakeback base on this number

But some spineless 8/5 was only playing 8 hands an hour
At least half the time he raised everyone just folded
So lets be extremely generous and say he saw 6 flops an hour and won 4 of those hands

Most of the pots would be tiny that he won
Even if 2 were raked at 3 dollars and 2 were raked at a dollar he was paying 8 dollars an hour in rake (and this is a very high estimate) yet getting back about 25 dollars an hour per table from the site

Even if you took the same amount of rake per hand regardless of pot size (and used the average rake already taken to do it) these people won't play any more hands bc on average that would just mean these blood sucking leeches would pay more rake as they rarely play big pots anyway
If you switched to this method the rake on smaller pots would actually increase and the rake on bigger pots would actually decrease from what they are right now
(to simplify things- say all half of all hands were raked at a quarter and half were raked at 75 cents-now you rake them all at 50 cents- you're just raking the lower pots at a higher % than you used to and visa versa)


The rake adds up online because of the volume
However on a per hand basis it is rarely high enough that the slight decrease in rake for that hand swings a fold preflop into a call
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 10:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by POW
No just an incidence that rake is hidden from fish very well so has little to no affect on the market when it changes
if thats the case why on this planet would sites drastically lower it effectively burning money?
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 10:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by POW
And a group of players making up a large percentage of hands played and have given years of loyalty to the game are ok with letting this slide?
lololol
wow this one takes the cake
they may play the bulk of the hands but they do so at a drastically reduced rake rate, until recently even got rakeback on hands they didnt pay rake on,suck money out of the poker economy, in many cases refused to start games at all, and arent the reasons games are running
stars doesnt run games to be nice, and you don't play on stars (or wherever) because they're your friends

they arent loyal to the game at all- they are loyal to the relatively easy money
if tomorrow you could play words with friends (or some other online game people of above average intelligence would be successful at) for money and make a lot more money than you could in poker people would be devoting all of their time to making money at words with friends instead of poker

the only people actually loyal to poker are the constant donators who despite losing more and more money each money continue to play
they enjoy playing poker so much they are willing to lose money to do it
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 10:21 AM
If they did these things at the same time:


1. Decrease the maximum amount of tables.

2. Offer a welcome back bonus for all the players that stopped playing too soon, as a free sample.

3. Optimise the rake structure to increase the long term market potential to its maximum.


You get back a healthy model build up from the bottom.



The problem with the skimming strategy is with pricecuts you don't get back the players you lost already.
For that reason pricing policy and management of the shark/fish ratio need to be pro active.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 10:24 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by maton808
not sure it's in the sites best interest to be too long term focused.

This is a young industry and large portions of the market can be cutoff at any time due to local law changes.

If I was running Stars I'd be raking the crap out of games and diversifying into live tournamounts and gambling venues.....oh hang on
ive always said stars has a great short term business model thats terrible for the game quality
im not saying they are wrong for thinking that way either
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 10:26 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by borg23
i honestly don't think it makes much of a difference either way- it may even have the opposite effect
i think it takes something really egregious for play to tighten up bc of the rake on a hand
i just dont see people folding a hand pre that they would play otherwise if it wasnt for the rake in online games

ive seen it in time games (winner of the first hand over x pays everyones time for the half hour) because in a situation like that you could easily play 25-50 pct of the pot in rake for that one hand (5-10 big blinds)

one poster said he payed about 1 cent per hand to play nano stakes
if im wrong he can correct me but ill assume that's 6 max so on average the site was making about half a big blind per hand in rake (this is probably a very high estimate as im sure he had some pretty decent rakeback)

there may be some rare cases where people fold a hand bc of rake (ie broadway with no flush possible on board and someone shoves 10 dollars into a 20 cent pot) but those are few and far between

i still think time is a way better option as people who enter a lot of pots shoudnt be the ones carrying the burden of paying significantly more rake when they are the ones who create action to begin with

the 10/6 isnt playing so tight bc of the rake
he is playing so tight because he is playing way too many tables and has no skill and is exploiting a flaw in the system, or he is a bot

he would still play next to no rake because someone who plays a 10/6 style rarely sees flops
a large % of the time he raises people just fold and pots arent raked preflop

in the example i gave on cake where players were getting over 300% rakeback it was players like this
cake used the dealt method
they would play even tighter- maybe 8/5

My numbers my be slightly off as its been a while but i remember breaking down the numbers

In a 6 max game we got about 100 hands an hour
about 65% of the hands had flops and were raked
of those probably 2/3 were max raked, and the rest were raked b/w 1-3 dollars

So in a table hour we would each get credit for about 25 dollars an hour in paid rake

Depending on what rake race you were in , how much volume you put in, what bonuses they had you would get back b/w 50-95 pct rakeback base on this number

But some spineless 8/5 was only playing 8 hands an hour
At least half the time he raised everyone just folded
So lets be extremely generous and say he saw 6 flops an hour and won 4 of those hands

Most of the pots would be tiny that he won
Even if 2 were raked at 3 dollars and 2 were raked at a dollar he was paying 8 dollars an hour in rake (and this is a very high estimate) yet getting back about 25 dollars an hour per table from the site

Even if you took the same amount of rake per hand regardless of pot size (and used the average rake already taken to do it) these people won't play any more hands bc on average that would just mean these blood sucking leeches would pay more rake as they rarely play big pots anyway
If you switched to this method the rake on smaller pots would actually increase and the rake on bigger pots would actually decrease from what they are right now
(to simplify things- say all half of all hands were raked at a quarter and half were raked at 75 cents-now you rake them all at 50 cents- you're just raking the lower pots at a higher % than you used to and visa versa)


The rake adds up online because of the volume
However on a per hand basis it is rarely high enough that the slight decrease in rake for that hand swings a fold preflop into a call
I think you're misunderstanding my suggestion. My suggestion is effectively the same as a time charge: each player would pay $x per hand, and it would be the same for all players regardless of whether or not they played. The amount paid per hand would be determined by what sites are currently raking per hand on average.

ALSO: whether or not players who analyse their games to find leaks are aware of it, they're playing a tighter range in many instances as a direct result of rake.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 10:36 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by borg23
ive always said stars has a great short term business model thats terrible for the game quality
im not saying they are wrong for thinking that way either
In English, capital letters are used as the first letter of a sentence.
Full stop, a punctuation mark indicating the end of a sentence or phrase.
Sorry, but that pissed me off.

People and poker sites can't take you seriously even though you arguments might be good.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 10:38 AM
i misunderstood
i thought you meant you wanted rake all pots the current average of raked pots
i fully agree with a time charge and think it would help the games
even if people don't play more hands blood sucking leeches would at least play their fair share
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 10:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ifloattheflop
In English, capital letters are used as the first letter of a sentence.
Full stop, a punctuation mark indicating the end of a sentence or phrase.
Sorry, but that pissed me off.

People and poker sites can't take you seriously even though you arguments might be good.
SERIOUSLY?

IM TYPING ON A TABLET AND CYCLING BETWEEN UPPER AND LOWER CASE LETTERS IS A PAIN IN THE ASS BUT THANKS FOR THE ENGLISH LESSON


and if you're going to criticize someone's grammar on a posting forum over something so petty try not making mistakes yourself.

People and poker sites can't take you seriously even though you arguments might be good.

People and poker sites can't take you seriously even though you arguments might be good.

People and poker sites can't take you seriously even though you arguments might be good.

It's YOUR not YOU............................................... ................
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 10:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by POW
And a group of players making up a large percentage of hands played and have given years of loyalty to the game are ok with letting this slide?
Not sure people have too much of a choice. I appreciate what you're arguing for, and obviously I'd love lower rake, more fish etc. Personally I think there are a lot of things that need to change for the good of the game, rake is only one part of it.

Some of the suggestions in this thread are just so implausible. Capping rake, monthly charges that come out to a fraction of what high volume players currently pay????

Sure lobbying for a reasonable rake reduction is one thing. Even entering into discussions with a business that they should cut their profits by a large percentage, for the greater good of a game and their customers is not reasonable. The longevity of the game is questionable, certainly with it's current liquidity and growing focus from governing bodies.

If the CEO of Pokerstars announced rake cuts to the tune of what people actually want, he should be given 5 minutes to pack up his desk and be marched off the premises by security. That's the awful truth unfortunately. Sure, here at twoplustwo we'd chair him around on our shoulders and make appreciation threads, but then what.

The truth of it is regs at anything from about nl100 don't pay anywhere as much rake as we like to pretend we do (comparatively). Rakeback/VIP gives a decent chunk back.

The issue is the casual rec players and the micros. Any rake reduction needs to be weighted towards these groups. The question is how do you do that?

If 3bb/100 nl400 reg is playing 50k hands a month, yeah he's paying a lot in rake but he's making decent money too. The nl400 fish who deposits once a month, puts in 2000 hands before going busto is raked a hell of a lot more.

I don't know the answers, but I honestly don't think rake cuts across the board will achieve much and are not sound policy for anyone running a business. Somehow giving money back to the fish and micros is not only cheap but makes more sense. A bigger flow of players is needed to keep the games rejuvenated.

micros->ss->mid->high
fish->everyone

VIP systems are not good for the games, they're good for the sites. They keep you playing on the one site, as once you hit a certain tier any hands played elsewhere (in a vacuum) are now less profitable than by staying put. They are also so heavily weighted to regs that they only compound the effect. The regs get more of their rake coming back to them while the fish and micro players get very little. If the balance shifted a little it would be so much better.

I can only speculate, but I think a standard rakeback amount across the board for 100% of players has to be better for games. Regs would have softer games, players would climb out of the micros more readily and the fish would last longer. The decent players are going to capitalise on those longer lasting fish and weaker players moving up, so they're probably not losing much if anything. The rakeback whoring breakevens can probably become winning pre rb with the influx of fish to their games, or can just gtfo for all i care really.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 10:47 AM
If the CEO of Pokerstars announced rake cuts to the tune of what people actually want, he should be given 5 minutes to pack up his desk and be marched off the premises by security. That's the awful truth unfortunately. Sure, here at twoplustwo we'd chair him around on our shoulders and make appreciation threads, but then what.


Exactly
I mean i would love it if my cell phone cable and internet bill came out to 19 cents next month,i could stay in fancy hotels for 2 bucks etc but it's not gonna happen nor should I expect it to.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote
11-22-2012 , 10:49 AM
Drop rake by 30-40% and end rakeback/VIP altogether. Company still makes monies, no more rakeback grinders, more action.

Unless everyone is willing to move from PS and FTP to PP, iPoker etc it should work...Or maybe not.
Rake pricing for a sustainable poker ecosystem Quote

      
m