Quote:
Originally Posted by hallemerick42
We are about to see new emphasis on strategy C), and a shift from
Current state - lots of players that spend very little (fish who deposit a small amount, lose it quickly to the pros without raking much, have a crappy time in the current environment and never deposit again); and a few players (pros, SNE etc) that spend a LOT
To future state - lots of players that spend a little/lot more than they currently do on things broader than cash game poker, that come back again and again because they actually have a good time; with potentially fewer but likely not all that different amount of pros crying and moaning but ultimately continue to rake as high as ever.
Agree with most of your post. The one qualifier I'd add is that while the shift you describe above is the the
hoped-for outcome, it's hardly a foregone conclusion that it's going to play out that way. It's a pleasant-sounding narrative, but the poker ecosystem is complex and not even Stars knows what effect these changes will have. A few possible hypothetical scenarios that could play spoiler:
- Stars overestimates just how much of a role "game enjoyment" plays in keeping rec players depositing more;
- Whatever increase they Stars achieves in capturing more rake is more than offset by the $ they lose by lower overall traffic due to the higher effective rake;
- Or, the most likely caveat, some substantive fault line in the overall ecology that hasn't even been thought of yet (cue goldblum_chaostheory.gif)
The goal here is not to analyze the likelihood of the above hypotheticals. The point is merely that Stars is doing nothing but taking their
best guess at what these changes will do to the existing equilibrium. I'm not going to call for anyone's head on a stick because Amaya was unable to prove to the 3 attendees beyond a shadow of a doubt that their changes will be effective in bringing about the desired outcome. They're making an educated guess...I just want a little more evidence that it is, indeed, "educated". Hence my questions earlier ITT about wanting to understand just what misrepresentations the players felt were being made to them in the meeting, and just what series of events resulted in the alleged unsustainability of an ecosystem that had been just peachy in previous years.