Now that it's clear even 30% VPIP players earn far ewer points on Weighted-Contribution, can we please let Party know how we feel? Only the fish make more PartyPoints but they hardly benefit due to the structure of the VIP reward system. The big winner is only PartyPoker.
If you are upset over this change, please contact PartyPoker and let's make sure our voices are heard. Call, email, and live chat are all good options.
Call
toll free most countries: 00-800-7278-9109
Canada: 1-877-447-2184
Australia: 0011-800-7278-9109
Email
vip@palladiumlounge.com
Live Chat
http://iq.corp.partygaming.com/eCust...b:PG_Party_En#
Private Message
Party_Rep
Here is a starting template you can use and personalize:
Quote:
Dear PartyPoker,
First off I applaud you for listening to your most loyal customers and not ruining the 600nl to 2000nl games with the $5 rake cap and $2 at HU.
That's a start, but the real problem is the switch from dealt to contributed rake method; it's bad for both overall site ecology and your biggest customers, without giving recreational players, or fish, much more actual rewards.
Let me explain why Weighted Contributed is anything but "fair," so we can move beyond that ridiculous argument. PartyPoints are not cash. They are part of a reward program that requires everyone to rake $10,000+ and stockpile points in order to get any significant value from those hard earned points. Losing players don't do this; they might on average get 10% back on their PartyPoints. Now nearly every winning/brek-even player, even if playing 30%+ of hands, earns less. Fish get more but points don't rake enough to be able to spend them wisely. So who does this change really benefit? PartyPoker, of course. (Assuming the same volume of games continue to run.) This move is anything but "fair" and a pure attempt to pay out less in overall rakeback.
Do you really want to be as fair as possible? Here's an idea: stay on dealt method and simply give fish more bonuses and re-deposit incentives instead of taking far, far more money from regs and huge rake generators than the fish will ever see. That solution would actually help overall site ecology instead of damaging it. It would certainly be a better way to keep fish around. If you insist on staying on weighted contribution, when you take $100 from my bottom-line, from someone who makes their living playing on your site,
at the very least make sure weaker players actually see all of that $100.
According to my calculations I am now earning points 66% as quickly, meaning a decrease in my rewards from 30% to 20%. Now I make 13,200 points when before I would have earned 20,000 points and been able to buy a $3,000 bonus.
As much as I love Party poker, the VIP rewards are now 20back on the dollar + the monthly promo. Compared to the 40 cents I could get on Stars (with an even better rake structure) or 60 cents on iPoker, unless Party is crazy mega fishy (it's not), there is absolutely no reason I or any logical poker player should stay. Are you even trying to compete with Stars and iPoker to once again become "the world's largest poker room" or just screw everyone over in the short-run until we clear our bonuses and leave?
Please go back and re-evaluate how these changes will impact my bottom-line and the earnings of average grinders at small and medium stakes. Even before these changes, I was already paying more in rake than industry competitors. I was even paying more rake than I was earning in profit!
Party has always been the most forward thinking Poker site, until now. After pulling out of the US market post UIGEA, it was exciting to see Party not just survive, but thrive internationally. It seemed that Black Friday was their moment to shine. Instead, Party is shooting themselves in the foot by alienating their biggest customers and hurting the quality of the games. Sure, maybe you'll see a profit in the short-run, but this switch is so bad for everyone and helps just about nobody, it will definitely hurt the growth and long-run success of Party. Contributed method is bad for me, bad for us professional players, bad for site ecology, and bad for Party in the long-run.
Perhaps the proposed $5 rake cap was a smoke screen to avoid us from focusing on the real injustice, but I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt and once again say thanks for listening. Now please keep listening: switch back to the dealt rake method, or at least when taking $100 from me, make sure that weaker players actually see that $100.
Sincerely,
Last edited by czGLoRy; 08-28-2011 at 07:51 AM.