Am I the only one at CardCrusade.com?

[TimsterToo]

I saw CardCrusade mentioned in another post and decided to have a look. They are looking for betatesters at the moment and I decided to give it a spin.

It's a site where you pay a monthly subscription instead of rake but for the betatesters there's no charge. (don't have a clue how long that will take!)

In my enthousiasm I transferred 100$ to them but apparantely I'm the only player they have!! /images/graemlins/crazy.gif /images/graemlins/confused.gif /images/graemlins/confused.gif

I've logged in a couple of times and the only other 2 players there are always there and also always have the exact same amount of money in front of them (1200$) so I suspect they are bots to help test the software.

Anybody else signed up yet? Fancy a game? /images/graemlins/grin.gif

I must say that the idea of a no rake but no other stuff (bonuses etc etc) has a certain appeal to me, my only worry would be if the influx of fish will be high enough seeing as the pro's are more apparant to the calculating thinking player and the con's (monthly fee, no bonuses etc) will probably be more of a decisive factor for the newbies etc.

[TimsterToo]

I mailed CardCrusade to ask them if I maybe was a bit of an early adaptor and where the other players were. I also thought it was the friendly thing to do to foreworn them that they were mentioned on 2+2 so they knew the floodgates were open /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif

I got a quick reply which I will post below as it has some relevant info in it (I asked permission to do so of course):

Timothy,

Thank you for supporting the site.

As you know, we are currently in Beta and organising various events in order to exercise different aspects of the service. We have not yet gone fully public and haven't initiated a more general marketing campaign.

When we are more than confident that the site and service can withstand the rigours of public use, we will start to market the site very actively.

In the interim period, we are extremely pleased to have players such as yourself spreading the story by word of mouth. This brings in high quality players that are interested in having a real role in developing and supporting the site at this early stage.

We are holding two Freerolls every Friday at 4pm and 9pm EST and usually play ring games before, during and after the tournaments. As we build our client base, we hope to extend those active times.

I have read you post and wanted to clarify two small points. We only started the servers in Mid December and are trying to channel players into certain points of the day when there will be other players...hence the Freerolls. My second point regards the 2-3 players you see at the table, they are very keen players who are logged into tournaments waiting for some other players to come in.

I hope you understand and agree with the way we are building out CardCrusade.com and will continue to support our efforts.

Best Regards,

Michael

[Overdrive]

I signed up there, but I haven't played at their site yet (too busy other places.) The idea of a low or virtually no rake site is very nice and I hope they make a go of it - but the odds are really stacked against them. We'll see how it goes...

[kurosh]

I just signed up... wow what horrible software.

[Gregatron]

I wish the concept of a rakefree site would work. I really don't think it will though -- at least not in this format (you pay a monthly fee). I would much rather pay a fee than rake. But, as we've discussed here before, recreational players either don't know what rake it, or don't think it matters. They will never "pay to play" (which is how they will think of it). Sorry, not trying to player hate.

[Overdrive]

[ QUOTE ]
I wish the concept of a rakefree site would work. I really don't think it will though -- at least not in this format (you pay a monthly fee). I would much rather pay a fee than rake. But, as we've discussed here before, recreational players either don't know what rake it, or don't think it matters. They will never "pay to play" (which is how they will think of it). Sorry, not trying to player hate.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are right, the pay to play model won't work. It would be much better if someone offered something like you didn't have to pay any rake after you played 1500 hands a month or something like that. After you first 1500 hands (or whatever #) for the month you get to play rake free for the rest of the month.

[jman220]

Or a site could just come out with a bonus structure that would attract both fish, and people who understood rake. Somethign along the lines of giving people signing up with a new account an option: You can have an account with 75 percent rakeback built in, OR a one time $600 bonus that clears like the one on full tilt. The majority of slobbering fish will elect for the bonus keeping the site profitable, (OMG, $600 FOR FREE!) while the site will attract lots of high volume players who are drawn to the fish and the huge rakeback. Of course, this will never happen, but I can always dream.

[robracing]

The vast majority of the poker playing masses are either looking for bonuses or to feed on the fish. Neither of these scenarios are likely to play out at CardCrusade.

However, as was mentioned on the other thread here yesterday, this model would be ideal for competitions such as KOTZ and other private table play.

It is an unfortunate fact that for somebody to be particularly rake-aware makes them an undesireable opponent for the majority of poker players.

[Robby Box]

How could this possibly work!!!

If they got 2,000 active players all paying $25 a month, they would have a turnover of $50k per month.

How on earth would that pay for Software, Hardware, Support, Wages, Customer Service...?

As for marketing...forget it!!!

Even with 20,000 active players, you would struggle to break even.

Am I missing something here?

[maccamack]

I signed up with Cardcrusade a few weeks ago - mainly because I like the idea of a rake fee site.

I have played in the free rolls they have - which a pretty good value with limited numbers of people.

The players I have come across - about thirty of them, have been pretty good - none of the big holes visible.

The one thing that I have noticed is the variance is much lower without a rake - because you are not leaving that 5% behind when you win.

A bit of a question on theory: if there is no rake does that mean that calls that a marginal at say Pokerroom become profitable with no rake?

Anyways, I really hope that Cardcrusade works - I have spoken to a couple of the guys there and they seem like a nice bunch. I also, think that the community shares part of their offer is quite compelling. It strikes me that if Cardcrusade gets any traction then when of the big sites will have to take them out - meaning the community shares will increase in value. SO if you go to the site - say I referred you - that gives me more shares......lol.

I agree with Gregatron's point about costs - however, if say they get 100,000 players -it will turn 30mln a year, which doesn't make it PartyPoker but does make it a compelling business. At that point, we may find that the rest of the poker sites have to take some notice and give us a fairer deal.

[Arnfinn Madsen]

Remember also that you have to pay fees on deposits etc., which I think is a plus for the players as it makes the concept possible. However, they need to either increase their fee or introduce rake /images/graemlins/smile.gif, in order to be able to do marketing. Unless, they have to rely on word of mouth which I think is insufficent to reach critical mass.

Hope they succeed anyway.

[MickyTheFish]

(Disclosure : I work for CardCrusade.com)

I perfectly agree with your sentiment…The concept of “Rake Free” only works well with the more experienced players who understand how much they are actually paying. We have a page at www.cardcrusade.com/content/savings.aspx (http://www.cardcrusade.com/content/savings.aspx) that can help you estimate how much you pay.

Less experienced players and some recreational players may be less focused on the rake and less likely to pay a subscription. That is why we have also come up with the concept of a “Flat Pot Fee”.

The Flat Pot Fee is different from a rake in it doesn’t go up as the pot increases – it isn’t a commission but simply a set fee. Also it turns out to be anywhere from about 50% to 95% less than a typical rake. It might be playing with semantics, but we have still managed to “Break the Rake” (sorry, had to include that because it is our slogan!).

So on the Flat Pot Fee a $0.50/$1.00 game will always cost $0.15 vs a more typical sites Rake of $0.50 to $1.00

From our perspective, the important thing was to come up with a real business model that incentivised all players and made certain the poker site isn’t in any conflict of interest with its players. Commissions (Rakes) are universally acknowledged as always putting the supplier of services at odds with the buyer.

So we offer two different ways, Subscription and Flat Pot Fee, for the player to get online and play. We also have some more ideas that are in the design phase and will give the player even more choice!

I hope the Moderator doesn’t mind a little plug at the end…

We are in Beta right now and looking for experienced players that are willing to help us improve the site and service. During the Beta phase, we aren’t even charging a Subscription or Flat Pot Fee. We also have some Freerolls scheduled every Friday evening. So please come by, register and play. If there isn’t anyone on at the time, then don’t be afraid to bring a friend.

Micky "The Fish"

[RainDog]

I've signed up for an account and I'm certainly more optimistic than a lot of you about this model working...especially with a "flat fee" option or whatever. It's good to see some feedback from the site here as well. However, this post from "maccamack" is a horrid spamming attempt. You can't do better than that? Makes me skeptical of how well you folks can run a poker site.

[MickyTheFish]

(Disclosure : I work for CardCrusade.com)

You’re right, CardCrusade.com will never pay big upfront bonuses…because they are paid for by the player.

But I think we will get a range of players including the “fish”.

It is estimated that only 1-2% of players are continuously profitable, but most game theory would suggest that in poker 20% should be! So everyone should be interested in that 10-20 times better chance of being profitable.

More importantly, for the fish, if you are a flat player elsewhere you will be very profitable on a rake free site. If you lose money constantly then your game play will actually last much longer. We have estimated that most players that have to recharge their bankroll will get anywhere from 2-10x more playtime.

We hope that would appeal for the simple fact that some of us also play for the distraction, challenge and chance to meet other players.

MickyTheFish

[Robby Box]

While we are on the subject of "bringing our friends", do you know how much it would cost to enforce the necessary effective security measures on the site to prevent collusion, laundering + dumping (with no rake) etc....

Around $20k per month would be my conservative estimate

[MickyTheFish]

(Disclosure : I work for CardCrusade.com)

We are starting the site with a choice of options when a player signs on. Currently you can opt for a Subscription or use a Flat Pot Fee. We also have some more ideas that are in the design phase and will give the player even more choice! But we are never going to offer big upfront bonuses because they are only paid for by the player.

From our perspective, the important thing was to come up with a real business model that incentivised all players and made certain the poker site isn’t in any conflict of interest with its players. Commissions (Rakes) are universally acknowledged as always putting the supplier of services at odds with the buyer.

The Flat Pot Fee is different from a rake in it doesn’t go up as the pot increases – it isn’t a commission but simply a set fee. Also it turns out to be anywhere from about 50% to 95% less than a typical rake. I might be playing with semantics, but we have still managed to “Break the Rake” (sorry had to include that because it is our slogan!).

So on the Flat Pot Fee a $0.50/$1.00 game will always cost $0.15 vs a more typical sites Rake of $0.50 to $1.00

It is estimated that only 1-2% of players are continuously profitable, but most game theory would suggest that in poker 20% should be! So everyone should be interested in that 10-20 times better chance of being profitable - or just more profitable!

More importantly, for the fish, if you are a flat player elsewhere you will be very profitable on a rake free site. If you lose money constantly then your game play will actually last much longer. We have estimated that most players that have to recharge their bankroll will get anywhere from 2-10x more playtime.

We hope that would appeal for the simple fact that some of us also play for the distraction, challenge and chance to meet other players.

MickyTheFish

[maccamack]

Nice touch Raindog - thankfully I have a job (that doesn't involve hoping for poker players to turn up).

[MickyTheFish]

(Disclosure : I work for CardCrusade.com)

Your’re right, it will take many thousands of players to break even…but it is possible. As an example, there are many companies running MMORPG (Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games) which require an infinitely more complex infrastructure etc than poker. They do it for anywhere from $15 to $30 per player/month.

We feel it hasn’t happened in poker yet because of one simple fact – GREED. To date, it has been too easy to run a profitable poker site and the established sites don’t have it in their best interest to move to a Rake-Free model.

It won’t be easy but with some help from the poker community, it can happen.

As for marketing….don’t forget it! /images/graemlins/wink.gif

We aren’t marketing actively because we’re in Beta and working to improve or systems and services. Once out of Beta, perhaps around March, you should expect a massive up-tick in marketing activity.

Micky “The Fish”

[Elevens]

Micky,

As a key to success, I strongly suggest you contact Pat at PokerTracker (http://www.pokertracker.com) and work with him so that PokerTracker is supported at CardCrusade. Without PT, you won't see as many 2+2ers moving over that might otherwise consider it...

[MickyTheFish]

Thanks Pair!

I appreciate the advice and will contact him.

Out of interest, how many of the 2+2ers use PokerTracker and are there others out there that you think might be worthwhile looking up?

Micky The Fish

[Elevens]

I think most everyone (regulars, at least) uses PokerTracker on 2+2 (with some exceptions, of course). The other contender is PokerOffice, but not as popular.

[Gregatron]

For the record I wish a site like this would become the biggest site on the net, and all the players from Party, Pokeroom, and the higher rake sites would come to you. I really do.

Mickey, have you thought on other sources of revenue for your site? I mean like ads in the games (table: Miller Lite), banners, audio ads, etc. I think this might be how a rakfree site might work, not by charging a fee.

I have speculated on this before in the zoo, and would love it if a pokersite guy like you commented on it.

[Girchuck]

This is how Yahoo would do its poker site if it was legal in US.
Which is probably the main reason it will not be legal any time soon.

[Gregatron]

Whoa! Yahoo has a poker site? For real money?

[Pokeraddict]

So you cant even see the software without registering? I bet this will drastically cut people even checking it out.

Before I see how many games there are and how the software is I have to give them personal info?

This will have to go ASAP (hint to you beta testers). How many other rooms make you register to even see the lobby? The only one coming to mind for me is Pokertropolis, nice company to be in.

[TimsterToo]

Their software still needs a lot of work. I think we might have gotten clued in a tad bit too early.

This thread will help them though. As Micky the Fish has stated he doesn't want to go public until March so they still have two whole months of tweaking and improving before it should be spot on.

One thought just occured to me, finally a bonuswhore like me has a site where he can play when there are no bonuses around without having this nagging feeling that something is missing /images/graemlins/grin.gif/images/graemlins/grin.gif

I don't know if any of the other whores have that too but somehow I can't put myself to play a serious session of limit poker if I'm not freeing up a bonus of sorts.

[TimsterToo]

[ QUOTE ]
So you cant even see the software without registering? I bet this will drastically cut people even checking it out.



[/ QUOTE ]

It's Java based so you don't have to download and install the client software. (play on any computer with an internet connection! /images/graemlins/laugh.gif)

Registration is two minutes work, you need access to your mail though.

And I can assure you that the lobby is completely empty right now apart from (let me check..)ah yes, "acesinurface" who is one of the very keen players who's always there. Micky has convinced me he's not a bot, I now believe that he's there so the room isn't completely empty and as soon as someone joins one of the staff will play him.

So have no illusions about availability of games right now but the upside could be that we can influence the shape and form the software eventually will take at a time where changes are still quick and easy to make.

I'm a 100% recreational player of course so for me it doensn't matter to spend some time around a room where things are not happening yet, as I like being around the start of something and see where it goes. I can fully relate to any of the 2+2 pro's thinking that they'll have a look in 6 months and not be too bothered until then.

[lehighguy]

Have you considered the enourmous potential of the "online poker is rigged" crowd. An unfathomable number of people think that sites provide more then thier fair share of bad beats in order to increase pot sizes the thus the rake.

Since you charge a flat rate, you could advertise as a more legit site. This would increase your fish population which is really what we are looking for here.

[lehighguy]

I think the free 2000 hands thing is a good idea. Your chief task is getting new customers, and thier doesn't cost you anything like a bonus does.

[TStoneMBD]

there are 2 players always seated with $1200 at all times? you say they are bots? what limit/nl tables do they sit at? playing against bots all day sounds like it might be a really nice cash cow.

[mshalen]

I see Neteller but I don't see Firepay as a deposit option. These are the two largest online cash deposit transfer agents. I would suggest that you allow people to have the option of using their already existing Firepay accounts to deposit.

[Dennisa]

[ QUOTE ]
I wish the concept of a rakefree site would work. I really don't think it will though -- at least not in this format (you pay a monthly fee). I would much rather pay a fee than rake. But, as we've discussed here before, recreational players either don't know what rake it, or don't think it matters. They will never "pay to play" (which is how they will think of it). Sorry, not trying to player hate.

[/ QUOTE ]

The only way a pay to play model will work is if their are two different skins. Skin 1 with is pay to play 100% rake rebate every hour for a daily fee, with a 2nd skin that just runs a traditional rake and traditional marketing methods. But I guess we have that model now and its called online propping.

[Gregatron]

[ QUOTE ]
Have you considered the enourmous potential of the "online poker is rigged" crowd. An unfathomable number of people think that sites provide more then thier fair share of bad beats in order to increase pot sizes the thus the rake.

Since you charge a flat rate, you could advertise as a more legit site. This would increase your fish population which is really what we are looking for here.

[/ QUOTE ]
Interesting thought. What kind of advertising strategy are we talking here. What sort of slogans? One that implies that other sites are rigged? Or something more subtle? I think the former might lead to more erosion in confidence of online poker in general, and the latter will sail over the heads of the unwashed masses.

[DavidC]

[ QUOTE ]
I wish the concept of a rakefree site would work. I really don't think it will though -- at least not in this format (you pay a monthly fee). I would much rather pay a fee than rake. But, as we've discussed here before, recreational players either don't know what rake it, or don't think it matters. They will never "pay to play" (which is how they will think of it). Sorry, not trying to player hate.

[/ QUOTE ]

Regular players at a live casino will notice something when paying a flat fee rather than a rake: there will be more chips on the table at most times of the evening than they are used to. They will notice, even if they don't really understand, and they'll lose less money, which they will also notice.

So, I'm much more interested in figuring out how to get an hourly rake at online sites rather than a monthly rake. I think that a monthly rake will drive away fish, but an hourly rake could work quite well.

Not having actual chips in front of you makes justifying an hourly rake much harder. /images/graemlins/frown.gif

--Dave.

[Gregatron]

Ideally I think this is a good idea. I think you are overestimating the recreational player though. Why would they want to pay an hourly fee to play when other sites don't charge anything? (Remember that many don't even know what rake is and are unaware anything is taken out of the pot!)

[MickyTheFish]

Thanks for the support we really do appreciate it (and need it!).

We had thought about other forms of revenues including ads etc, but for now have decided against advertising.

When it comes down to it, we want to create a site where the players pay for the service in a similar manner to any other members' club. The revenues have to come directly from the players using a mechanism which avoids any conflict in interest between the player and poker site.

Obviously a Rake creates a conflict of interest at a game level - pot ramping, churning etc, but advertising creates an even more fundamental conflict of interest when it comes to service provision. We want the players to pay for the service directly, ensuring the only people who dictate the direction and development of the site and game are the players and not advertisers.

It has yet to be proven but we are hoping that a mixture of payment models which incentivise different types of players and styles will be acceptable as long as the service is also outstanding. In general we believe that people are not against paying for something as long as they think it is of “good value”.

For now we have Subscriptions which will be suitable for “serious” users and Flat Pot Fees for people who want to dip their toes.

We are very early in our development and would welcome other ideas on how we can fairly charge the players. So keep the ideas coming, we want to hear them!

Micky The Fish

[Sniper]

This model is doomed to fail... there simply will not be enough money to spread around in a marketing budegt for the site to ever gain enough traction!

[MickyTheFish]

For the time being, we're in Beta and reliant on players such as yourself coming in and testing the software/service.

If at a minimum, a player isn’t willing to let us to know who they are then they are unlikely to be suitable for the beta period. We need to earn the trust of our Beta testers and out Beta testers need to trust us enough so we can open a dialogue and trade ideas and opinions.

So I hope you agree that for now it makes sense ask people to register before they play.

Saying all of that, after launch, I think it is highly likely we will allow players to view the software and lobby before registering.

Micky The Fish

[Pokeraddict]

Micky,

I guess this is our project. #1 issue is tha tno one should have to register to see the lobby to see if there are even any games. This needs to be fixed ASAP as many players will not sign up due to this.

[MickyTheFish]

The software does need additional work that is true and I’m really happy to be having this chance to communicate with the players at 2+2. This dialogue is invaluable in prioritising what needs to be done.

I hope we aren’t too early for all of you. Without player liquidity, CardCrusade.com is certainly not the place for people to go fishing but we would welcome groups of players, who we would very gladly host at no cost. We are also running some Freerolls every Friday and want to organise some periods of time when we can guarantee other players would be there.

As for the “bonuswhores”, well we hope that our rake meter is some incentive. Our lobby has a Savings meter which adds the Rake you would have paid at any of the top 10 poker sites. The total value of that number racks up much quicker than any rake bonus would for obvious reason…it is 100% yours.

We had thought about other mechanisms like 75%-100% rake backs every hour, but that goes against the ethos of the site and I hope you would see the ridiculousness of that solution.

Micky The Fish

[MickyTheFish]

TimsterToo,

Thank you for such an upbeat post. I think you have accurately described the situation and we’ll work our asses off to make certain your optimism isn’t misplaced.

Right now we are debating how we can guarantee certain times when other players will be online. We figure there is no way we can guarantee player liquidity 24/7 during the Beta phase but would like to know when are the best times to try and corral people together?

We run 2 freerolls every Friday and are thinking that we want to try and fill the space between them (4pm to 9pm) with various ring games and tourneys.

Is there any way to poll people on 2+2 who might be happy to play a regular game at a certain time? They need to be happy to get involved and give us feedback – good and bad!

Micky The Fish

[MickyTheFish]

Right now we are offering our Cavalry Subscription (rake free ring games and tournaments for) free during the Beta phase - which could last several months. So you could play many thousands of hands without paying a cent.

Later on we will offer people the choice of a Subscription or a Flat Pot Fee which works out at a 50% to 95% discount to a typical rake (and doesn’t go up with the pot).

Once we fully launch, a free month subscription or 2000 free hands would both be possible.

Micky The Fish

[MickyTheFish]

Sorry to dissapoint you but they are two players sitting on a sit-n-go waiting forlornly for other people to join them...

Not rape them /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Micky The Fish

[MickyTheFish]

You may be right but you also may be wrong.

There are plenty of other examples in this world where the service speaks for itself. Think about Google which started way after the “leaders”, or Napster which challenged an industry (and lost, but had fun trying). We’re hoping CardCrusade’s service will speak as strongly, to the poker community.

Regarding costs, I think most people have a very inflated view of what it should cost to provide this service. PartyPoker makes clear profits of about 50% even after spending approximately 30% on marketing alone.

We are also asking our players to cover the cost of the cash transfers similar to some budget airlines that charge an additional fee if you use a credit card. This gets rid of one of our least controllable costs and means we can budget more accurately.

BTW we also have a small marketing budget which we will use very effectively once we exit the beta phase.

So don’t count us out yet!

Micky The Fish

[MickyTheFish]

We are working on that one as we speak! But we are dependant on Firepay getting a little more attentive. Feel free to email them and tell them to WAKE UP! /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Micky The Fish

[MickyTheFish]

The concept of an hourly table charge is a very good one and I think worth looking at more closely.

I realise that the table charge would be levied against all players, winners and losers, but do you think it is sufficiently different to market it in parallel with the Flat Pot Fees? Most people win roughly the same number of pots per hour (5-10) so you can translate it into an equivalent table charge.

As a reminder, our Flat Pot Fee is set fee levied on the winner of the pot. It doesn’t go up with the size of the pot so isn’t a commission. So for a $0.50/$1.00 game you would only pay $0.15 regardless of the size of the pot. Other sites might charge between $0.50 to $1.50 rake in the same situation.

We hope it will appeal to the newbie or someone who wont play very often.

You can see more details on Flat Pot Fees at www.cardcrusade.com/content/paymentmodels.aspx (http://www.cardcrusade.com/content/paymentmodels.aspx)

Micky The Fish

[Sniper]

[ QUOTE ]
You may be right but you also may be wrong.

There are plenty of other examples in this world where the service speaks for itself. Think about Google which started way after the “leaders”, or Napster which challenged an industry (and lost, but had fun trying). We’re hoping CardCrusade’s service will speak as strongly, to the poker community.

Regarding costs, I think most people have a very inflated view of what it should cost to provide this service. PartyPoker makes clear profits of about 50% even after spending approximately 30% on marketing alone.

We are also asking our players to cover the cost of the cash transfers similar to some budget airlines that charge an additional fee if you use a credit card. This gets rid of one of our least controllable costs and means we can budget more accurately.

BTW we also have a small marketing budget which we will use very effectively once we exit the beta phase.

So don’t count us out yet!

Micky The Fish

[/ QUOTE ]

As many know, I post quite frequently with regard to Poker Site financials, so I would consider myself well informed in that regard.

With minimal revenue coming in, your site will have neither the ability to recruit a large affiliate force to market for you, or a sustainable marketing budget to continually refresh the short term player life cycle.

Its also worth mentioning that yours is not the first attempt at a rake free site!

That said, I do wish you luck... but based on what you've posted here, I do not think you've done enough homework!

[Terry]

[ QUOTE ]
#1 issue is that no one should have to register to see the lobby

[/ QUOTE ]

Nor should I have to register to watch a game.

I’ll show you mine if you’ll show me yours ... but you’re the one trying to sell something so you have to show first.

I would really like to see something like you are attempting succeed.

A serious and important question: Is Russ Dutch Boyd involved in or with your project in any way?

[BradleyT]

I can't believe you don't think high rakeback is a good thing, it's way better than pay to play.

"The more you play, the more we pay!" is more psychologically inticing than "The more you play, the less you pay".

[MickyTheFish]

Terry,

I'm not certain if you saw my post on Post4379732 regarding the fact that the process of registering first before seeing tables is more likely a temporary situation during the Beta.

Dutch Boyd or any of his family/friends are NOT involved with CardCrusade.com nor will they ever be.

Micky The Fish

[kurosh]

Your first priority should be to fix your [censored] software. I didn't even look at a table. The lobby was so bad, I that just quit.

[MickyTheFish]

[ QUOTE ]
With minimal revenue coming in, your site will have neither the ability to recruit a large affiliate force to market for you, or a sustainable marketing budget to continually refresh the short term player life cycle.

Its also worth mentioning that yours is not the first attempt at a rake free site!

[/ QUOTE ]

Sniper,

You have raised some very interesting points and I would normally not want to discuss such detail on an open forum but I think it is important to make certain our players have some confidence we will be around in 5 years time.

The key to understanding the model is understanding the difference in revenues a subscription based service will generate vs a normal Raked site AND what level of player churn we will see.

Revenues – Most people don’t realise it but ex marketing and transaction costs, PartyPoker spent only about $50/player in 2004 to pay for operations. If we charge on average say $15/month that equates to $180 per year per subscription player. We don’t think our average will be as high as $180 because some people will pay a Flat Pot Fee, but there is some room for marketing.

PartyPoker spent about $150/player in marketing last year, we wont be able to match that but we might be able to spend ½ as much. Also given some player liquidity, I would contend that our story is far more persuasive to a large portion of the poker players than PartyPoker ever was. Additionally, due to a much lower churn, we will have less expense of administration and marketing compared to PartyPoker.

Churn – that is where the story becomes really exciting. The question is why does the average player have more than 6 accounts a year and change those accounts frequently?
<ul type="square">- Absolute similarity in current poker offerings, all raked and all at the same level!
- Up to 99% of bankrolls fall to $0 gives them an opportunity to move [/list]
We will retain more players who play for longer periods
<ul type="square">- up to 20% are now profitable, 20x more people with positive bankrolls
- the 80% who lose money, do it far more slowly, adding player liquidity to the system
- Subscription based approach with set terms of 1month to 1 year
- Multiple payment models offering choice and retaining interest
- Constant feedback on money saved, often times more than player bankroll!
- Game innovations are not restricted by the business model – no conflict of interest [/list]

Zero Rake was one of the first serious attempt at a rake free site and it closed down after only a few short months which in itself is very strange…why would they only close after 6 months? We think it has something to do with the fact that the people behind it had interests in traditional raked sites as well. They didn’t get the huge take-up overnight as they expected and were not prepared to do the hard work to better the service and bring in the players when they had other sites which were very profitable.

Also, they didn’t see that the benefit of Rake Free has to be communicated to the poker playing public who might not be aware how much impact the rake has. It is probably going to be our biggest challenge and where we will spend the most effort.

I apologise for the length of this post but would point out I have still left out a huge amount of detail! Sniper, if you want to discuss this more over the telephone then please feel free to PM me your telephone number.

Micky The Fish

[MickyTheFish]

That makes sense if you assume the player is uniformed and doesn’t understand the money is coming from them in the first place. We may be idealists but we want to educate those players and are hopeful that ultimately the public will see through the ruse on their own accord.

So we don’t think it is wise to rely on the ignorance of the public and hope that more informed players will ultimately lead the way so that Rake Free becomes the standard and not the exception.

Micky The Fish

[_And1_]

"Dutch Boyd or any of his family/friends are NOT involved with CardCrusade.com nor will they ever be."

At least you got this feature right, you're off to a good start... /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[Bigdaddydvo]

[ QUOTE ]
"Dutch Boyd or any of his family/friends are NOT involved with CardCrusade.com nor will they ever be."

At least you got this feature right, you're off to a good start... /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Amen to that.

[Grummin]

Micky,

Allow me to take on the roll of devil's advocate for a moment. Speaking as developer of a yet to appear poker site who's following the traditional 'winners pay the rake' model, it's a natural instinct on the part of any new site to look for a way to break into the market. We looked into this subscription model as well, because as a new site you must stand out. As a matter of fact, we were evaluating this very thing when Zero Rake launched and were able to study them closely though their efforts.

I'm sure you remember that they in fact removed all rake for the last few months of their operations (if you signed up, you'd play completely rake free for 6 and then 12 months). This move was backed up with magazine ads and banners touting this fact. We watched and waited for what should have been a flurry of activity on their site, only to see barren tables.

Certainly, if your site gets let's say 1,000 people in a month to subscribe...you're only able to raise $15K for that month. I'm not sure how much your server hosting is running you since you're in CR, but it can't be too much. Let's assume that it's zero for this scenario though.

Let's also assume that you don't pay any of your staff salary either.

A 1/2 page ad in Card Player Magazine runs your $6K a month. Full page around $14K a month.

You see where I'm going with this.

I wish you folks all the luck in the world, though. Being here and openly discussing your site is a good start. =)

[Timer]

Nothing you do or say will make any difference if you have poor software and a less than adequate interface. There are so many online cardrooms who, in my opinion, would be so much more successful if they simply made it easier to play on their site.

I could give you many examples, but I’ll tell you about three: Planet Poker, Absolute and Battlefield Poker.

Planet Poker was one of the very first online cardrooms. They could have had all the business if they had been willing to make some changes, but because of their stubborn and shortsighted corporate hierarchy they failed to grab the brass ring.

Absolute was and is a complete joke and I gave up immediately. I had no idea what was going on there, but they seem to get a decent amount of business anyway—go figure.

Battlefield Poker (a Prima site) on the other hand showed some promise, but I just couldn't follow the action, and there were other annoying problems--but in spite of that I gave them a half a dozen chances before I finally gave up. I had some back and forth correspondence with them airing my views, and they seemed genuinely interested in what I had to say, but I now realize that it was just flag waving PR on their part to placate a new customer. Nothing will change. If it does change, it will have to change across the entire Prima network, and the changes, if and when they do come, will materialize very slowly. So many of these places have the attitude, "if it ain't broke don't fix it," without realizing that it's already very badly broken.

I genuinely liked the idea of 40% rakeback, and the fact that they had a decent amount of games, but the poor interface made playing there a lot more trouble than it was worth.

And to top it off you have existing sites like Party and Stars who won’t fix obvious problems with their interfaces while at the same time running multi-million dollar advertising campaigns. It becomes obvious to even the most casual of players where these bigger sites place their priorities.

When I go to a cardroom to play, and I get confused or upset because I can't figure out how stuff works, or it doesn't work well enough to accommodate my needs—I'm outta there—no matter how good the incentives. This is especially true when you have places like Party and Stars to fall back on.

Any up and coming card room that hits the market will have to have a new and interesting gimmick to draw people in, but it will also require, make that demand, state of the art software and the interface to go along with it.

Why the newer start ups aren't willing to cull the best of the existing sites and incorporate those good features, along with some features those busier sites have overlooked, into their interfaces, just stymies me.

[MickyTheFish]

Kurosh,

As you can imagine, after months of staring at the same software it can become hard to see some obvious problems (I still see some though!)...

I'm not afraid of discussing it here, so can you list some of the issues you experienced and what you think might fix them?

Micky The Fish

[kurosh]

Whoa, so I just tried to load up the client to point out the things that were wrong and something completely different opened up. There must've been a problem with my java. Sorry, your client is fine.

[StacysMom]

I coought their prop/bot sitting at the .1/.2 table. Dominated his big blind and he timed out, left the table to go sit at an empty SnG.

Neither prop/bot has said a word after repeated inquiries. Seems shady to me.

[MickyTheFish]

StacysMom,

Let me guess, the player's name was "Acesinurface"?

Why would you come to a conclusion it was a prop/bot? If true it wouldn't make sense for them to fold/leave the first time your raise. That would sort of defeat the purpose of a Prop wouldn't it?

"Acesinurface" is a very keen player who sits down on a couple of tables but isnt at his computer when someone else sits down. Our software allows this, as soon as someone raises against this "away" person they will fold. We do it this way so the maximum a person can lose if their ISP drops connection or they leave their computer is the big blind.

We are in Beta Right now and have not done any marketing whatsoever. If you want a game come to our Friday Night freeroll at 4pm &amp; 9pm ET or arrange to meet people at the site for a friendly game.

We really appreciate any player who is willing to try things out and give us feedback so come along!

BTW, We need to channel our registered players to certain times to get some liquidity and I've been trying to get a consensus as to the best time to arrange these games. What is your opinion?

Micky The Fish

[iSTRONG]

anyone wants to give this a try... I'm sat at the 0.25/0.5 NL table...

[iSTRONG]

errrm... can't withdraw to neteller?? wtf?