[DCJ311]

[ QUOTE ]
Sites charge what they can get and fish don't care about rake.

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously, but the optimal business model is one that maximizes profits by finding the equilibrium point between supply and demand- very basic.

My point is not only are they screwing loyal players, they're screwing themselves by reducing the amount of volume they're getting due to absurdly high prices!

If a site can get 2 $1050+50 SNGs per day or 20 $1050+10 SNGs per day which do you think is closer to achieving market equilibrium? Notice that they wouldn't be catering to 'fish' in this case, they're catering to mostly savvy players who have the means to put a lot of $ into action.

Furthermore I'd venture that at the $27s and up we are seeing a lot less 'fish' than before. Many of these players are aware of the absurd rake being charged, and even though these players are in the overall minority, they are the ones putting the most money into action.

If rake were cut in half I think we'd see WAY more than 2x the # of SNGs being played as of current, and I'd lay a big chunk of my bankroll on that if I could wager.

The proper solution is to flood Stars (Full Tilt, etc) management with emails addressing the issue, then give them an opportunity to comment, and if nothing happens we organize boycotting their site(s) for a week or something just so they get the point. It's a freeroll that can save each of us thousands of dollars a year.