|
|
#41
04-21-2006, 05:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Is there anything in the world more expensive than internet poker?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Anyone who isnt a rake nit, has no sense in their head. [/ QUOTE ] If I may ask, how do you propose a poker room make money? And don't say charge a flat fee per month - that's not a new concept. Personally, I don't think 5% rake (yes, I know there are some exceptions) is anything to get one's panties in a bunch about (and at high stakes, the $3 cap is generally much lower than 5%). The poker room needs to make money. Sure, over the long run, the amount of rake high-volume players pay can look staggering, but compared to what winning players actually make, it's not really that big of a deal. Even at low stakes, frankly, I don't particularly mind giving 50 cents to the house when I scoop a $10 pot. I know it's kind of a "fish" mentality ("Hey, I still won, so who cares?"), but the poker room is providing the service, so they should be paid. In the end, I'm going to assume you are an affiliate for WSEX. [/ QUOTE ] Just like we should assume you're an affiliate that benefits from a high rake? I agree that the sites need to make money, but I think they can cut the rake in half and still make plenty. And they do a lot of stuff with that extra money that I don't necessarily care for. Examples: player points, freeroll tournaments, paying for high profile players to shill for them. If they simply run a bug-free site with good customer support and a reasonable advertisement budget, and charge enough to make a healthy profit still, there'd be no complaints about rake. [/ QUOTE ] No player wants high rake (except for an affiliate that also plays I guess). Why would Party poker cut there rake in half? Would they double there pool of players? This is capitalism, you do whatever you can with in the rules to make money. Party poker, Stars, and other sites are doing a very good job of getting lots of players to pay large amounts of rake and make money off o it. Why would they change it? Who wants half the money they currently have? As with anything in capitalism, you don't love it then leave it, your choice. 
|
|
#43
04-21-2006, 06:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Is there anything in the world more expensive than internet poker?
|
|
#44
04-21-2006, 06:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Is there anything in the world more expensive than internet poker?
[ QUOTE ]
It's a Cost of Doing Business. You don't like it, find another business. [/ QUOTE ] ...and then discover that all basically all businesses have expenses associated with them... We're fortunate that the rake we pay we can get back a portion of it through, you know, other means -- but that's just gravy as the money from actually playing should be far more than this ... other thing ... no one is supposed to mention.
|
|
#47
04-21-2006, 10:58 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A Poll
[ QUOTE ]
It is you who are all idiots. If there are not 10,000 players at WPX within 6 months, it just proves how DUMB I am. [/ QUOTE ] FYP
|
|
#48
04-21-2006, 11:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A Poll
[ QUOTE ]
Is there anything in the world more expensive than internet poker? [/ QUOTE ] B&M Poker. At Star City Casino in Sydney Australia 5/10 limit, you pay $75/100 hands in rake (75c ante per hand). At least online poker is beatable.
|
|
#50
04-21-2006, 11:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: A Poll
since when is ante counted as rake?
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
