[1p0kerboy]

[ QUOTE ]
As mentioned before, you already HAVE a fairly significant rake difference between sites.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't actually agree with this.

In the games I play, the rakes are identical amongst almost every site. At least the major sites. In fact, this is true as far as ANY no-limit game goes, and no-limit is far the most popular game. So almost everybody pays the same rake on either Stars or Tilt.

[ QUOTE ]
And nobody gives a crap...not even the people who are playing at those sites now...not even most of your 2+2'ers who you would expect to care the most about these things. Even THEY don't care that much.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't necessarily agree with this either.

The industry leader, PokerStars, probably has the lowest rake when figuring all games across the board. I think this may actually be a small reason they are as popular. (Obviously advertising and signing the WSOP winners are much bigger reasons)

[ QUOTE ]
Will lower-rake actually influence revenues for the site?
I think it would hurt the site's bottom-line because they aren't going to get significantly more action to make up for the amount they are NOT taking out in each hand.


[/ QUOTE ]

Hmmm. They might. Higher rakes bust out players quicker. If they kept losing players in action longer, I think they would be less likely to leave the game altogether.

[ QUOTE ]
Will it bring in more players by announcing, "We have lower rake than the other guys"?
I just don't think it will.


[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe not. But you've heard the adage "it's better to fleece the sheep than to skin 'em".