Full tilt vs Pokerstars / affiliate rakeback vs directly rakeback

[gameplay]

Personally i dont find the reason to pay a percentage of my rake to a third party like an affiliate. i find more straight and not 'under the table' for the Full Tilt to give a 30% rakeback for example to everyone and not an 27% via an affiliate who gets the rest.An affiliate work is to find players for poker and not for rakeback and to get a fixed amount for his effort,like on pokerstars. must not have connection with the rakeback a site decides to give on the players.that would make i think very easier and clear the things for us as poker players and let us play poker and not searching ,change accounts,give a percentage of our rakeback at a third party etc. Pokerstars is doing that and it is the biggest room right now. So is any + third parties get money in their pockets and out of the poker pool in a passive way? Where is the + on that? i would like to see affiliates who bring new poker players and not make their profits from the players already exist.
i would like to hear your opinions and thoughts.

[DiamondRB]

In theory your point is valid. Rakeback affiliates only came to existance becauase the poker sites wanted to give the knowledgeable players incentive to play with them while at the same time keeping the new players in the dark as to the fact they can get rakeback.

It is for this reason we will never see the majority of sites give rakeback directly to players. Stars does it however unless you are Elite the rate of return you can not compare to some of the deals floating around at other sites (even FT) these days.

Therefore for the average player (someone who will never be able to attain Elite status at Stars) the clear choice would be a site that offers rakeback at a better rate (whether thats FT or not is irrelevant).

[RakeBackDirect]

[ QUOTE ]
In theory your point is valid. Rakeback affiliates only came to existance becauase the poker sites wanted to give the knowledgeable players incentive to play with them while at the same time keeping the new players in the dark as to the fact they can get rakeback.

It is for this reason we will never see the majority of sites give rakeback directly to players. Stars does it however unless you are Elite the rate of return you can not compare to some of the deals floating around at other sites (even FT) these days.

Therefore for the average player (someone who will never be able to attain Elite status at Stars) the clear choice would be a site that offers rakeback at a better rate (whether thats FT or not is irrelevant).

[/ QUOTE ]

agreed, and also do not leave out the fact that affiliates really help to promote certain poker sites...promotion and advertising that otherwise would need to come directly from the poker site itself. Most poker sites need help with advertising and promotion and are willing to "pay" some of the rake generated by new players back to affilaites and players in exchange for the advertising help.

[DiamondRB]

Yes good point rakebackdirect. Affiliate commissions are basically a marketing expense for these sites. From a marketing standpoint it is much more effective than hit and miss ad campaings are by paying affiliates they are gaining access to a direct market of active players.

[demon102]

full tilt can suck my balls cuz I have no rb there,


that is all

[gameplay]

is it unfair which is happen to demon102 now or not? i find it extremely unfair.
about the pokerstars rakeback the poll above is NOT about the percentages and if full tilt has better rakeback than pokerstars but simple if it is directly or by an affiliate.
on pokerstars it is 8%-28% +15% from freerolls.

i know and understand your point rakebackdirect but really i dont think that the affiliate sites promote poker because simple a new player doesnt even know them. they simple promote himselfs on the players already exist which makes no good for noone. if they get their profit from the new players and a fixed amount about that,then it is real affiliating,the current is not. in other words i think the same advertise by the affiliates can be done with a fixed amount payable to them for new players and not the affiliate rakeback throw them.
In reality i think the main reason a lot of sites keeps doing that way the rakeback is that they want the new players (fishes) who dont know about rakeback to lose all their money without any rakeback for the site's profit. otherwise if they got rakeback the site would have made less money from them fishes till busting because they will bust out from the better players and not from the rake!
So all that works against the poker players and simple increase the sites profits! (bust out the without rakeback fishes from the rake and not from the better players)
sorry for the not so good english but i think you understand the point.

[RakeBackDirect]

you are correct in regards that most poker sites do not want the average new player to even know about rakeback, which is the reason that they offer this through affiliates, and not on the main site -- or else EVERYONE would want rakeback, versus just those that know about it. Rakeback used as more of an incentive tool, to either those who are searching for bonus/promo options and incentives, or for those individuals maybe playing on a different network that might not try a given poker room without incentive.

While affiliates do receive commissions based on a players poker play once a member of the given poker site, they do have to be NEW players to be able to receive commissions on a player and thus be able to provide rakeback, so its guaranteed that affiliates are in fact, only bringing in new player to a given poker site -- not existing players.

[gameplay]

for example i dont have account on full tilt,none affiliate will learn me existance of the site nor make me playing there and i am not new. The sites wants to bust the new players fishes without rakeback to get the bigger possible profit from them.otherwise the better players will profit from that. the affiliate can bring new players and get a fixed amount after a while the player is not new so no reason the affiliate to keep profiting from him.

[RakeBackDirect]

I really can't explain it any better than I have alreay above...but if for instance you are playing at Poker Stars and hear about Full Tilt...you might not sign up because why bother switch to a different site when you already are on Poker Stars. However, if you hear about FT and also about their rakeback program of 27%, you might consider switching poker rooms because of this added bonus/incentive. You would not hear about rakeback unless you are going through an affiliate, and therefore an affiliate has influenced you through an incentive to sign up as a new player (and has successfully marketed Full Tilt to you) which gives FT revenue they would not have received without the help of an affilaite and their marketing efforts. The affiliate receives commissions on your play for bringing you in to FT as a new player and FT is willing to pay and take slightly less rake to have you as a customer. The affiliate is willing to give up some of that commission as rakeback to provide you an incentive to continue to play at this poker site, and not simply switch to another poker room when your bonus has run out, etc. The affiliate only profits slightly by keeping you as a customer, so everyone wins...the poker site since they are getting revenue they would not have otherwise, the affilaite by taking a few percent of the rake you generate for their efforts as well as for admin costs, and the player who would not otherwise receive ANY rakeback if not for the affiliate.

I hope this helps!

Tim
RakeBackDirect

[gameplay]

he would have received rakeback if it was directly like on stars.it is not the affiliate who brings the rakeback but the competition beetween the sites.an affiliate only capitalize of that or he promotes it in a different opinion.
theoriticaly full tilt can offer 27% directly to all. i cant imagine a reason which makes that not better for poker. but i can understand the reason that full tilt will make less profits from the no rakeback players. i havent heard yet an advantage of the affiliate rakeback vs direct for the poker and poker player and not for the sites or the affiliates.

i would like to hear the opinion of one of the 7 i think players who votes for affiliate rakeback not only affiliates. do they find an advantage on the affiliate rakeback or simple dont care how it works and just give a vote?