Why is SNG rake so high?

[DerrtySlime]

i will boycott stars for a week which is a big deal for me if it brings awareness the these multi tablers of your site ( which play a high volume=lots of rake) are not willing to pay the stupidly high rake.

and like other poeple have said, lower the rake and you can bring in even more volume and a pool of new players. which is good for the site.

[Kibby]

Someone please organize a week long boycott where all the high volume players will be gone. Let me know when it is so I can profit$$$$. :-)

Ya, the rake should be lower. Its ridiculous. It costs the same for them to run whatever stake tourney they do. Really the model should be a percentage up to a certain point and then a flat rate however higher it gets. High stakes card rooms, from what I'm told, often don't even have a rake. You just pay an hourly rate. I don't see any reason why PS needs to make more than $45 per turbo sng it runs if not less. $20 sounds reasonable too.

[Daleroxxu]

[Daleroxxu]

the biggest joke was when we wanted something between the 27s and 60s on stars and they came up with the 35s which are 32+3, with the worst rake % yet, CHEERS!

[Daleroxxu]

[ QUOTE ]
Another issue I kind of have is, why does the rake decrease so much at the low stakes, then jump way up at the medium stakes, actually increasing as stakes do until high stakes are reached, where they finally start decreasing again, and not getting as low as the rake at the $16s again until the $335s

[/ QUOTE ]

yah, OP had another thread where he listed the exact rake % for each stake and its pretty retarded how they vary as you move up/down stakes

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...age=0&vc=1

[ QUOTE ]

Currently the SNG rake format on Stars is as follows, using Buyin/Fee/Rake % of Buyin

$3 $0.40 13.33%
$6 $0.50 8.30%
$15 $1.00 6.67%
$25 $2 8.00%
$32 $3 9.38%
$55 $5 9.10%
$105 $9 8.60%
$210 $15 7.14%
$315 $20 6.35%
$525 $30 5.70%
$1,050 $50 4.76%

<snip>

Here's my proposal using the same format but different fees for the $32+ buyins:

$3 $0.40 13.33%
$6 $0.50 8.33%
$15 $1.00 6.67%
$32 $2.00 6.25%
$55 $3.00 5.45%
$105 $5.00 4.76%
$210 $9.00 4.29%
$315 $12.00 3.81%
$525 $15.00 2.86%
$1,050 $25.00 2.38%


[/ QUOTE ]

[Finnisher]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Another issue I kind of have is, why does the rake decrease so much at the low stakes, then jump way up at the medium stakes, actually increasing as stakes do until high stakes are reached, where they finally start decreasing again, and not getting as low as the rake at the $16s again until the $335s

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. It makes no sense that the $15+1s have a better rake (6.6%) than a $210+15 (7.1%), yet that system has been in place for well over a year. I have confronted Pokerstars on this blatant inconsistency several times and they have still yet to comment!

It's all very absurd that they haven't realized the ineffiiciency of their business model by now, but the only way to get them to listen is to bitch and possibly even boycott.

[/ QUOTE ]
FWIW with the FPPs the 210s have a better rake than the 15s, assuming that most people who play $200+ sngs and care about the rake are at least Supernovas and there probably aren't that many Platinum+ people playing the $20 sngs. $200+ players get more FPPs in relation, their FPPs have a greater value and they can use them more freely (eg concierge). Maybe you don't see it that way but Stars might. I'm not saying that the rake isn't too high.

[cougar62]

lol...the above posts are just one reason why a boycott wont work, because many will just see that day (or week or whatever) as a golden opportunity to snack on some fish. The other reason is, say someone who plays ~50 SNG's a day sits out a day. My guess is they'll start playing 55-60 SNG's a day for the next week to make up for lost profits.

Rake at SNG's are simply a function of the marketplace. The reason Stars charges $15 rake at the $210 buy-in is because it's most profitable for them to do so. If a $10 rake brought in enough extra action to generate more $$$ that's what the rake would be, and if jacking it up to $20 meant more net profit than up goes the rake. It's no different than the price of gas, milk, cars, or anything else. Companies price their product in order to maximize revenue and profits, not to be fair to the consumer. Nor should they. They don't care if you bitch and complain, they only care if you leave and don't come back. If you really want the rake of SNG's to go down, quit altogether for about 6 months and find another game. If SNG volume went down considerably compared to other games, then the rake would possibly go down to stimulate business.

Edit: If the games continue to get tougher at each level and it becomes more and more difficult for high volume players to be profitable at SNG's, this could happen just as a natural function of the marketplace. If your ROI is 15-20% you're not nearly as concerned about the rake as you are when your ROI is 2-3%.

[blackize]

Fish don't care about rake and the high volume pros will play so long as they are winning. There is no incentive for any of the sites to lower the rake on SNGs.

Organizing a boycott would probably show them how much rake they could lose, but they know that you can't hold out forever AND there is too high a monetary incentive for pros to break the boycott(games will be ridiculously easy while all the other pros are boycotting).

[ryanghall]

[ QUOTE ]
Fish don't care about rake and the high volume pros will play so long as they are winning. There is no incentive for any of the sites to lower the rake on SNGs.

Organizing a boycott would probably show them how much rake they could lose, but they know that you can't hold out forever AND there is too high a monetary incentive for pros to break the boycott(games will be ridiculously easy while all the other pros are boycotting).

[/ QUOTE ]

This is why there will have to be consequences for any pro who is invited to join the boycott and decides to play instead. And they'll wish they'd just sat out the day.

Ryan

[Uniqueuponhim]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Fish don't care about rake and the high volume pros will play so long as they are winning. There is no incentive for any of the sites to lower the rake on SNGs.

Organizing a boycott would probably show them how much rake they could lose, but they know that you can't hold out forever AND there is too high a monetary incentive for pros to break the boycott(games will be ridiculously easy while all the other pros are boycotting).

[/ QUOTE ]

This is why there will have to be consequences for any pro who is invited to join the boycott and decides to play instead. And they'll wish they'd just sat out the day.

Ryan

[/ QUOTE ]

What, you're going to track them down and bust their kneecaps... or their fingers?