|
|
#11
06-27-2007, 09:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Why not make it higher?
[ QUOTE ]
probably cause the rake that the pros would be paying would be higher, and thus the site would have to pay more in rakeback [/ QUOTE ] spot on. 
|
|
#12
06-27-2007, 12:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why not make it higher?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] probably cause the rake that the pros would be paying would be higher, and thus the site would have to pay more in rakeback [/ QUOTE ] spot on. [/ QUOTE ] rakeback is capped, duhhh. the actual rake itself, now that's a different story. where does this unrakebacked rake go?
|
|
#13
06-27-2007, 02:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why not make it higher?
Fish would go instabusto instead of slowly dribbling their money away?
|
|
#14
06-27-2007, 02:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why not make it higher?
[ QUOTE ]
higher games can be money losers for the sites because of the cost of processing deposits and withdraws for those amounts. the float somewhat offsets this and if wires are the only way then that is relatively cheap. [/ QUOTE ] What is the float?
|
|
#16
06-27-2007, 10:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Why not make it higher?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] higher games can be money losers for the sites because of the cost of processing deposits and withdraws for those amounts. the float somewhat offsets this and if wires are the only way then that is relatively cheap. [/ QUOTE ] What is the float? [/ QUOTE ] the float is the interest earned from all players' balances. Yes the money is not owned by the poker sites, but even when they hold it in segretated trust accounts, they make profit from it.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
