|
|
#31
03-29-2007, 09:20 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Ultimate Bet rake calculation update
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I guess we'll see. I moved to UB because of their rakeback (now reduced)and bonuses (now reduced as well). I would be really pissed if i was a US player because they are taking an even bigger hit than others. [/ QUOTE ] Bonuses reduced? Do you just mean size and/or frequency, or have they changed the clearing terms? [/ QUOTE ] the deposit bonus went from 650 max to 350 a few weeks ago. [/ QUOTE ] don't they also deduct more of your bonus from your MGR than they used to? 
|
|
#32
03-29-2007, 09:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ultimate Bet rake calculation update
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I guess we'll see. I moved to UB because of their rakeback (now reduced)and bonuses (now reduced as well). I would be really pissed if i was a US player because they are taking an even bigger hit than others. [/ QUOTE ] Bonuses reduced? Do you just mean size and/or frequency, or have they changed the clearing terms? [/ QUOTE ] the deposit bonus went from 650 max to 350 a few weeks ago. [/ QUOTE ] don't they also deduct more of your bonus from your MGR than they used to? [/ QUOTE ] Only if you're American, AFAIK.
|
|
#35
04-02-2007, 03:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ultimate Bet rake calculation update
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Someone answer this.... If the sites take out the SAME amount of rake for each hand, why do they switch from Dealt to Contributed? Is it because the affiliates get less? Is that the only reason? All things being equal, usually max $3.00 is taken out of the pot.. [/ QUOTE ] Yes, without a doubt the sites do this because they know it will reduce the MGR that their affiliates get credit for, reducing the commission that they pay the affiliates, which of course reduces the amount of rakeback we all get. [/ QUOTE ] I still don't get it -- why does it reduce the MGR that their affiliates get credit for?? This would only be true if the looser players were less likely to be tracked to an affiliate. Is that the explanation? In other words, the only way this will let the poker sites keep more money in their own pockets is if the percentage of individuals contributing the most to the rake (e.g. looser, prob fishier players) that are tracked to MGR-affiliates is LOWER than the percentage of tighter players that are so-tracked. I guess this is probably true. So is my reasoning more or less correct?
|
|
#38
04-02-2007, 09:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ultimate Bet rake calculation update
[ QUOTE ]
ok guys, what if i already have names on all these sites such as acsolute,ub,and fulltilt, can i still get rakeback? [/ QUOTE ] for UB, u can have up to 3 accounts, so u'll need to create a new one...for absolute, not on that site specifically, but if u wait 90 days, u can sign up with RB on one of their skins (seems vegas is getting attention)...full tilt, u can't do anything about ur situation there...
|
|
#40
04-03-2007, 12:46 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Ultimate Bet rake calculation update
[ QUOTE ]
That's pretty much it. the loose/passive fish don't know about rakeback. [/ QUOTE ] But they are still likely to be tagged to an affiliate. From what I have seen, a lot of players sign up to a poker room via a link of some sort, which, unless directly purchased by UB, are most likely affiliates of some kind. I don't know how many of these affiliates earn MGR, vs CPA, but my guess is that quite a bit are MGR.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
