Defend against PartyPoker - mass mail revolt (PLEASE HELP)

[MoistToes]

[ QUOTE ]
The post above is correct, what is going to happen is that the new affiliate will lose the rev share and the old affiliate will get nothing. Win/win for Party. No way Party goes back and says "Old affiliate someone stole your player, here is the back pay from that player".

[/ QUOTE ]

Irionic isn't it? Party should shut itself down for fraud traffic since they have stolen accounts from the original affiliates.

[addict2k7]

Sorry, can someone please explain this to me?

I was under the impression that, while unmentionable is always kept on the down-low to prevent applications en masse, PP tacitly allowed it for high-volume players in-the-know to get it. This is allowed by PP in order to keep MGR on their site, especially for players whose MGR can exceed like 5k a month; as was my understanding.

Is receiving unmentionable the problem here, or just changing affiliates to earn it with a second account? I mean how could unmentionable occur without Party knowing it? It would have to comprise a substantial proportion of PP's software to administrate and track such a program. If PP does indeed allow it, where exactly is the legality in PP designing their software to directly allow players to break their T&C.

Sorry if this sounds like a noob question, I was considering unmentionable schemes for my PP account, only just learned that it would need a second account. Naturally I will be waiting until this saga reaches a conclusion, but would you say there is any chance of getting PP unmentionable anymore? I can't imagine many affiliates being comfortable offering it, even if the software supports it.

This must be worrying for a lot of affiliates and seems very very sketchy. It surprises me that PP, a publicly listed company, can legally offer unmentionable at all if it actually is against their T&C. Either way they can't complain too much about ppl disrespecting their T&C if they're seemingly so willing to do it themselves.

All seems related to this.

[marand]

Well RB has never been 'allowed' according to their policy. However my old 'vip host' even told me that he knew that most high volume players had RB and he didn't really care about it.

I mean it does make sense to keep high volume players that would otherwise switch site. I guess they are hoping to keep the majority of them with their new VIP system. 15% at party or 27% at FTP? Or play like a mad man to get a nice % at Stars?

[marand]

I paid $25000 in rake to Party in May so this whole mess sucked. Don't know where I will be playing now. Guess I will take a vacation for a week or two until I figure out what site that deserves my rake.

[addict2k7]

[ QUOTE ]
Well RB has never been 'allowed' according to their policy. However my old 'vip host' even told me that he knew that most high volume players had RB and he didn't really care about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

It seems that this is more than just pretending not to notice though. For unmentionable to occur, PP software would at some stage have been deliberately programmed to break its own T&C. For them to now turn around and penalise people who break one rule while allowing others to break a similar one is obviously rediculous. I know that internet gambling isn't the most regulated of businesses at the moment, but for a publically listed FTSE 250 company this seems really, really suss. If an independent audit was ever taken of PP (which I'm not naive enough to believe will happen soon) surely this would not hold up.

[lotus guardian]

You don't get it. PP didn't give anyone rakeback, so the software was not programmed for it. PP gave affiliates a % of your rake and then the affiliates gave you a smaller %, bur party didn't allow this.

[xTheKidx]

[ QUOTE ]
Well RB has never been 'allowed' according to their policy. However my old 'vip host' even told me that he knew that most high volume players had RB and he didn't really care about it.


[/ QUOTE ]

Of course PP didnt care about.
But then,at least one Big non RB affiliate (I think it was a German affiliate because he announced it a couple of times in the Germn Forums) put pressure on Party and complained that he's losing many of his Mid and High Limit players.
So Party had to react...

[Chomp]

[ QUOTE ]
But then,at least one Big non RB affiliate (I think it was a German affiliate because he announced it a couple of times in the Germn Forums) put pressure on Party and complained that he's losing many of his Mid and High Limit players.
So Party had to react...

[/ QUOTE ]


That's the most coherent explanation for this sorry mess I've heard so far.

[xTheKidx]

Of course there were other reasons too,but it was one of the main reasons.

[badbeatLOL]

so what you are saying is that because of one affiliate who is not even Partypoker-exclusive anymore putting "pressure" on Party they decided to [censored] all of their other affiliates and ruin some of them? where does this info come from? the only thing the big german affiliate said was that he will keep his eyes open for affiliates who offer RB and report them or something in this manner and thats it....