The rake is unacceptable

[freecard4all]

[ QUOTE ]
I may not be the genius you think I am, I have only one Nobel Prize.

[/ QUOTE ]
hope didn't get it for Peace [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] (because their decisions in this category are a real joke)
kidding.

Are you the "real" Milton Friedman? I thought you already died ...

[aos08]

I confirm that

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
lol I did the very complicated math myself that if I won $19 and payed $1963 in rake that makes it $1982. Understand?

[/ QUOTE ]
yes but we don't understand what the $1963 means. Please confirm/deny that it means "rake taken from pots you actually won" so we can finally close this issue.

[/ QUOTE ]

[aos08]

Yes, I would prefer to pay $500 up front instead of paying $1963 in rake.

[ QUOTE ]
It is simple. What you have done is single out a marginal cost of doing business as "unacceptable". In its place you propose a fixed cost of $500.

Fixed costs, by their nature, can and usually are paid up front, like rent, internet service et cetera. So, if you want to discuss a fixed cost of $500, do you realize it would be payable upfront ?

I may not be the genius you think I am, I have only one Nobel Prize.

[/ QUOTE ]

[MiltonFriedman]

Well, yeah ... but post-mortems are an integral part of poker.

[Bellagibro]

Vote with your feet, play where you get the best rake (taking rakeback into account). I stopped playing at Party completely when they got rid of my RB.

[MiltonFriedman]

The winning players are the ones holding the shears, not the sites.

Playing against a fish, with all the aids available, is like fishing with dynamite.

Coase wrote a long analysis of this tragedy of the commons.

[MiltonFriedman]

They usually get off at the front of the plane. They ain't flying coach.

[sethypooh21]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, I would prefer to pay $500 up front instead of paying $1963 in rake.

[/ QUOTE ]

So your position is that PS would attract 4x (or more!) the number of players if it just charged a $500 admission fee?

Film Cannister FTW again!

[JamieO]

So when i enter a $11+1 180 man turbo sit and go tourney at stars how much profit does stars make? Someone give me a guess please. Does stars make $100, $150, or $179?

Are they putting out $40 worth of ads for that tourney? maybe $80 in security and $20 in customer support? That would give stars a profit of about $40 for a tournament like this. Plenty of $ to do good business with a good profit.

NOT A CHANCE THAT STARS MAKES THIS LITTLE. Im not gonna pretend like i know the real numbers but in you average 180 man tourney the customer support cost has got to be about 50c. Just think how often you have contacted customer support. For me thats 2 times and ive played over 5k tourneys.
Now how about security. How much does it cost stars to make these transactions secure and to prevent collusion, botting, and other cheating? With cheating not really a problem in mtts the only cost is making sure the cash transfers are secure. How much can this really cost? $5 maybe.
Advertising is the part that im not even going to guess at. But it would be ridiculous to think that stars is spending enough on ads to justify the cost of these tourneys. maybe 20% max.

PLEASE SOMEONE TELL ME WHERE MY $ GOES AND HOW I AM GETTING A GOOD DEAL. PLEASE.
I understand the sites need to profit, and i think they should make piles of cash. Guess what, the top sites are doing EXTREMELY WELL, but why is 10% the one and only true gospel rate that should be charged on online tournaments????????????????????????????
Why do you guys defend the sites without giving any sort of reason why 10% is optimal??
Does 10% rake keep the games growing as fast as possible?
How would you even know?
Does a 10% rake even make the sites the most $??
How would you know?
Somehow a whole lot of people seem to think they know this info. PLEASE EXPLAIN. WHAT INFO DO U HAVE THAT I DONT?


And BOB--
Why do some sites offer rakeback deals in the first place?
If no one cares about a 20% reduction in rake how do the rakeback affiliates stay in business? Do the sites only attract players that are multitable nits who make $ just by the rakeback? OF COURSE NOT. EVERYONE WANTS A DEAL NOT JUST WINNING PLAYERS.

[JamieO]

And op im sorry but the flat-fee idea will never work. It will just discourage the people who just wanna come play a little.

Really i dont see any changes in rake coming until the laws are changed and american casinos and cardrooms can compete.