|
|
#11
11-14-2007, 06:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: The rake is unacceptable
[ QUOTE ]
I won $1982 I raked $1963 The amount of money won after rake taken is $19. What part is it that you donīt understand? [/ QUOTE ] that part where you took your numbers. 1) you have to count your rake as contributed (you should only count the hands you won). 2) PT doesn't show "net won without rakeback" - either you misread or you calculated it yourself. 
|
|
#12
11-14-2007, 06:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The rake is unacceptable
[ QUOTE ]
I won $1982 I raked $1963 The amount of money won after rake taken is $19. What part is it that you donīt understand? [/ QUOTE ] Rake is taken pre-winnings, not post-winnings. You won $1982 AFTER paying rake. DUCY?
|
|
#13
11-14-2007, 06:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The rake is unacceptable
Well if he had won $1982 he'd have noticed that his account had an extra $2k in it. So I'm thinking that he won $19 and paid $1963 in rake but then added the two number together and is calling that what he won.
|
|
#14
11-14-2007, 07:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The rake is unacceptable
[ QUOTE ]
I won $1982 I raked $1963 The amount of money won after rake taken is $19. What part is it that you donīt understand? [/ QUOTE ] How did you calculate these figures? It also sounds to me like you won $1982. Show us a screenshot of your PT or something.
|
|
#15
11-14-2007, 07:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The rake is unacceptable
[ QUOTE ]
Well if he had won $1982 he'd have noticed that his account had an extra $2k in it. So I'm thinking that he won $19 and paid $1963 in rake but then added the two number together and is calling that what he won. [/ QUOTE ] hmm, then he's completely wrong because he wasn't paying that much. Especially if he - is tighter than average - encountered many bad beats - won many pots preflop (thus paid no rake)
|
|
#16
11-14-2007, 07:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The rake is unacceptable
Yes, I won $19. And raked $1963. And I did the not so complicated math myself that if I had played without rake taken I had won 19+1963=$1982.
Less than 1% of what I won to me, and over 99% to Ftp.
|
|
#17
11-14-2007, 07:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The rake is unacceptable
[ QUOTE ]
hmm, then he's completely wrong because he wasn't paying that much. Especially if he - is tighter than average - encountered many bad beats - won many pots preflop (thus paid no rake) [/ QUOTE ] Why wouldn't he be paying that much? He could be a break even player.
|
|
#19
11-14-2007, 07:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Would you pay that $500 flat rate upfront before playing any hands ?
Overhead versus marginal costs:
It is worse than that .... You forgot to include the monthly amount your internet provider took from your winnings, the amount the electric company took from your winnings, the amount you pay for rent/mortgage which was taken from your winnings, all the money you paid for food during the month which was taken from your winnings .... Jesus, why bother to get up in the morning, you will only lose your winnings. Did the concept of the "marginal cost of doing business" ever enter your analysis ? Fixed Cost Pricing: A flat rate plan might work. After all, you probably pay your rent, internet bill and a host of other costs by a flat rate. However, would you be willing to pay it upfront, before playing ? If not, you are asking a site to stake your play. You don't ask yopur landlord or the internet provider to do so.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
