OT: No Rake Poker Site?

TeckChavez · #1 03-09-2006, 10:34 AM

So I was reading JMan's blog yesterday and some of the posts that spilled over from the entry around Rake (blog). This line in particular got to me:

[ QUOTE ]
So, assuming there were no rake, what we call a 0% ROI is actually a 10% ROI.

[/ QUOTE ]

It got me thinking. Remember during the internet boom (when investors could care less about Net Income) there was an Internet provider called NetZero. They basically had free internet and made their money by advertisers and what not. I think they are still around but charge now -> but that is beside the point [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

I am wondering the feasibility of doing something like this for a poker site. No rake. It seems to me it would become the biggest poker site almost over night (maybe a couple of months). So how would this new site make money?

Advertising of sponsors: a Pepsi branded poker table, a quick 15 second commercial before you sit down, link offs to sponsor sites for shopping, etc.

There are other ways such as having house advantage games as well or some other creative ideas that I am sure this forum has.

So my question is, does it seem feasible? And a secondary question is related to SammyKid11's Congressman post: If this new site wasn't taking rake would it be legal under the bill they are trying to pass?

OK, I digress; have to get back to work.
~Teck

Melchiades · #2 03-09-2006, 10:35 AM

Speak to Dutch Boyd.

skipperbob · #3 03-09-2006, 10:42 AM

You would find the Backers floating down the Ganges with a toe-tag that says "DikShit"

rockin · #4 03-09-2006, 10:51 AM

skipper are you a prick to every noob, or just a prick in general?

Frozinite · #5 03-09-2006, 10:54 AM

I donno... I wouldn't want to play if I had to wait 15 seconds before I could actually sit. But then again, there're other options, I'm sure... It's possible though, but wouldn't you want to take a little bit of rake? Party poker can get up to 100K ppl at a time. If they're all paying rake... Can you imagine how much money they're making? If I were a businessman, I'd get greedy and charge rake.

beeyjay · #6 03-09-2006, 10:55 AM

i didn't know being hilarious was a prickish thing to do

Costanza · #7 03-09-2006, 10:56 AM

Nice replies, but if he's asking this question there's a good chance he doesn't know who Dikshit is and probably doesn't understand the Dutch Boyd connection here either.

This has been discussed on 2+2 before with the general consensus being that rake-free sites won't work because the fish seem to either not care about the rake they're paying or don't understand just how much of an impact it has on their bottom line.

Something like what you suggested was tried -- a site where you could pay a monthly fee to play rather than having individual pots raked. Short story: it didn't work, and a certain poker player who was a darling of the ESPN coverage of the WSOP ended up with a pretty bad reputation around here due to his involvement in the matter.

Try searching rake free or rakezero and see what comes up.

Wolfram · #8 03-09-2006, 10:56 AM

Problem is that majority of people don't realize that rake is costing them money.

GtrHtr · #9 03-09-2006, 10:57 AM

[ QUOTE ]
skipper are you a prick to every noob, or just a prick in general?

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, got humor? And the crowd from the MTT forum continue to spiral down and down.

ClockWyze · #10 03-09-2006, 10:58 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Speak to Dutch Boyd.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dutch Boyd proposed this idea a few years ago. However, he is a scum bag gambling addict with no credibility in the industry. He previously ran a poker site.. which went under, and didn't pay any players with balances in their accounts (and this was a site that took rake).

The idea has been banged around but I don't think it will ever materialize. One of the reasons is Skipper Bob's post... Party and Stars would not be too happy.