The rake is unacceptable

[jukofyork]

[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

[lefty rosen]

I agree with your general point. Sites don't offer direct rakeback it's corrupt affiliates. Very few sites offer rakeback maybe 4 sites directly. Sites if they are getting desperate will lower the rake or give cash incentives to get players to stay or comeback . I noticed Party actually lowered the rake at .5/1 limit and 1/2 limit at 5 dollars. So it does happen occasionally. I also agree their is implicit collusion in the rake as no big site has ever significantly reduced the rake since online poker has plateaued.

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]

PLEASE SOMEONE TELL ME WHERE MY $ GOES AND HOW I AM GETTING A GOOD DEAL. PLEASE.

[/ QUOTE ]


All the advertising and marketing from their mega-profits bring in a ton of players to the game.
PokerStars wouldn't have 100k+ players on all at once if nobody knew about them.
That's how you benefit.


[ QUOTE ]

Why do some sites offer rakeback deals in the first place?

[/ QUOTE ]


People's understanding of rakeback is really freaking warped in some situations.
First, lots of people still don't even know about rakeback in the first place. But obviously a lot of people do as the top rakeback affiliates have thousands of palyers.
Second, there are actually some players dumb enough to think that RAISING the rake is GOOD for them because that means they will actually get more rakeback at the end of the month.
Seriously, they have even shown up on here from time to time. It's kind of incredible.

People are dumb.

People get rakeback because they know they can get $200 or whatever at the end of the month. It doesn't even occur to them that they 'spent' $800 in rake to get that $200 back.

[twoblacknines]

Microbob is dead on. People don't mind the rake because they don't SEE it. And paying a $500 upfront fee is the worst idea ever. Even though it would save them money, most people would think they are getting ripped off. It's a lot different psychologically to lose rake a few cents at a time than to hand over $500 to the poker site in one big payment.

[JamieO]

"All the advertising and marketing from their mega-profits bring in a ton of players to the game.
PokerStars wouldn't have 100k+ players on all at once if nobody knew about them.
That's how you benefit."

PLEASE GIVE ME #'s. Guess how much stars spends on ads. 20% 30% 40%? How much of the $180 fees goes to advertising?
How do you know they are doing enough advertising to justify the cost? You seem to accept it as a given. I DONT. I know that i personally dont ever see any pokerstars ads anywhere besides on commercials during poker events on tv, and at poker sites online. Also, i see a good amount more ads for FTP than Stars, shouldnt stars be running more ads? how do we know that stars couldnt have 200k+ players if they spent more on ads?

I really do not understand your reasoning. You basically start from the conclusion that stars is giving you a great deal, and dont offer any PROOF.

Break it down for me please. Someone who thinks that stars rake is a good deal. Where does the $180 from a 180 man 11+1 sit and go go?? how are the players getting a good deal.

"Microbob is dead on. People don't mind the rake because they don't SEE it."

And they would SEE it if stars made a point about it. If stars came out in there ads and said," Full Tilt is ripping you off, come to stars where we take half as much for you to play the game." Even the most dense fish will respond to this type of advertising. the sites wont do this however, because they are "colluding" to keep the rake up. They dont compete and wont compete cuz they wont have to anytime soon.

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]
i personally dont ever see any pokerstars ads anywhere besides on commercials during poker events on tv, and at poker sites online.

[/ QUOTE ]


I see poker ads in a lot of different programming. Lots of sports programming for example.


[ QUOTE ]

PLEASE GIVE ME #'s.

[/ QUOTE ]


I have no idea.


[ QUOTE ]
You basically start from the conclusion that stars is giving you a great deal, and dont offer any PROOF.

[/ QUOTE ]


I don't start or finish with the idea that Stars gives me a 'great' deal because I don't think they do.
I think the deal is 'okay' after tacking on FPP and milestone benefits as well as my perception that their security is probably better than elsewhere and also how much I like their software.

Would I like it if they lowered the rake or had none at all?
Sure. that would be awesome.
But I'm practical about it and understand they won't do that and I also understand why.

It's a real stretch to think that a 30% reduction of rake will not hurt their revenues at all. I believe that anyone who thinks this and honestly thinks that so many people care so much about the pennies at a time that Stars is taking probably don't have a very good grip on reality.

It's pretty easy to tell that most people don't care about the rake and wouldn't go running from one site to another just because they started bragging about their wonderful war on the competition's rake.
To think that thousands of people would go running for this is silly.

That is not the same as saying I wouldn't love to see it. Sure. Give me lower rake or no rake at all. I won't complain.
But most players won't care.

[JamieO]

""PLEASE GIVE ME #'s.""

"I have no idea."

Then how on earth do you know you are not getting ripped off? Thats my whole point.

Im asking for a number cuz i think that stars makes say 90-99% profit off their fee and i find this ridiculous. You dont think that what stars makes is ridiculous.

I would like to know if we differ on opinion because you think the 90-99% profit on the fee is acceptable or because you think the profit is more like 30-40% which is perfectly reasonable.

"don't have a very good grip on reality."

and the first insult comes. The fact that you keep picking one tiny part of my posts (like posting 5 times about the 30% thing which was just an guess and as stated just an opinion) to respond to and avoid the meat of the argument (stars takes too much from the games) speaks volumes.

[lefty rosen]

Stars has the best deal. They have never increased their rake while other sites have slowly raised their rake while the games have slowly hardened up like Elvis' arteries. The problem is Stars was tough when internet games across the board were fishy. So in a way Stars has never been a good deal for the winning player or losing player.

[JamieO]

And dont get me wrong i love stars

[mbpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
Im asking for a number cuz i think that stars makes say 90-99% profit off their fee and i find this ridiculous. You dont think that what stars makes is ridiculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

There is an easy way to find out. Read Party's or 888's published reports and see what kind of profit margins they make on poker. I think it's between 25% to 45%.