|
|
#21
11-14-2007, 08:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: The rake is unacceptable
[ QUOTE ]
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. [/ QUOTE ] PT screenshot please 
|
|
#23
11-14-2007, 08:17 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The rake is unacceptable
[ QUOTE ]
The statistics in poker tracker showed this: The last month I won $1982. I payed $1963 in rake. So the netto was $19. I donīt think itīs acceptable to pay this enormous amounts of money in rake every month. My suggestion: Give us the alternative of paying a montly fee of $500 instead of paying rake. I donīt think anyone should pay more than $500 a month for their hobby. I just sent this message to Full tilt poker. Please copy this, put in your own numbers and send to your poker site. The rake is unacceptable and something must be done. [/ QUOTE ] WOW!!! $19...Jackpot Nice win man [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] Seriously, its a lot cheaper than the rake live
|
|
#24
11-14-2007, 08:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Would you pay that $500 flat rate upfront before playing any hands ?
You are a genius.
[ QUOTE ] 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. [/ QUOTE ]
|
|
#27
11-14-2007, 09:37 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The rake is unacceptable
I love how whenever someone makes a post like this complaining about high rake they are automatically a loser who deserves ridicule. I personally believe that the rake at most major sites could be cut by 30% or so without any major loss in revenue for the site.
Some games are worse than others in terms of rake though. I dont play cash games much anymore, but the rake is actually pretty bad if u dont have a rakebake deal or dont play enough volume to reach plat-plus at stars. Rake on Mtt's is acceptable to me, 10% or less of your buyin gives you a whole tourneys worth of play, but still i could see it go lower. The worst rake IMO is on STT's. The whole reason i stopped playing STT's is that my roi was only like 11% at the 27s and i just hated the idea that stars was making as much off my play as i am. STT's fee should be 5% not 10% that is a big problem. Really the bottom line is that it costs stars less than $0.01 to run a tourney that makes them $100s. There is a lot of room for improvement in terms of the price we pay to play a game. Remember, poker is a skill game. We are not gambling. There is no reason for the rake to be so high. Who decided that 5% was the magic number anyways? Why is there no room for discussion/negotiation here? I can go play any play money game for free so what is the rake for? It obviously doesnt pay for the play of the game itself. It pays for your assurance that when you win you will actually get your $. So it costs $1 everytime i put in $10 just so i can be sure i will be paid when i win. Why on earth should it cost that much? Does it cost you 10% everytime you transfer $ to another player? All we are doing is playing a game and transfering $. Where is the high cost of providing us a place to play at? Advertising? Security? Customer support? I dont think so. How did stars decide on thier rake/fee structure in the begining? It has stayed the same for as long as i can remember so obviously it is big enough for them to stay in business and make a HUGE profit. So what profit is TOO BIG? Why does questioning the price you are getting to play make you a bad player? If you dont question the rake you are a moron. That said, I will still play at stars as its my only source of income, but i will never be happy with the rake as it is. The rake is not unacceptable, but it is higher than optimal. I will deal with it for now as it seems there is nothing i can do about it if i wanna chase the fishes.
|
|
#28
11-14-2007, 09:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The rake is unacceptable
[ QUOTE ]
I love how whenever someone makes a post like this complaining about high rake they are automatically a loser who deserves ridicule. I personally believe that the rake at most major sites could be cut by 30% or so without any major loss in revenue for the site. [/ QUOTE ] Stopped reading here.
|
|
#29
11-14-2007, 09:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The rake is unacceptable
[ QUOTE ]
Rake on Mtt's is acceptable to me, 10% or less of your buyin gives you a whole tourneys worth of play, but still i could see it go lower. [/ QUOTE ] You are basing how much rake you are willing to pay on how long you can play rather than how much you can make. That tells me all I need to know.
|
|
#30
11-14-2007, 09:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The rake is unacceptable
"You are basing how much rake you are willing to pay on how long you can play rather than how much you can make."
They are the same thing DUCY? Longer play means more hands means more of an edge. Of course roi is greater at MTTs. Im sorry but i didnt think anyone here would need further expantion of that.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
