| Posted by: Johnny Empire at August 5, 2004, 9:53 am | | Topic: Why hasn't anybody tried this? Forum: Bonus Whores | If anyone should try it, it's Absolute.
They've drowned us in 10 hands/$1 bonus, but the number of games is still pretty limited. They may as well throw in reduced rake.
I still say advertising on cable is the only way a room can really expand. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: GamblinFool at August 4, 2004, 8:38 pm | | Topic: Why hasn't anybody tried this? Forum: Bonus Whores | The only question is this: can the site get more revenue by offering a reduced rake at slower times and bringing in more players, or by continuing what they do normally. I do not know the answer to this question, but if absolute wanted to it could find out quite easily.
_________________
Cuz' it's all about clothes, bankrolls, and hoes | | Static Link |
| Posted by: microbob at August 4, 2004, 8:37 pm | | Topic: Why hasn't anybody tried this? Forum: Bonus Whores | Quote: Didn't Absolute have a promo where they had 6/12 LHE tables going without rake? "No rake till it breaks", I think it was.
yup....and while there was some talk about it on 2+2 and i think on here as well the promo really didn't do so well.
i wonder how much better it would have done if they had offered '100% rake-back until it breaks' which is virtually the same thing....but the psychology is different. like saying 'buy 2 get 1 free' instead of 'buy 3 and 33% off of your total purchase'. 1 just sounds better than the other.
however...i say 100% rake-back is VIRTUALLY the same...but it really isn't. the tighter player will be receiving more back than the rake they actually contribute. and the loose player won't be getting back as much.
i agree with the previous comments that most players and fishies just don't think about these things. the site takes a dollar or two out of the pot. can't make that much difference can it??
... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: Johnny Empire at August 4, 2004, 5:15 pm | | Topic: Why hasn't anybody tried this? Forum: Bonus Whores | Didn't Absolute have a promo where they had 6/12 LHE tables going without rake? "No rake till it breaks", I think it was.
I guess it broke pretty quick, from the lack of interest. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: Gonzo787 at August 4, 2004, 4:54 pm | | Topic: Why hasn't anybody tried this? Forum: Bonus Whores | jek187 wrote: 24h poker tried this for awhile. It didn't work at all.
I don't think this is a good indication of if "cheap rake" or "no rake" would work on "slow" nights. I mean think about it; if a tree falls in the forest, and nobody is there to see it did it really fall? I never heard of 24H before I became a member here and have not heard anything since from another source. Judging by the "availablily" section here at BW, it appears that most people are in the same camp as me.
People have to know about a site before this can be a success. I would guess that if a low to mid range site like Absolute or Crypto offered "cheap rake" or "no rake" for a slow night and promoted it heavily, they would see a noticable increase in traffic for that particular night. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: GamblinFool at August 4, 2004, 3:11 pm | | Topic: Why hasn't anybody tried this? Forum: Bonus Whores | The ironic thing is that the people paying the most rake by far are the fishes, who win way more hands than we do. Even if they don't notice the rake per se though, you'd think a poker room would be hurt when the players realized they usually did better at other places and subsequently fell in love with those other places.
_________________
Cuz' it's all about clothes, bankrolls, and hoes | | Static Link |
| Posted by: andrew26 at August 4, 2004, 1:11 pm | | Topic: Why hasn't anybody tried this? Forum: Bonus Whores | elric wrote: Is that not what the ZeroRake.com guys are trying to do?
Everytime I check there is less than 10 people playing ring games there... so this idea is not bringing em in by the boatload...
I am a member and even have $100+ on account there and have no one to play. So while I can save on rake I will have to play with myself till more people show up.
Yes but a discounted rake site presumably would not charge a membership fee.
I agree that any site that offered this probably would attract the more experienced players and would not be a fish-fest like much of online poker is.
Andrew
_________________
Andrew26 wins pot $.95, with a Royal Flush, spades. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: Johnny Empire at August 4, 2004, 12:29 pm | | Topic: Why hasn't anybody tried this? Forum: Bonus Whores | It stands to figure that a bad poker player isn't the sort of person looking for the poker room with the lowest rake. Mostly they just find a room by advertising or from their friends and they stay there.
That's why the rooms have to advertise to grow. Bad players attract other players. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: elric at August 4, 2004, 12:14 pm | | Topic: Why hasn't anybody tried this? Forum: Bonus Whores | Is that not what the ZeroRake.com guys are trying to do?
Everytime I check there is less than 10 people playing ring games there... so this idea is not bringing em in by the boatload...
I am a member and even have $100+ on account there and have no one to play. So while I can save on rake I will have to play with myself till more people show up.
_________________
The fuel of poker is --- money. No money, no poker. RW | | Static Link |
| Posted by: m0nger at August 4, 2004, 11:50 am | | Topic: Why hasn't anybody tried this? Forum: Bonus Whores | My guess is, around 80-90% of the players online probably don't chase bonuses and bargains. Many probably don't even realize how much they pay in rake if they play a lot. They probably just play on a couple of the main sites they see advertised on TV, or heard about from a friend. The bonuses get us to many of the less well known sites to fill some tables tho, so they aren't dead when others happen by. That's all stating whats probably already obvious to many tho, I'm just thinking outloud. I know I didn't move around for bonuses (and other promotions) when I started playing online, was wedded to party poker, until I started exploring poker forums and stumbled upon this place. Now it seems silly to be playing without also clearing a bonus. If nothing else, the bonuses are a good rake rebate, since I don't always play to clear a bonus as quickly as possible (I usually hate playing multiple tables when I play NL, for instance, but have been doing okay with more then one on the party skin 25 NL tables).
___... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: andrew26 at August 4, 2004, 10:28 am | | Topic: Why hasn't anybody tried this? Forum: Bonus Whores | Why doesn't someone start a reduced-rake pokerroom?
There is no reason in hell that Party takes 50 cents out of a $5 pot other than the fact that they CAN.
It might even be profitable for some of the smaller rooms (like Absolute or Paradise) to offer reduced rake on certain weeknights to increase traffic.
I'd even play there when I am not chasing bonuses (which admittedly never happens)
_________________
Andrew26 wins pot $.95, with a Royal Flush, spades. | | Static Link |
|