You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Comments
It'd be nice to see Sky Poker break ranks as to rake on PLO8, but the fact is, it is, & will always be, such an infinitesimally small part of the overall traffic that it makes little odds either way. PLO8, & for that matter PLO, is never going to be a significant product for any poker site.
It's a shame ( to a few of us) but that's how it is. I'll certainly "have a word", & I certainly expect then to turn a deaf 'un.
Whether we as players like it or not, as a Business, it makes no sense to sell a product for a shilling if the market shows it can be sold for 2 bob. If they halved the rake, would the traffic double? Nope.
You want cheaper prices but more Freerolls & Promos?
Not sure that pig will ever fly.
We should also remember that although, to us, poker is the be all & end all here, as a standalone, relative to the rest of the Business, it is extremely small - VERY small indeed. Small but important, & don't forget, cross sell works both ways - we get invited or enticed to move across, but Sports Bettors & Vegas (slots) players get the same enticements to come here. And we WANT those players here, as they are less experienced than we are,.
I don't think there are any "standalone" Online poker sites left, are there? It just makes no commercial sense, as there are so many ways to encourage players to play a wider variety of products.
Incidentally, another site closed it's doors this week - Genting Online. Market efficiencies are doing their thing.
Small players are the seedcorn.
Cracking thread, this.
those games are virtually unbeatble. even an incredible heater would only yield a meagre return.
people must get very fustrated when they attempt to learn the game, correctly rate themselves as being better than the player pool, yet cannot string a winning month together. there was an infamous diary on here where a micro stakes dym player put a lot of effort into his game, became one of the better players at his stake yet constantly quit due to fustration at not being able to build a bankroll.
i can see why sky do it. in a high raked enviroment all funds end up converted to rake.
is it good for the long term health of the site and fluidity across stakes?
is it a healthy poker enviroment for newer players?
i'm not so sure. as players we do well to speak out on it though.
But I don't believe that a big enough boycott could be organised to make a difference.
but is it a good thing long term for the site?
would lower rake at the micro stakes lead to more deposits? deposits would last longer, which short / medium term may not be a good thing for sky: the deposits would last longer and it would create winning players who may actually withdraw themselves.
but in a longer time frame would games be more attractive? would players move up stakes and increase liquidity there? would more games run across the site? would word of mouth and referals increae?
i dont know. but i dont think having games that are unbeatable due to rake is a good thing for the players there. whether they care or not.
AJS makes the best point here. I agree, 'lossback' is the future. Better for recs, which in turn is better for everybody else, including the pros.
Giving the lions share of rewards directly to those at the top of the pyramid is flawed thinking. It should be going to those at the bottom. Most of it will still end up at the top anyway, but those whose hands it passed through first will be a much happier bunch than if they'd never seen it.