Blonde ipoker skin revoked

The Snapper

http://blondepoker.com/forum/index.php?topic=45532.0

Allegedly Blondepoker players show a net profit in contravention of ipoker rules.
Some interesting discussion.

gorrrr72

The Snapper wrote: »

http://blondepoker.com/forum/index.php?topic=45532.0

Allegedly Blondepoker players show a net profit in contravention of ipoker rules.
Some interesting discussion.

Read through the thread and looks like a really bad beat for blondepoker.
iPoker must die imo.

Mullicker

Pretty ****ty rules. A similar thing would have happened dirty stack poker, and guessing thats why they merged with dafa poker.

Why don't the big skins on the network just look after they winning players by offering good enough deals to stop them migrating to other iPoker skins.

The Snapper

Yea, its tough on blondepoker given their rakeback stance, though I do think rakeback wars between the various skins on ipoker is suicidal as a business model and if it continues its current course will ultimately choke itself into a fishless sea of rakeback nits.

The Snapper

Mullicker wrote: »

Pretty ****ty rules. A similar thing would have happened dirty stack poker, and guessing thats why they merged with dafa poker.

Why don't the big skins on the network just look after they winning players by offering good enough deals to stop them migrating to other iPoker skins.

IMHO I think you miss a lot of the big picture here. Not that I'm a fan of ipoker but, if your marketing target audience are winning players the more you attract the less viable your product and business become.

Its pretty clear recently that ipoker is a tougher place to play and already lots are looking for softer games and will take a 20% + hit on RB as a consequence.

Mullicker

Lets take a site like titan on iPoker who attract much more fish than sites like dirty stack, but they will also have many winning players, from reading the thread it seems that one of the complaints of the sites that are spending money on advertising and attracting fish is that the winning players on their site will migrate to other iPoker skins offering better deals, why not just offer their winning players better deals to keep them playing on there skin?

Wasn't trying to say that they should only try target winning players.

Tight Ted

I don't really get the whole iPoker must die thing. I know the software isn't as good as Stars or FTP, but it's definitely one of my favorite places to play.

Daithio9

Yeah apparently for some unkown unexplainable reason "fish" just seem to love it.

CHD

iPoker Must Die

a147pro

its not just the software, the games are appalling. the structure of the multi table sit n gos is a complete joke, chip leader on final table of a two table tournie will prob have about 8bbs. there are also literally no MTTs worth playing. again the structure is appalling with no play.

the IPO is the only reason I have chips on this site and, TBH, its led to nothing but bad will from me for Boyle's

actually does / can anybody swap Boyle's dollars for pokerstars dollars?

dannydiamond

a147pro wrote: »

there are also literally no MTTs worth playing. again the structure is appalling with no play.

I have to disagree with this.The're there if you look. I play the $100 ds,the $55 ds and the $30 rebuy pretty much every night.Three good tournies imo.

Treehouse72

Mullicker wrote: »

Lets take a site like titan on iPoker who attract much more fish than sites like dirty stack, but they will also have many winning players, from reading the thread it seems that one of the complaints of the sites that are spending money on advertising and attracting fish is that the winning players on their site will migrate to other iPoker skins offering better deals, why not just offer their winning players better deals to keep them playing on there skin?

Because on a network-wide basis, this approach simply becomes a race to the bottom: Titan start offering the grinders a 40% "rakeback"/cashback/iPoints/bonus/whatever deal, and so in retaliation Blonde offer 45%, Circus offer 50%, Dafa offer 55%....where does it all end? Answer: it doesn't, until the skins are paying out so much in bonus that the network is down to impossible margins. And all this time the big skins are investing in attracting new players while the smaller skins piggy-back on this largesse whilst poaching all the high-rake generating regs with sexy deals. This is a suicidal business model.

I like this new iP policy. Anything that threatens the bigger skins (and smaller ones I guess) investing in new players is death to all of us. It would be terrible. Seems reasonable to me that the network would expect each skin to have broadly the same number of winners and losers because that would indicate that each skin is not competing on RB, but rather on legitimate bonuses and marketing/advertising basis. Much healthier.

Besides, if you are looking for good deals on reputable skins, those deal are out there. If you are a grinder (say, 50k+ hands pm) and have shown loyalty to a site (by playing there a lot and showing you are not a whore) then good skins will make you a deal. They just don't want every yahoo player jumping in immediatly getting 50%+ - that just rocks the boat and looks bad for the network. But if a player sticks around and behaves, then they'll get a good deal eventually. Building a relationship with a skin's poker room managers is possible and advisable nowadays.

a147pro

dannydiamond wrote: »

I have to disagree with this.The're there if you look. I play the $100 ds,the $55 ds and the $30 rebuy pretty much every night.Three good tournies imo.

I did look, but to be honest each of the deep stack games started too late for me, couldn't be up all night cos of work. and even then its only 4k chips. When I used to play on stars you could play a 3000 chip, 25k guranteed game starting at 5 for $22, then the $109 at 6, a 1 rebuy and add on game around 7 for $60 total and the $55 50k guarantee at 8. all much better games at much better times. I - poker seems to cater primarily for Europe yet doesn't have equivalently structured games starting till later.

and the software is complete cack

Grafter

Treehouse72 wrote: »

Because on a network-wide basis, this approach simply becomes a race to the bottom: Titan start offering the grinders a 40% "rakeback"/cashback/iPoints/bonus/whatever deal, and so in retaliation Blonde offer 45%, Circus offer 50%, Dafa offer 55%....where does it all end?

In fairness to Blonde, they are not one of those who tried to outdo the competition. Their offer has been the same all along and was never that generous. They do seem to be a genuine small site caught up in the rules which were designed with others in mind.

I've read the arguments in favour of this policy by reps of sportsbooks amongst others, and I get where they're coming from, but find it a bit sad when all independents get picked on.

In this instance, Titan (in house) are offering double points on Euro and Sterling tables and WH (in house) have a big ole rakeback deal on the same tables and have been paying double rakeback since they joined the network, both of which are paying out far and above what other sites large or small are allowed or able to pay out.

It'll be interesting to see if the consolidation stops when the indies have been wiped out or if the larger sportsbook partners end up regretting their current supportive stance.

I've read more than one credible argument that it's going to be a repeat of when Party stomped on their skins and didn't stop until it was effectively a site and not a network.

Treehouse72

Sure thing Grafter - I didn't mean to imply Blonde were guilty of dodgy dealing because I don't know anything about them. It would indeed be a shame if a small site is kicked out because of what must presumably be bad luck (i.e. they just happened to have more winners than losers over a month or two). I was just trying to fill in a fuller picture.

And yeah, what you say about the double standard is pretty shifty: I have great deals at two of iP's bigger skins so it seems very unfair for them to dump on the small skins.

As for your point about network v. site, that has the ring of truth about it. Unlike the old days, there is less need for smaller sites and affiliates nowadays since there are fewer players to try and get to play (not least because the US is gone, and also because the potential player pool has to decrease over time by defintion). I would say though that for iP to become a single site it would probably require one site to buy all the others out (presumably this would be WH) - and that is hard to envisage because I can't imagine PP, 365, Noble or Titan would be happy to exit the market entirely.

doke

This policy seems nonsensical.

If you "punish" a skin for having too many winning players, surely there are two possible outcomes:
(1) The winning players migrate to another skin. Zero gain/loss to the network
(2) They migrate to another network. Definite loss to the network

Winning grinders are essential for traffic generation for any network/site. Some of these grinders are only profitable because of rakeback, so forcing them to take a worse rakeback deal will just drive them out of the game, or at least the network surely.

phantom_lord

It makes sense from the pov of maintaining the network and forcing skins to put effort into signing on new players rather than just poaching high volume players from other skins with high rb deals a la noiq. They're not so much punishing people for winning or skins for having too many winning players, they're punishing them for taking the wrong approach in gaining more traffic.

ianmc38

The whole thing with Playtech is becoming ridiculous. They're well aware that under the table rakeback is being given out and they know the skins in question. The only realistic option for them at this stage (imo) is for them to adapt a zero tolerance policy towards rakeback, one strike and you're out regardless of who the skin is.

As somone who is actively involved in the rakeback industry Im well aware of every skin that gives it as well as the %s that are involved for most affiliates. Even several of the traditionally non rakeback skins give under the table deals.

Changing from the traditional deposit:withdrawal ratios to a winner/loser method isn't going to change much. Players will still be recycled and sites will just find other ways to hide what they've all been at for years.

The sad thing about what Playech have done is that with the network as it is, they are pretty much forcing the hands of many sites to get involved in rakeback. How can XXX ipoker site compete with companies who are worth hundreds of millions that are giving out obscene rev share %s to players. It's simply not possible.