888 is runned by...

i thought it was dropped to 4 already lol

maybe they are tired of the HU bumhunters opening 12 tables each ?

think about the money they lose for 6 handed players
they try to get ride of their regs
wtf ? :/

I've posted it before on other topics, but poker rooms now don't give a sh!t about grinders and regs.
They value the fishes more than any other type of players and fishes are pretty rare and hard to get nowadays.

Best example of the switch of strategy of the poker rooms lately:
- PartyPoker removing the highstakes tables
- Stars getting rid of Isildur1 as sponsored player
- iPoker splitting its network to protect their biggest pool of fishes
- etc...

The rooms that haven't "switched" yet are bound to do it soon or will be dying (e.g EverestPoker)Grinders, regs etc... generate a lot of revenues and they make the eco-system of a poker room/network not viable in long term.
Highstakes games are ALL unprofitable for any poker rooms.

How is a fish playing 1 table 2-10h/week more valuable than a reg playing 4tables+ 15h+/week? And high stakes not profitable? A lot of highstakes players are paying enough rake for several employees.

So please explain why fish are better than regs for a site, because I don't understand the logic.

I think they should instead focus on getting better software. For example, so many sites don't even have auto reload. How fucking hard can it be?

yeah how is a fish more valuable than me raking 10k a month? fish is gona rake 100$ a month

this kinda made me wanna play on 88eight :D

It's not a logic of revenues. It's now an issue of the eco-system itself.
How do you produce rake? Rake is created from deposits (yes it doesn't appear magically).

Who makes deposits in order to sustain enough liquidity of money to have a viable system? Fishes because they go broke and then deposit. Repeat and rince.

If you have a network that has a ratio regs/grinders > fishes, your model will collapse at one point. So you need enough fresh deposits every month in order to cover the amount of rake produced. Simple example on small sample:
Let's say your network has a total of 10 players with 5 grinders and 5 fishes. All have the same BR of 1k€ each.
Grinders never deposit again because they never go broke/get bonuses from VIP plan to at least breakeven and only the 5 fishes deposit 200€ per month. Total deposit per month: 200*5=1000€
Grinders rake each 200€ per month and fishes rake each 50€ per month. That's a monthly total rake of 1250€.

Knowing that you have 1250€ rake produced from money of players and 1000€ deposited each month it means that in the space of 40 months, there is 0€ money left on any account of the 10 players or simply Regs/grinders stop giving each other action or they reduce the volume played?

I'm not saying regs are better than fishes for the rooms but I'm saying that they have more interest in "protecting" their fishes with more bonuses or limit the stakes they can play (reason why highstakes are being removed on Party) so they don't lose their money too fast etc... Also that's why you don't see rooms offering high RB % or rake races anymore (way less than years ago). And also reason why they limit action regs/grinders can have (by limiting # tables etc...) so they don't eat too fast the liquidity of money of the network by either turning it into rake or profit because once it's profit, regs don't give it back to the network liquidity....

My explanation is a bit confused but I'm happy to explain further if needed because I'm about to get diner now :D

My explanation is a bit confused

lol

Hehe Actually was in a rush to go eat
But we can summarize it better:

- Poker Rooms can't generate more rake than they have deposits coming in otherwise they'll reach a point where the eco-system isn't viable anymore
- Poker Rooms don't care about getting/retaining regs/grinders anymore because they know that if they have fishes, traffic of regs/grinders will come naturally
- Fish don't come that easy so they spend more money/focus on them because it serves their interests in both draining traffic from regs + maintain a good eco-system

So as long as the network/room has enough liquidity coming in to cover the rake generated, it's fine. So what they do is restrict fishes to play to high and tricks to restrict regs/grinders to generate too much volume according to the money liquidity they are getting in.
If you are a "casual" player I think you have never seen/received so many deposit promo/bonus than before. Even coming from stars...

^completely true if you assume that there is little to no pure reg-on-reg action, which definately applies to the high stakes. As far as I know, this is something that happens now at midstakes too, but there are plenty of microstakes grinders that still masstable

anyways, if it deters regs from playing there (which it does, no doubt), I'd take Evilsky's tip and play multiple sites

even if you have reg on reg action, the concept of rake kills your network eco-model. So short/mid term even if you are making money (as a poker room or network) it's not a sustainable model.
Because as said, even if reg give action to each other, they do not make deposits to balance the amount they generate in rake

with table selection becoming more and more important (as beating regs after rake is tough if the rake is a high % of the average pot), you could sort of say that regulars play on tables where fish are.

Essentially 888 is adjusting the reg:fish ratio per table

This site has surprisingly decent software and game selection, they seem to like haggling a bit with deposits tho which I thought was kinda funny.

zomg evil dont come on 888 wtf its 4$ rake
gtfo
xD

someone working for 888 told me its gona be 4 tables max soon ...
lol... T.T