Revolt against Rake

Subscription poker site. Or or combo of rake/subscription. Hardest part will likely be advertising.

Subscription is such a bad idea. It will chase away the fish completely when they can play for ''free'' on a site like Stars. Don't you understand ?? Fish doesn't know about rake and if they do, they don't care... To them, rake is this extremely tiny part of the pot that gets taken away. They do not realise how much it adds up to be. Sure, subscription is WAAYYY cheaper if you do it right, but to a fish, it's not. To a fish, it's much more expensive.

You have a very honest and noble goal but why would you put so much time and effort into something like this and make little money, since you will be making less money than most pokersites according to your philosophy.

On July 20 2009 13:42 Kilay wrote: You have a very honest and noble goal but why would you put so much time and effort into something like this and make little money, since you will be making less money than most pokersites according to your philosophy.

3% will still add up to be quite alot of money.

I'll play your site

I would love to see 100% rakeback once a set "rake cap" is hit. Rake cap can vary based on VIP level. Higher for lower levels - lower for higher levels. Pretty simple really. Reward people for being regulars. Once you hit your capped rake for the month you get 100% RB after that. Reducing rake on the fish would be foolish though. They don't know any better and it would cut into your profits so much that it would be difficult to run a software that is as good and wonderful as what Pokerstars offers.

every poker player has thought of this idea.

making a good poker interface is not hard at all and there are tons of good programmers who can make smooth interfaces.

do you even know how expensive it is to run an online poker room? from setting up your company in a tax free country to customer service, server costs, IT guys, marketing, accounting, lawyers, security algorithms to detect chip dumping, etc.

i thought about this idea and the only guys who will join this site are the grinders. i.e GOOD players who have bought PT or HEM and realize how much rake costs. The fish know poker through...TV commercials or WSOP logo-wearing players! But do you even have 50k to produce ONE commercial, let alone broadcasting that ONE commercial in 52 states.

This is a waste of your time unless you've got a business plan.

On July 20 2009 14:58 royalsu wrote: every poker player has thought of this idea. This is a waste of your time unless you've got a business plan.

And capital, lots and lots of capital

On July 20 2009 14:58 royalsu wrote: do you even know how expensive it is to run an online poker room? from setting up your company in a tax free country to customer service, server costs, IT guys, marketing, accounting, lawyers, security algorithms to detect chip dumping, etc.

+1, and its not just money but also all your time

On July 20 2009 14:21 Bejamin1 wrote: I would love to see 100% rakeback once a set "rake cap" is hit. Rake cap can vary based on VIP level. Higher for lower levels - lower for higher levels. Pretty simple really. Reward people for being regulars. Once you hit your capped rake for the month you get 100% RB after that. Reducing rake on the fish would be foolish though. They don't know any better and it would cut into your profits so much that it would be difficult to run a software that is as good and wonderful as what Pokerstars offers.

Awesome idea, this is what I have been thinking of:

No "rake", but fees on withdrawals of more money then has been deposited by the user.
Meaning: Any player having edge vs the others will earn money. This is compared to when a player with edge only wins say 10 buyins (excluded rake), but rakes 20 and only has 40% rakeback, therefore becoming a loosing player.
Personally I feel preassure of knowing that I gotta beat the bank as well as the players, the preassure is released in this type of fee-system.
With this being an attempt of charity to the poker community I bet I can beat the fees charged by any site including even though they have rakeback offers etc.

On July 20 2009 13:38 DaEm0niCuS wrote: Subscription poker site. Or or combo of rake/subscription. Hardest part will likely be advertising.

Being a site made for the poker community, having no goal to harvest money, I bet it is possible to round up enough people to play at the site alone, hence avoiding the need to join a poker network. As i understand by contacts to owners of poker-sites they charge a lot for their services.

I don't know how tough it would be to advertise of a poker site like this, I don't know too much about marketing etc etc. I am just a programmer and a poker player, knowing how high the ambitions actually could been set for the software of the poker sites.