- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
If Party was full of bad players, everyone who was good at the game would flock there to clean up.
And just maybe that is what is happening, too. :hattip:
Certainly a lot of affiliates make good money there.
@Casinolisten 143373 wrote:
Aha. And how many “bad players” do you think rakeback affiliates refer to a poker room?
Not that many
Quote:If Party was full of bad players, everyone who was good at the game would flock there to clean up.It is certainly the most popular for those outside the US and it isn’t because of good bonuses, rakeback, player friendly rake structure or good support.
@Pokeraddict 143396 wrote:
It is certainly the most popular for those outside the US and it isn’t because of good bonuses, rakeback, player friendly rake structure or good support.
Nope. I agree. Not the best bonuses, no rakeback etc.. But they are still one of the most succesfull online poker rooms. Why?
@DanTheMan 143271 wrote:
Seriously – getting 35-40% as an affiliate is a joke. It is way to much and a lot of that cash should go to the players. I agree that the rakeback system has flaws but more money going towards the players is only natural and to be honest it also seems fair.
@Dominique 143272 wrote:
Poker rooms need to do the math then and adjust their expenses so they can comp players appropriately without causing theft and deception in the industry,
Do you get my point?
Many poker rooms (and affiliates) think they will loose their players if they don’t give them rakeback (through affiliate commissions). I think they are wrong. Let the affiliates keep the money, buy traffic, send new (and bad) players and everyone will be happy.
The players were never supposed to receive “monthly payments” from affiliates!
Quote:Nope. I agree. Not the best bonuses, no rakeback etc.. But they are still one of the most succesfull online poker rooms. Why?Their offline marketing puts almost every other poker room to shame, especially at the start of the boom. This is why there are so many fish and why so many sharks will play there without much incentive.
@Casinolisten 143401 wrote:
Do you get my point?
Many poker rooms (and affiliates) think they will loose their players if they don’t give them rakeback (through affiliate commissions). I think they are wrong. Let the affiliates keep the money, buy traffic, send new (and bad) players and everyone will be happy.
The players were never supposed to receive “monthly payments” from affiliates!
I don’t think this helps your point about rakeback. This topic started off about rakeback affiliates stealing current and potential customers. Now this statement pretty much says, regular affiliates should get all the credit, while the poker room does all the work.
You don’t think poker rooms loose players if they don’t get in the rakeback game? That is simply not true. The big 3 sites can get away with it, but everybody else no, even so much more ever since the U.S. fiasco. A site like Absolute was a ghost town even with their generous player bonus, that was until rakeback became part of their offering. A site like Cake is following in the same direction, even with their substandard software they are gaining market share partly because of their stance on rakeback.
Bottom line is its a very competitve market, and all the sites need to find some sort of edge to gain players. Not all companies have deep pockets for marketing, some do and have failed (ie Mansion). Talk to the Carbon guys, they fought rakeback for the longest time, and now they had no choice but to join the club. They’ve done wonderful things with their software, but traffic wise they barely make the top 20.
Casinolisten;143401 wrote:Nope. I agree. Not the best bonuses, no rakeback etc.. But they are still one of the most succesfull online poker rooms. Why?Do you get my point?
Many poker rooms (and affiliates) think they will loose their players if they don’t give them rakeback (through affiliate commissions). I think they are wrong. Let the affiliates keep the money, buy traffic, send new (and bad) players and everyone will be happy.
The players were never supposed to receive “monthly payments” from affiliates!
The truth of the matter is, that only the big guns can run a succesfull online pokerroom without rakeback. They already have the fish and of course the sharks will always come to a site with a lot of bad players. But this isn’t true for other poker rooms.
Can you imagine a Cryptologic room withour rakeback? Or what about a Boss room?
They would be dead within 6 months. MANSION is a great example of a pokerroom trying to duplicate the PartyPoker/PokerStars strategy and hammer down the market with offline marketing and extreme retention value for their players. They gave out more than $5.000.000 in a matter of months and still couldn’t get a strong hold of the players.
The fact is that you simply can’t start up a pokerroom now a days without offering the players direct and large comps (read: rakeback). Party is still doing good and we have quite a large affiliate account with Party Poker as well but I can’t get a single valuable player on Boss without offering him rakeback.
And I like it this way. I like that I can make a fair amount of money along with the poker site while the lions share of the cash flow towards the players. This just seems more fair.
And please don’t talk about revenue share affiliates as if they are the only guys bringing players into the game. We have created Denmarks largest poker affiliate through content. I don’t see how what we are doing is different from what 95% of the revenue share affiliates are doing.
I agree that a site only offering rakeback without content is a bad representative for the pokerworld. But you can’t blame this matter on rakeback in itself. Revenue share affiliates does the same thing with ridiculous link-farms and other low content sites. For instance I would argue any day that our poker portal (where we offer rakeback) has far more content and “player creating value” than our casino site which are plain revenue share.
I am with you 100% when it comes to the fact that some rakeback affiliates are scumbags. But you can’t blame this on the rakeback concept in itself.
/Mike
Quote:And please don’t talk about revenue share affiliates as if they are the only guys bringing players into the game. We have created Denmarks largest poker affiliate through content. I don’t see how what we are doing is different from what 95% of the revenue share affiliates are doing.I agree with you. Some rakeback affiliates (like you) refer new players to the poker rooms… But 90% of the rakeback websites have no content and they don’t bring new players to the industry.
Quote:Can you imagine a Cryptologic room withour rakeback? Or what about a Boss room?Cryptologic has converted well for me in the past. I am sure many players like the software and the reload bonus. But today it’s not possible to send players to a Cryptologic poker room and make money if you’re on revenue share….and you know why
Quote:They would be dead within 6 monthsThey will die no matter what. it’s only a matter of time. Rakeback will kill many poker rooms.
Hi again all,
well it comes down to the poker rooms. They should offer the rakeback scheme to all affs and not just some. it should be set standard to create a level playing field.
That has always been my stance. I’m sorry if misunderstood. I have no problem accepting less % …. but have a large problem when the guy next to me is offering more than I can afford.
when rakeback first started … it was the affs offering it …… not thru a poker room (in many cases). This created an unequal playing field and gave me no incentive to promote poker. I lost players I had for years due to it.
I think Dan and I agree but have termed our appraoch differently. I don’t think he wants to see his % forced down further than what he’s already giving because he has to due to the next guy offering a bit more back than he is.
again …. it all falls on the poker rooms. But there are …. (or used to be …. i’ve been out a long time) affs who were offering kickbacks thru their sites. This is what a true rakeback is. A poker room offering a kickback is the same as a bonus or comp. Even if it takes the aff agreeing to less. at least the affs have the chance to either accept or deny this.
@BB1webs
When rakeback started it was pretty much shady affiliates promoting it but the landscape of rakeback has changed. Now a days the networks are learning that the rakeback needs to be fair and even with the affiliates.
My guess is that the rakeback situation will level out in a couple of years and become standard. Either you promote it or you don’t. And if you do you will be promoting the same as everyone else.
A great example is the new rules on Cryptologic. No affiliate can be given extra percentages to work with. They all have to promote the same program. The same it true on Boss.
The big problem is that the pokerrooms are breaking the network rules when it comes to re-tracking players and overpaying large volume players. Especially the latter problem is giving me a lot of problems. We have quite a lot of high volume players and they are constantly getting offers directly from pokerrooms.
They are competing with their own affiliates and it stinks! But in the future I do believe that this will change when the networks learn how to set up rules that actually work and punish the skins who doesn’t follow them.
Rakeback started out badly and due to this the rakeback market is suffering a bit. But things are getting better.
/Mike
Agreed – Rakeback can be a good thing but needs to be controlled.
It is difficult as an AM when you get Rakeback affiliates trying to squeeze a % or 2 out of you.
But anyway, this thread is good as affiliates and operators alike might read it and re-evaluate their position.
Btw – 95% of rakeback affiliates are honest and reputable in my opinion :tongue:
A great example is the new rules on Cryptologic. No affiliate can be given extra percentages to work with. They all have to promote the same program. The same it true on Boss.
The big problem is that the pokerrooms are breaking the network rules when it comes to re-tracking players and overpaying large volume players.
well dan ……. despite our earlier differences…… i very much feel you make my point.
Crypto ……. is one of the larger …….. shall we say …. crappers….. when it comes to this situation.
they are willing to sell out any aff …… under any condition….
so screw them! and that’s how it is…
I wish it wasn’t so………
@bb1webs
There is no doubt that we agree on a lot of issues sorrounding the rakeback situation. My only problem is with affiliates pointing thier finger at rakeback as a concept. That is wrong.
Rakeback affiliates who screw over rev share affiliates by teaching players to re-track is a problem.
Networks who doesn’t control the rakeback promotions is a problem.
But rakeback as a concept is not a bad thing. Actually I think rakeback is one of the key elements that creates the very high volume players. For instance I have a guy playing that we call “the rakeback professional”. He is pretty much breaking even in the game but he is raking about 20K a month and is pretty much living out of his rakeback.
If this guy didn’t receive this kick back he wouldn’t play much – maybe not at all. Now he is a professional player. I know from the talk on our forum that a lot of players feel like this guy. No matter how bad you are running the rakeback is a sure thing. Like a steady income. And in a world as volatile as the pokerworld the concept of a steady income sounds good to a whole lot of people.
/Mike
not only fair enough …….. but excellent point.
There is no reason THE POKERROOMS shouldn’t provide proper comps to players, they need to. It’s their business, and they need to worry about retention.
Affiliates are advertisers and have nothing to do with the matter.
Bringing advertisers in to provide incentives is not only outside of common business practice, it has resulted in theft (both from affiliates and from the rooms) and shady under the table deals.
