PokerStars VIP Changes 2016 and onwards

[Doobs]

Never understood the aversion poker folk have to A) a sponsored player being self serving and B) an online poker room trying to max their profits.

It's remarkable how many people on 2+2 have posted to the effect of 'I guess we have learned PokerStars are only doing this for the money...'

What the hell else is a business doing it for? Given they have staff as well as shareholders, I'd be mortified if they weren't trying to make as much money as profit. You should of course complain about the way they make a profit, and especially if what they are doing is short sighted for all parties, but complaining because a business is motivated to do the exact thing it should be motivated to do is silly.

And everyone complaining about Stars wanting to make as big a profit as possible is complaining because the latest changes are stopping them from making as big a profit as possible. Nobody 24-tables hyper turbos for the love of the game, so why does everyone demonise Stars for wanting to make money?

btw not directing this at anyone here, all of it directed at the many ludicrous comments I've seen on 2+2.

I absolutely agree that businesses (public companies anyway) should act in a profit maxismising way but there has to be boundaries somewhere. There are plenty of reasons to complain in these situations. Whilst I hate to trivialize much more serious situations, do you have the same reaction when you read about the Apple factories in China? (I reread your post and I think you cover this tbh kinda but dont want to delete) Personally, I think it is unethical for a company to provide a games service which should be beatable, but cannot actually be beaten, and this is where Amaya is going. Pokerstars will lose the dream of professional poker play, and after that I'm not sure why people would be particularly drawn to play. I'm sure even the worlds biggest degen will be turned off by a product that will suffer so much bad press. I guess the Spin and Go side makes up for some of this but surely not all. I don't think they realise how good they have actually had it.

All very good points, I think we are in agreement, just may differ on the severity of the (current) changes.

Completely agree poker has to be beatable for it to be packaged the way it is.

But surely by this logic, it should be beatable by everyone and not just SNE's.   The issue is then a rake problem not a SNE problem.  I think SNE and rake races have always been bad for the long term future, so can't fault Amaya there.  There doesn't seem to be much of a problem with the technical aids either.

What should happen is a reduction in rake on the "unbeatable games" or higher rewards at the lower level to compensate for the loss of SNE.  I'd much rather that happened than the status quo was maintained.

[buffyslayer1]

Never understood the aversion poker folk have to A) a sponsored player being self serving and B) an online poker room trying to max their profits.

It's remarkable how many people on 2+2 have posted to the effect of 'I guess we have learned PokerStars are only doing this for the money...'

What the hell else is a business doing it for? Given they have staff as well as shareholders, I'd be mortified if they weren't trying to make as much money as profit. You should of course complain about the way they make a profit, and especially if what they are doing is short sighted for all parties, but complaining because a business is motivated to do the exact thing it should be motivated to do is silly.

And everyone complaining about Stars wanting to make as big a profit as possible is complaining because the latest changes are stopping them from making as big a profit as possible. Nobody 24-tables hyper turbos for the love of the game, so why does everyone demonise Stars for wanting to make money?

btw not directing this at anyone here, all of it directed at the many ludicrous comments I've seen on 2+2.

Lordy Lordy. These guys don't do themselves any favours when they trot that nonsense out, do they? Why & for what exactly do they think 'Stars - or any Online Poker site - exists?

And they make changes because - with the data they have at their disposal (which we don't have) - they think they will make more money long-term. I've no idea if they will, but if I had to back one side or the other to be right, I'm backing the guys who run the business & have all the data.

I really would not trust the guys with the data, look what happened to ongame when Amya took over. Look at what happened to Party poker when it became a PLC, same with paradise poker way back in the day. These were all giants they all had data and smart people working for them and they still royally messed it up.

If anything we have learnt that when a company is beholden to shareholders. Long term stable profits go out of the window in favour of short term gains which guts the site.

Stars are really not to big to fall, its happened before in this industry no reason why it cant happen again.

Also you are right their are some complete NVG tards on 2+2 but for the most part people are smart.

They realise that stars is in this to make money, but feel betrayed because there was an unofficial contract between the players and stars. It was built on the players trusting that stars had the long term health of the game in mind even if that was only so they could go on milking the cow so to speak.

Now they see this approach gone completely out of the window and these actions without the reduction in rake, or redistribution of rewards to rec players really could just kill online cash games and especially high stakes. 

[AlunB]

I agree Stars isn't too big to fail/fall. In fact I said so about two pages back. But these are different times to back then.

The amount of data modelling that goes on in the major online gambling firms is incredible. They will have looked into this very deeply. It won't be a decision made on a whim.

That said I do agree the main shift from private to public is a shift from long-term to short-term growth. There will be a lot of pressure there for short-term results and that can distort the analysis.

Also wtf is this chat about them "breaking" ongame? It was thoroughly and utterly broken when they bought it.

[buffyslayer1]

I agree Stars isn't too big to fail/fall. In fact I said so about two pages back. But these are different times to back then.

The amount of data modelling that goes on in the major online gambling firms is incredible. They will have looked into this very deeply. It won't be a decision made on a whim.

That said I do agree the main shift from private to public is a shift from long-term to short-term growth. There will be a lot of pressure there for short-term results and that can distort the analysis.

Also wtf is this chat about them "breaking" ongame? It was thoroughly and utterly broken when they bought it.

From what I heard they finished it off with the changes they made, and it was a half playable site until then. I can be wrong of course but I have heard this lots from various people.

wrt to short term profits. It really does not help Amya massively overpaid for stars and mortgaged themselves up to the hilt to buy it. That's likely weighing heavy on the balance sheet hence them taking some debt reduction measures like slashing FPPs values.

[AlunB]

I agree Stars isn't too big to fail/fall. In fact I said so about two pages back. But these are different times to back then.

The amount of data modelling that goes on in the major online gambling firms is incredible. They will have looked into this very deeply. It won't be a decision made on a whim.

That said I do agree the main shift from private to public is a shift from long-term to short-term growth. There will be a lot of pressure there for short-term results and that can distort the analysis.

Also wtf is this chat about them "breaking" ongame? It was thoroughly and utterly broken when they bought it.

From what I heard they finished it off with the changes they made, and it was a half playable site until then. I can be wrong of course but I have heard this lots from various people.

wrt to short term profits. It really does not help Amya massively overpaid for stars and mortgaged themselves up to the hilt to buy it. That's likely weighing heavy on the balance sheet hence them taking some debt reduction measures like slashing FPPs values.

Yeah definitely. Mind if Russia collapses they will save themselves $400m.

Pressure from investors is probably just as a big a factor though. PE firms don't invest $1bn in something to just make 5% on their money.

[TightEnd]

New CEO at PokerStars

Rational Group, the company behind PokerStars and Full Tilt, name Rafi Ashkenazi as the new CEO.

http://www.pokerstrategy.com/news/world-of-poker/New-CEO-at-PokerStars_94289/

[The Camel]

Amaya must have expected to be back in the US market by now, wouldn't they?

[AlunB]

I still don't understand why they are spending all this time and effort trying to get back in. Well, I do, but in the short to mid-term it's an absolute money and talent drain.

The entire US market is worth < $200m at the moment. The online poker sector is worth probably < $50m

[TightEnd]

PokerStars to launch sportsbook BetStars http://buff.ly/1WBrU5h

stand alone, not on the client

[AlunB]

Story should really be PokerStars (probably) looking to go with BetStars over Stars Bet as brand name for already launched sportsbook with its well recorded previously announced plans for standalone site and app.

[AlunB]

Bet Stars seems more coherent.

BetStars
PokerStars
CasinoStars
BingoStars
FantasyStars
etc

[DaveShoelace]

Bet Stars seems more coherent.

BetStars
PokerStars
CasinoStars
BingoStars
FantasyStars
etc

This could be the thing that finally brings Stars down

[TightEnd]

Bet Stars seems more coherent.

BetStars
PokerStars
CasinoStars
BingoStars
FantasyStars
etc

This could be the thing that finally brings Stars down

why?

[DaveShoelace]

Bet Stars seems more coherent.

BetStars
PokerStars
CasinoStars
BingoStars
FantasyStars
etc

This could be the thing that finally brings Stars down

why?

Oh, I was trying to be funny.

[AlunB]

Bet Stars seems more coherent.

BetStars
PokerStars
CasinoStars
BingoStars
FantasyStars
etc

This could be the thing that finally brings Stars down

why?

Oh, I was trying to be funny.

Why?