IMPORTANT - Changes at the blonde Cardroom.

[Overated]

obv titan are losing player to better offers and thats why they want the other rooms shut down

titan wont be getting charged because ipoker own most of that site!  ipoker is a joke

Least you don't have to worry about that seeing as they closed all your accounts because of that scam you pulled.

suck my balls murph =]

they only closed my boyles account

[DaveShoelace]

Ah, the iPoker Network Policy.  The most recent incarnation is indeed a sight to behold.  Maths had always been a strong point of mine but I gave up halfway through reading it and will have to return to it later in the week.

As clarkatroid was saying, unfortunately Playtech have been somewhat forced into taking some drastic action to try and combat the rakeback cannibalisation in the network.  The ideal would naturally be that everyone played fair and stuck to a cap on "loyalty bonuses" etc. but this was never really going to happen.  Therefore they have come up with the "fine the shark pools and reward the fish tanks" idea.

Personally i'm not a fan, and after getting my head round the document will put my own thoughts across.  I actually quite like an idea that Jonas Odman from Bodog put forward recently as their new model to avoid rakeback wars on their newly launching network.  It is similar to what Playtech is doing, but just not as aggressive.  Basically the rake generated by players is redistributed according to their win/loss ratios.  Therefore a net losing player will earn the skin much more than a net winner, with the biggest winners actually earning very little for their skin "owner".

This avoids the unfortunate scenario that Blonde find themselves in, as there would be no fines and possibility for losing - winning players just wouldn't earn them very big profits.  Interestingly this also massively affects loyalty schemes, because effectively you wouldn't be able to offer much at all for the custom of a winning player.  In some ways it is like the Betfair changes that charge the most profitable traders for using their service.  In this Bodog model, the big cash game winners will be sacrificing loyalty rewards or rakeback in return for nice fishy games created by skins spending money on marketing to bring in the casual players that will earn them the most revenue.

I wish Blonde the best of luck in finding a suitable new partner.  Happy to chat anything through if you want another opinion, although Flushie did try that on the weekend but left it too late and i was too battered to say anything sensible  

This idea certainly seems to be a step in the right direction. If I understand it correctly:

Player A and B play a pot and generate $1 rake. Player A wins the pot and gets 10% of the rakeback, Player B gets 30%, the skin of player A gets 10%, the skin of player A gets 30% and the network operator gets the last 20%

I have picked these percentages from thin air btw, obviously other factors come in to play like affiliates and sign up bonuses. Am I right or have I missed the point completely?

[Mango99]

What's wrong with the current way? e.g. 75% to 85% to skin, 15 to 25% to software provider.

Skin chooses what to do with their percentage (within network rules).

[Ironside]

What's wrong with the current way? e.g. 75% to 85% to skin, 15 to 25% to software provider.

Skin chooses what to do with their percentage (within network rules).

nothing but the big boys dont like it
they attact the fish by there name and advertising
while the smaller skins dont need to spend on advertising they just offer
bigger RB to the sharks who like the fish the bg boys bring in

then the sharks take all the money off the fish and the big boys have to spend more money on advertising
while the smaller sites just sit back and get rake from the big boys advertising spend

[tikay]

Wow, I'm famous. I use google Alerts, for business reasons, & this popped up this afternoon, from another Website called, I think, "Poker News Headlines". I don't recall being "damning", I thought I pretty much just reported the facts. Must be a bitch to be proper famous!

".....Blonde Poker, one of Europe’s most popular poker forums and websites, has been given written notice by iPoker to leave their network. The skin, which has one of the smaller player groups on iPoker, has been given three months to leave the network by iPoker.

Tony “Tikay” Kendall was damning of the decision by iPoker chiefs. Tikay, one of the founder members and shareholders of the website, said; “On Friday, BlondePoker Web Ltd received in writing 3 months notice of Termination of our Contract with Aqua/i-poker. The document was a complex one – 15 pages long, full of equations & algorithms, but the gist of it was that, on aggregate, the blonde players are winning players.”

He went on; “They went on to explain, & demonstrate, that, as an example, once the new arrangements come into place, our performance in October would have resulted in a fine in the region of $30,000, based on how much our players won. The Net Rake which accrued to blonde was about $7,000 I think, so we’d be on a net loss of some $20,000+. Because our players were winning.”

Where this leaves Blonde Poker now is unclear. The recession has certainly hit the British poker market and many are arguing that due to over-saturation of online poker rooms in the UK it is difficult for many businesses to get a foothold in the poker industry.

iPoker have yet to respond to Tony Kendall’s comments. To read the entire thread on the issue please click here.

Poker News Headlines only advertises established and well used online poker rooms on the iPoker network. Those large skins are perfectly safe to play on whether you are a winning or losing poker player!......

[Mango99]

What's wrong with the current way? e.g. 75% to 85% to skin, 15 to 25% to software provider.

Skin chooses what to do with their percentage (within network rules).

nothing but the big boys dont like it
they attact the fish by there name and advertising
while the smaller skins dont need to spend on advertising they just offer
bigger RB to the sharks who like the fish the bg boys bring in

then the sharks take all the money off the fish and the big boys have to spend more money on advertising
while the smaller sites just sit back and get rake from the big boys advertising spend

Ah, I guess that makes sense. I can understand it being a network priority to protect their biggest sites. Just a shame it means they have to unfairly punish the smaller ones in order to do so.

[tikay]

More, even!

This was on "betastic", which, though I'm not entirely sure, may be a Gaming Website.

".....Popular online poker site Blonde Poker has been told they have to leave the iPoker Network as too many of its players are winning. The shocking request, believed to be the first of its kind, will give the poker skin just three months to find a different network to operate on.

In a statement on the Blond Poker forum, co-founder, Tony ‘Tikay’ Kendall said: “On Friday, BlondePoker Web Ltd received in writing 3 months notice of Termination of our Contract with Aqua/i-poker.”

“They went on to explain, & demonstrate, that, as an example, once the new arrangements come into place, our performance in October would have resulted in a fine in the region of $30,000, based on how much our players won. The Net Rake which accrued to blonde was about $7,000 I think, so we’d be on a net loss of some $20,000+. Because our players were winning.” He went on to say.

Member’s of the forum were quick to condemn the iPoker Network’s reasons for removing Blonde Poker, with one commenting that it is “utterly ridiculous” and another questioning whether “it is even legal”.

Blonde Poker has been quick to reassure players that they will not lose any money during the fiasco....."

[tikay]

More still!

This was on Bluff Europe. Clever bit of kit, that "google Alerts". Free, too.

"......Blonde Poker set for iPoker axe... due to winning players
 
Tuesday, 24 November 2009
The future of online poker room Blonde Poker is in the air due to an extraordinary decision from hosts, iPoker. The iPoker network has given the skin three-months to leave the network due to them having an excess of winning players.

Writing on the Blonde Poker forum, co-founder and shareholder Tony ‘Tikay’ Kendall said, “On Friday, BlondePoker Web Ltd received in writing 3 months notice of Termination of our Contract with Aqua/i-poker. The document was a complex one – 15 pages long, full of equations & algorithms, but the gist of it was that, on aggregate, the blonde players are winning players.”


Kendall added, “They went on to explain, & demonstrate, that, as an example, once the new arrangements come into place, our performance in October would have resulted in a fine in the region of $30,000, based on how much our players won. The Net Rake which accrued to blonde was about $7,000 I think, so we’d be on a net loss of some $20,000+. Because our players were winning.


The site is in talks to find an alternative network. Players have been assured that their money is safe....."

[Ironside]

phuh wish these news items would report that the reason we have too many winning players is because of flushys posts on PHA

[tikay]

Damn, google alerts is not perfect.

It just reported....

Google News Alert for: Tony Kendall

Robert Kendall, actor and author, dies at 82

Which is wrong an two counts.

[Ironside]

Damn, google alerts is not perfect.

It just reported....

Google News Alert for: Tony Kendall

Robert Kendall, actor and author, dies at 82

Which is wrong an two counts.

he was 84 and never an actor?

[Div]

The ideal world for a poker network would be one where every player was break-even in skill, ran equally averagely, and only ever dropped money to the rake i.e. into their pocket.

What actually happens is money funnels up the levels to the point where it is withdrawn from the 'poker economy' by players who actually cash-out when they win and spend the money on hookers and blow actual real world expenses.

I can see why this particularly hurts the bigger skins who are trying to attract newbies via advertising and who are suffering at the hands of smaller skins who are focusing on high volume rakeback hungry pros or semi-pros, but the way ipoker are going about managing this just seems absurd.

Of course some people will point at all this and say 'ooohh online poker is so dodgy it should be banned' but really it's a perfect illustration of why the government should be embracing the industry, getting the companies to onshore, and apply some proper, simple regulation.

[tikay]

Well yes, some Regulation would be nice, & ultimately, protect the players.

But really it's about messing with the free market, trying to manipulate supply & demand. Leave the market to it's own devices, & it will be fine. Interfere with free market forces & all hell will be let loose.

[kinboshi]

The ideal world for a poker network would be one where every player was break-even in skill, ran equally averagely, and only ever dropped money to the rake i.e. into their pocket.

What actually happens is money funnels up the levels to the point where it is withdrawn from the 'poker economy' by players who actually cash-out when they win and spend the money on hookers and blow actual real world expenses.

I can see why this particularly hurts the bigger skins who are trying to attract newbies via advertising and who are suffering at the hands of smaller skins who are focusing on high volume rakeback hungry pros or semi-pros, but the way ipoker are going about managing this just seems absurd.

Of course some people will point at all this and say 'ooohh online poker is so dodgy it should be banned' but really it's a perfect illustration of why the government should be embracing the industry, getting the companies to onshore, and apply some proper, simple regulation.

Agree with that.  Makes more sense to have enforceable legislation in place, rather than rely on laws of other countries who might not be completely above-board in what they enforce.  Of course, that's not to say it would be any better with the companies here.  In fact, it won't/can't happen, as they'll be taxed to buggery if they operated out of the UK.

[thetank]

You need to keep it pithy if you want to make the Grand Junction Chroncicle.