blonde poker forum
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 12:46:24 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
2272476 Posts in 66752 Topics by 16945 Members
Latest Member: Zula
* Home Help Arcade Search Calendar Guidelines Login Register
+  blonde poker forum
|-+  Poker Forums
| |-+  The Rail
| | |-+  AmayaStars
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 ... 44 Go Down Print
Author Topic: AmayaStars  (Read 147321 times)
Rexas
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1963


View Profile
« Reply #210 on: November 22, 2014, 04:15:08 PM »

Still waiting for another company to step up and provide a real alternative to stars.
Logged

humour is very much encouraged, however theres humour and theres not.
I disrepectfully agree with Matt Smiley
George2Loose
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15214



View Profile
« Reply #211 on: November 22, 2014, 04:19:12 PM »


There have been some Server Issues on 'Stars overnight, & the abuse 'Stars & Amaya are getting is just extraordinary.

Two guys from 'Stars (Stefan & Chris) have been fielding complaints - pages & pages of them - on 2+2.

They might just have the worst job in the poker.

Why would customers not be angry at not receiving the service they paid for? Schadenfreude all over the this thread.
Those 'Stars reps have been scrupulously polite throughout - they have to be - so I don't think anyone has the right to shower them with personal abuse. Imagine if it were the other way round, & the 'Stars reps abused the players, there'd be murders! Honestly, abusing guys who are just doing their job, regular guys like you & me, does not impress me at all. That may be a generation gap thing, I suppose, but that's how I see it.

Angry at not receiving the service they paid for? Sure, when a site has an outage, it is annoying & frustrating, whether you are a pro, or a recreational, it just is. But I think 'Stars "site availability" is well north of 99.9% measured annually. That is an imprerssively good number, especially bearing in mind that the internet is still, relatively, in it's infancy. It's only 15 or16 years ago that Online Poker arrived, & we were using dial-up then!

99%+ availabilty seems a reasonable achievement to me, for any business. Does that give us the right to hoot & holler when the 1% unavailability arises?

To me, demanding better than 99% availability is not a realistic entitlement. Of course it's a bummer when it goes wrong, but we need to keep a sense of perspective.


No I don't think getting angry will solve the issue, nor do I think it is particularly right/clever, but I don't think expecting people to not get angry is realistic either. It certainly isn't what I'm about. I imagine most of the anger comes from Stars now requesting players do their own audits and asking for exact tournament ids before they hand out refunds when they have the capability to do it easier themselves. Just another way of taking advantage of people who don't know the rules. People lose money during the 1% downtime. It can be quite a lot. If they went down for 2 hours during a Saturday, I'd estimate I'd lose over $2k in equity. That is a lot when I probably have an ev of $30k-200k this year. At that point I wouldn't particularly care about the 99% of good days. Before I wouldn't worry, I'd have been sure I'd get the money back. I would also argue that a company making hundreds of millions of dollars can put enough backups into its system that it should never ever go down. 38% profit margins remember? How much would 4 more backups cost? $100k?

Of course people are angry at the moment. Many people have had their livelihoods taken away, or their dreams of playing poker professionally taken away. Stars continue to treat people like idiots. They send out Negreanu to tell professionals its our fault. That pros are a drain on the system, and that we take more money out than them. They have put several rake %s up to make games unbeatable for anyone. They've moved the stars brand from friendly and most importantly fair service providers to a company that seems to be trying to hoover up everything as fast as it can.

Moaning at them any chance you get isn't really going to change anything.

You have a clear choice to make. The only way Amaya are going to lose any sleep is, as always, if you vote with your feet and I imagine they're going to have enough punters pulling on 13 against a 6 and spinning and going to care.
Logged

Ole Ole Ole Ole!
rfgqqabc
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5483


View Profile
« Reply #212 on: November 22, 2014, 04:37:45 PM »


There have been some Server Issues on 'Stars overnight, & the abuse 'Stars & Amaya are getting is just extraordinary.

Two guys from 'Stars (Stefan & Chris) have been fielding complaints - pages & pages of them - on 2+2.

They might just have the worst job in the poker.

Why would customers not be angry at not receiving the service they paid for? Schadenfreude all over the this thread.
Those 'Stars reps have been scrupulously polite throughout - they have to be - so I don't think anyone has the right to shower them with personal abuse. Imagine if it were the other way round, & the 'Stars reps abused the players, there'd be murders! Honestly, abusing guys who are just doing their job, regular guys like you & me, does not impress me at all. That may be a generation gap thing, I suppose, but that's how I see it.

Angry at not receiving the service they paid for? Sure, when a site has an outage, it is annoying & frustrating, whether you are a pro, or a recreational, it just is. But I think 'Stars "site availability" is well north of 99.9% measured annually. That is an imprerssively good number, especially bearing in mind that the internet is still, relatively, in it's infancy. It's only 15 or16 years ago that Online Poker arrived, & we were using dial-up then!

99%+ availabilty seems a reasonable achievement to me, for any business. Does that give us the right to hoot & holler when the 1% unavailability arises?

To me, demanding better than 99% availability is not a realistic entitlement. Of course it's a bummer when it goes wrong, but we need to keep a sense of perspective.


No I don't think getting angry will solve the issue, nor do I think it is particularly right/clever, but I don't think expecting people to not get angry is realistic either. It certainly isn't what I'm about. I imagine most of the anger comes from Stars now requesting players do their own audits and asking for exact tournament ids before they hand out refunds when they have the capability to do it easier themselves. Just another way of taking advantage of people who don't know the rules. People lose money during the 1% downtime. It can be quite a lot. If they went down for 2 hours during a Saturday, I'd estimate I'd lose over $2k in equity. That is a lot when I probably have an ev of $30k-200k this year. At that point I wouldn't particularly care about the 99% of good days. Before I wouldn't worry, I'd have been sure I'd get the money back. I would also argue that a company making hundreds of millions of dollars can put enough backups into its system that it should never ever go down. 38% profit margins remember? How much would 4 more backups cost? $100k?

Of course people are angry at the moment. Many people have had their livelihoods taken away, or their dreams of playing poker professionally taken away. Stars continue to treat people like idiots. They send out Negreanu to tell professionals its our fault. That pros are a drain on the system, and that we take more money out than them. They have put several rake %s up to make games unbeatable for anyone. They've moved the stars brand from friendly and most importantly fair service providers to a company that seems to be trying to hoover up everything as fast as it can.

Moaning at them any chance you get isn't really going to change anything.

You have a clear choice to make. The only way Amaya are going to lose any sleep is, as always, if you vote with your feet and I imagine they're going to have enough punters pulling on 13 against a 6 and spinning and going to care.

So I can vote with my feet but they won't care? Sweet, its nothing I don't know already. Its not like their is anywhere else to go. I play on six-eight sites already and am happy to avoid the sites I dislike the most when I can, however I want to try and make some money, and like you've just reminded me there is little I can do. My livelihood has gone from looking fairly secure for the next five years to in severe doubt, as it has for many of my friends, and tikay and a few others are wondering why I'm not patting Stars on the back for their fantastic business acumen. I'd love to be able to stick the finger up to Stars and go and play elsewhere, but I don't really have a choice. Its either I eat and put a roof over my head doing something I love, or find a new career, and that is something I just don't want to do right now.

Fwiw, I'm not moaning at Amaya, I'm way way past that now. I completely disagree with virtually every single business decision they have made so far but it is their choice. I'm telling tikay why I think other people are moaning and why I think they have the right too.
Logged

[21:05:17] Andrew W: you wasted a non spelling mistakepost?
[21:11:08] Patrick Leonard: oll
tikay
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: I am a geek!!



View Profile
« Reply #213 on: November 22, 2014, 05:39:21 PM »


There have been some Server Issues on 'Stars overnight, & the abuse 'Stars & Amaya are getting is just extraordinary.

Two guys from 'Stars (Stefan & Chris) have been fielding complaints - pages & pages of them - on 2+2.

They might just have the worst job in the poker.

Why would customers not be angry at not receiving the service they paid for? Schadenfreude all over the this thread.
Those 'Stars reps have been scrupulously polite throughout - they have to be - so I don't think anyone has the right to shower them with personal abuse. Imagine if it were the other way round, & the 'Stars reps abused the players, there'd be murders! Honestly, abusing guys who are just doing their job, regular guys like you & me, does not impress me at all. That may be a generation gap thing, I suppose, but that's how I see it.

Angry at not receiving the service they paid for? Sure, when a site has an outage, it is annoying & frustrating, whether you are a pro, or a recreational, it just is. But I think 'Stars "site availability" is well north of 99.9% measured annually. That is an imprerssively good number, especially bearing in mind that the internet is still, relatively, in it's infancy. It's only 15 or16 years ago that Online Poker arrived, & we were using dial-up then!

99%+ availabilty seems a reasonable achievement to me, for any business. Does that give us the right to hoot & holler when the 1% unavailability arises?

To me, demanding better than 99% availability is not a realistic entitlement. Of course it's a bummer when it goes wrong, but we need to keep a sense of perspective.


No I don't think getting angry will solve the issue, nor do I think it is particularly right/clever, but I don't think expecting people to not get angry is realistic either. It certainly isn't what I'm about. I imagine most of the anger comes from Stars now requesting players do their own audits and asking for exact tournament ids before they hand out refunds when they have the capability to do it easier themselves. Just another way of taking advantage of people who don't know the rules. People lose money during the 1% downtime. It can be quite a lot. If they went down for 2 hours during a Saturday, I'd estimate I'd lose over $2k in equity. That is a lot when I probably have an ev of $30k-200k this year. At that point I wouldn't particularly care about the 99% of good days. Before I wouldn't worry, I'd have been sure I'd get the money back. I would also argue that a company making hundreds of millions of dollars can put enough backups into its system that it should never ever go down. 38% profit margins remember? How much would 4 more backups cost? $100k?

Of course people are angry at the moment. Many people have had their livelihoods taken away, or their dreams of playing poker professionally taken away. Stars continue to treat people like idiots. They send out Negreanu to tell professionals its our fault. That pros are a drain on the system, and that we take more money out than them. They have put several rake %s up to make games unbeatable for anyone. They've moved the stars brand from friendly and most importantly fair service providers to a company that seems to be trying to hoover up everything as fast as it can.

Moaning at them any chance you get isn't really going to change anything.

You have a clear choice to make. The only way Amaya are going to lose any sleep is, as always, if you vote with your feet and I imagine they're going to have enough punters pulling on 13 against a 6 and spinning and going to care.

So I can vote with my feet but they won't care? Sweet, its nothing I don't know already. Its not like their is anywhere else to go. I play on six-eight sites already and am happy to avoid the sites I dislike the most when I can, however I want to try and make some money, and like you've just reminded me there is little I can do. My livelihood has gone from looking fairly secure for the next five years to in severe doubt, as it has for many of my friends, and tikay and a few others are wondering why I'm not patting Stars on the back for their fantastic business acumen. I'd love to be able to stick the finger up to Stars and go and play elsewhere, but I don't really have a choice. Its either I eat and put a roof over my head doing something I love, or find a new career, and that is something I just don't want to do right now.

Fwiw, I'm not moaning at Amaya, I'm way way past that now. I completely disagree with virtually every single business decision they have made so far but it is their choice. I'm telling tikay why I think other people are moaning and why I think they have the right too.

Ouch, I'm hurting here......Smiley

It's not personal, I'm just trying to explain the other side of the debate on what is, by necessity, here & on 2+2, not a very balanced debate. Both Forums are populated by players who have an axe to grind, so we see a very one-sided debate.

I do understand your angst Adam. As I've already explained, your interests & theirs are not precisely aligned, so there is bound to be ruffled feathers.

I just don't think - never have & never will - that abusing their Staff is the most optimal way to be heard. (And I never suggested you did that).

For the record, you, & any other thinking person, MUST have asked yourselves many times down the years why 'Stars never offered House Games or Sports Betting before? It is an abso no-brainer for them. Their poker product will suffer a bit no doubt, & maybe in Year One revenues overall will drop, what with start up costs & everything, but in the 5 year view, they will earn a lot more money imo. And that is their ONLY obligation. Buying 'Stars and leaving it "as was" was NEVER a possibility. The only logic for the purchase was to lever the database in other ways.

I'm genuinely sorry if folks livelihoods are affected, I am, & it's not personal, I'm simply offering the other side of the coin. 

« Last Edit: November 22, 2014, 06:02:59 PM by tikay » Logged

All details of the 2016 Vegas Staking Adventure can be found via this link - http://bit.ly/1pdQZDY (copyright Anthony James Kendall, 2016).
rfgqqabc
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5483


View Profile
« Reply #214 on: November 22, 2014, 06:15:48 PM »

They will go from having the best poker site, a money making behemoth to becoming just another regular gambling company. They have lost everything that made Stars unique and different. If I was an investor in Amaya I'd be mortified. Could you have seen Stars ever not being #1? I couldn't. Now that feels like it is a distinct possibility. I know you and others think it has been a good move, and we can agree to disagree on that. Having a business that is different feels important to me and Stars had possibly the best reputation I've ever seen among anyone, employees and players alike. And now they have lost all that to become one of the many rather than one of their own.

The only way to fight the initial changes, which are bad for every single customer, was to create some uproar. This has failed, and I think the majority are in the acceptance phase now. I've argued against many things that have little direct effect on me, but strike me as simply underhand. The currency charges will never affect me. Professionals simply have the contacts to get around it. I changed a chunk recently for a new mate of mine simply as a favour. I spend early parts of sunday firing off 888 $ to mates to get around the charges there. It is simply the recreational guys that get hurt by this sort of thing. And that doesn't sit well with me. Yes I too make my money from recreational players, but at least they have a fighting chance against me. Now if one of my mates chucks in 215$ and binks the sunday mil and goes to cash out. Amaya take 2.5% and I don't think that is fair.


P.S I know its not personal, and I know sometimes my posts come across that way, you have become the face of the other side of the coin to me that is all. I hope I haven't caused any offence whenever I name you, your simply "that lot". I'd still buy you a starbucks if/when I meet you in Vegas.
Logged

[21:05:17] Andrew W: you wasted a non spelling mistakepost?
[21:11:08] Patrick Leonard: oll
blueace
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 358



View Profile
« Reply #215 on: November 22, 2014, 06:52:03 PM »

This discussion reminds me of issues affecting my industry where a near monopolistic operator makes enormous profits whilst relentlessly squeezing its client base year on year.  http://plc.rightmove.co.uk/~/media/Files/R/Rightmove/reports-and-presentations/2013/annual-report-and-accounts-2013.pdf

In response, and due to roll out early next year, a new site www.onthemarket.co.uk has been started as a not for profit mutual for/by disgruntled customers/agents to break the hold of mainly Rightmove. I recall there has been discussion regarding this possibilty in Poker. It will be interesting to see how my industry handles trying to reign in the monster it has created. Poker take note!
Logged
tikay
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: I am a geek!!



View Profile
« Reply #216 on: November 23, 2014, 09:39:54 AM »

i genuinely believe that the current standing of stars is a loss to poker, tony.

not just the players on stars, but to everyone involved in online poker. no matter how many shady sites, scams, bot-rings etc out there are uncovered, and whenever online poker catches some flack we, as players / room managers of other sites / poker - ambassadors / whatever could point to the overwhelming market leader and say "show me another company in ANY industry that serves and understands its customers like that"?

they were an upward pressure on other sites' standards, and the positives of that outweighed the potential pitfalls of having a dominant site in the market.

when the market leader sets incredible standards its all gravy, everybody wins.

i'm not in 'the sky is falling' camp, but i am saddened to see the old stars morph into this.






Hi Teddy,

I don't disagree with a word of that & I'm actually not sure why my stance on the matter is being so misrepresented.

Of COURSE we preferred it as it was.

But we must have thought we were living in an ideal world if we thought it could continue for ever. Surely you must have wondered why 'Stars never had House Games & Sports Betting platforms? It made no sense. Online poker is in gentle decline, not terminal, not at all, but 'Stars would struggle to increase profits. And the ONLY reason a business like that exists is to increase profits. NO OTHER REASON. Hence, Amaya spotted a golden opportunity, as the database had never been "stretched".

For all the hoohah, they are STILL a great, great site, make no mistake. Just not as "pure" as many would prefer. (Me included, as I don't own Amaya shares).

They might lose, I dunno, 5% of their market share in the next 12 months? Probably less. They have been in very gentle decline - fractions of a % - for a while now, but poker is no longer in it's growth phase, & like all things, it has "cycles".

They now plan to do other things, House Games, Sports Betting, maybe they will do those as well as they do poker, & set new standards in those areas?

If you owned Shares in Amaya, you would say do not buy 'Stars UNLESS you plan to leverage the database with other products. There could be no other reason to buy 'Stars. Why else would they buy a mature business in a saturated market which is in slow decline?

I heard a number the other day that 'Stars made $400 milly pa or somesuch. If so, compared to what they can earn in those other sectors, that is peanuts. Bet365, who are more than uk facing, but cetainly not global, make more than that. Think they made £320 milly last year. If Online Poker contributed more than 1% of that figure I'd be extremely surprised. THAT is the scale of the Market that Amaya has it's eyes on. Potentially, they could dwarf their poker earnings. A well-run global Online Gaming & Sports betting Site? The mind truly boggles at the sheer immensity of that.

Yeah, in some ways it is a bit sad, but it's inevitable, so we may as well accept that & try to adapt. We can be as sure as God made little apples that they wont change their mind about monetising their new toy better.

 
« Last Edit: November 23, 2014, 09:42:39 AM by tikay » Logged

All details of the 2016 Vegas Staking Adventure can be found via this link - http://bit.ly/1pdQZDY (copyright Anthony James Kendall, 2016).
doubleup
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7049


View Profile
« Reply #217 on: November 23, 2014, 11:36:56 AM »





A well-run global Online Gaming & Sports betting Site? The mind truly boggles at the sheer immensity of that.

 

Apart from the fact that there is no evidence that Amaya has the skills to produce such a site.  Their first action at Stars has been to increase rake in some games making it virtually impossible for them to be beaten - that shows complete ignorance of the product they have purchased and I find it difficult to believe that they possess any talented senior management.
Logged
SuuPRlim
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10536



View Profile
« Reply #218 on: November 23, 2014, 01:42:09 PM »

in the infancy of my interest in poker, and long before i'd even considered depositing on a site, i browsed 2+2 occassioanly. one thing that stuck out clearly amongst the usual griping, bad beats and 'onlinepokerisriggedtomakemeloseOMG!!!ELEVEN!!!-type guffery that infests most gatherings of poker players was the incredible high regard that stars was held in. i chose the word incredible carefully there. few companies in any industry were or are as well regarded by their customers, or of the customers of their rivals.

maybe apple have had similar 'approval / satisfaction' ratings, but we are talking about a poker site here. that sort of reputation is incerdibly difficult to attain, and must take years of not just high standards amongst staff, but an actual ethos. you simply dont get a reputation like that by doing your job well, you do it by somehow managing to align your interests with that of your customers -  whilst making billions of $$$ of those customers. dizzying achievement when you pause to think about it.

that they managed this year after year must put the original owners up there with the very best businessmen in history. i dont think that is bombast. to make billions off your customers and have them extol your virtues and have such a great reputation when it comes to values like 'trust', 'integrity' service etc must near unique in business. again this is an online poker site too. there's almost certainly an aspirational book to be written on how pokerstars conquered their market and how it could inspire other compnaies outside of online poker.

what price that trust? what price that reputation? difficult to build up, but oh so easy to lose.

i think the anger is that borne out of loss. not monetary loss of losing x% of rake, or having to adapt to new formats but knowing that poker has lost an outlier. they way pokerstars understood, served and interacted with its customers was pretty damn impressive. impressive for any industry, market or product you care to think of. we've lost a world- class company really. that ethos has gone. are amaya's interests inline with that of online poker enthusiasts? it doesnt seem so, and when it comes to trust apperances are everything.

pokerstars strapline 'we ARE poker' was unarguable. cant say that now.


Fantastic post.


Pokerstars pre amaya believed that maintaining there ethos at the expense of squeezing their margins was the most effective way of preserving there huge market domination. Which they then sold to amaya, for a massive premium, whereas they didn't use there huge market share for immediate profit they have benefited from it on exit.

Amaya, having bought pokerstars, with its monopoly, is now cashing in. It's business, maybe they will piss everyone off and well all go play on party or 888 but it seems highly unlikely.
Logged

rfgqqabc
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5483


View Profile
« Reply #219 on: November 23, 2014, 09:51:37 PM »

in the infancy of my interest in poker, and long before i'd even considered depositing on a site, i browsed 2+2 occassioanly. one thing that stuck out clearly amongst the usual griping, bad beats and 'onlinepokerisriggedtomakemeloseOMG!!!ELEVEN!!!-type guffery that infests most gatherings of poker players was the incredible high regard that stars was held in. i chose the word incredible carefully there. few companies in any industry were or are as well regarded by their customers, or of the customers of their rivals.

maybe apple have had similar 'approval / satisfaction' ratings, but we are talking about a poker site here. that sort of reputation is incerdibly difficult to attain, and must take years of not just high standards amongst staff, but an actual ethos. you simply dont get a reputation like that by doing your job well, you do it by somehow managing to align your interests with that of your customers -  whilst making billions of $$$ of those customers. dizzying achievement when you pause to think about it.

that they managed this year after year must put the original owners up there with the very best businessmen in history. i dont think that is bombast. to make billions off your customers and have them extol your virtues and have such a great reputation when it comes to values like 'trust', 'integrity' service etc must near unique in business. again this is an online poker site too. there's almost certainly an aspirational book to be written on how pokerstars conquered their market and how it could inspire other compnaies outside of online poker.

what price that trust? what price that reputation? difficult to build up, but oh so easy to lose.

i think the anger is that borne out of loss. not monetary loss of losing x% of rake, or having to adapt to new formats but knowing that poker has lost an outlier. they way pokerstars understood, served and interacted with its customers was pretty damn impressive. impressive for any industry, market or product you care to think of. we've lost a world- class company really. that ethos has gone. are amaya's interests inline with that of online poker enthusiasts? it doesnt seem so, and when it comes to trust apperances are everything.

pokerstars strapline 'we ARE poker' was unarguable. cant say that now.


Fantastic post.


Pokerstars pre amaya believed that maintaining there ethos at the expense of squeezing their margins was the most effective way of preserving there huge market domination. Which they then sold to amaya, for a massive premium, whereas they didn't use there huge market share for immediate profit they have benefited from it on exit.

Amaya, having bought pokerstars, with its monopoly, is now cashing in. It's business, maybe they will piss everyone off and well all go play on party or 888 but it seems highly unlikely.

888 down for the 4th sunday in a row. Couldn't write it.
Logged

[21:05:17] Andrew W: you wasted a non spelling mistakepost?
[21:11:08] Patrick Leonard: oll
AlunB
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1712


View Profile WWW
« Reply #220 on: November 24, 2014, 10:16:43 AM »

i genuinely believe that the current standing of stars is a loss to poker, tony.

not just the players on stars, but to everyone involved in online poker. no matter how many shady sites, scams, bot-rings etc out there are uncovered, and whenever online poker catches some flack we, as players / room managers of other sites / poker - ambassadors / whatever could point to the overwhelming market leader and say "show me another company in ANY industry that serves and understands its customers like that"?

they were an upward pressure on other sites' standards, and the positives of that outweighed the potential pitfalls of having a dominant site in the market.

when the market leader sets incredible standards its all gravy, everybody wins.

i'm not in 'the sky is falling' camp, but i am saddened to see the old stars morph into this.






Hi Teddy,

I don't disagree with a word of that & I'm actually not sure why my stance on the matter is being so misrepresented.

Of COURSE we preferred it as it was.

But we must have thought we were living in an ideal world if we thought it could continue for ever. Surely you must have wondered why 'Stars never had House Games & Sports Betting platforms? It made no sense. Online poker is in gentle decline, not terminal, not at all, but 'Stars would struggle to increase profits. And the ONLY reason a business like that exists is to increase profits. NO OTHER REASON. Hence, Amaya spotted a golden opportunity, as the database had never been "stretched".

For all the hoohah, they are STILL a great, great site, make no mistake. Just not as "pure" as many would prefer. (Me included, as I don't own Amaya shares).

They might lose, I dunno, 5% of their market share in the next 12 months? Probably less. They have been in very gentle decline - fractions of a % - for a while now, but poker is no longer in it's growth phase, & like all things, it has "cycles".

They now plan to do other things, House Games, Sports Betting, maybe they will do those as well as they do poker, & set new standards in those areas?

If you owned Shares in Amaya, you would say do not buy 'Stars UNLESS you plan to leverage the database with other products. There could be no other reason to buy 'Stars. Why else would they buy a mature business in a saturated market which is in slow decline?

I heard a number the other day that 'Stars made $400 milly pa or somesuch. If so, compared to what they can earn in those other sectors, that is peanuts. Bet365, who are more than uk facing, but cetainly not global, make more than that. Think they made £320 milly last year. If Online Poker contributed more than 1% of that figure I'd be extremely surprised. THAT is the scale of the Market that Amaya has it's eyes on. Potentially, they could dwarf their poker earnings. A well-run global Online Gaming & Sports betting Site? The mind truly boggles at the sheer immensity of that.

Yeah, in some ways it is a bit sad, but it's inevitable, so we may as well accept that & try to adapt. We can be as sure as God made little apples that they wont change their mind about monetising their new toy better.

 

It made perfect sense.

Under new ownership it makes less sense. And they said from the very first day the deal was announced this is what they were going to do.

But I think the speed and the sudden shift in perspective has caught many people, including me, by surprise. To hear PokerStars happily describe itself as a gambling company? Well, I can hear the gear crunching from here.
Logged
AlunB
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1712


View Profile WWW
« Reply #221 on: November 24, 2014, 10:26:06 AM »

i genuinely believe that the current standing of stars is a loss to poker, tony.

not just the players on stars, but to everyone involved in online poker. no matter how many shady sites, scams, bot-rings etc out there are uncovered, and whenever online poker catches some flack we, as players / room managers of other sites / poker - ambassadors / whatever could point to the overwhelming market leader and say "show me another company in ANY industry that serves and understands its customers like that"?

they were an upward pressure on other sites' standards, and the positives of that outweighed the potential pitfalls of having a dominant site in the market.

when the market leader sets incredible standards its all gravy, everybody wins.

i'm not in 'the sky is falling' camp, but i am saddened to see the old stars morph into this.






Hi Teddy,

I don't disagree with a word of that & I'm actually not sure why my stance on the matter is being so misrepresented.

Of COURSE we preferred it as it was.

But we must have thought we were living in an ideal world if we thought it could continue for ever. Surely you must have wondered why 'Stars never had House Games & Sports Betting platforms? It made no sense. Online poker is in gentle decline, not terminal, not at all, but 'Stars would struggle to increase profits. And the ONLY reason a business like that exists is to increase profits. NO OTHER REASON. Hence, Amaya spotted a golden opportunity, as the database had never been "stretched".

For all the hoohah, they are STILL a great, great site, make no mistake. Just not as "pure" as many would prefer. (Me included, as I don't own Amaya shares).

They might lose, I dunno, 5% of their market share in the next 12 months? Probably less. They have been in very gentle decline - fractions of a % - for a while now, but poker is no longer in it's growth phase, & like all things, it has "cycles".

They now plan to do other things, House Games, Sports Betting, maybe they will do those as well as they do poker, & set new standards in those areas?

If you owned Shares in Amaya, you would say do not buy 'Stars UNLESS you plan to leverage the database with other products. There could be no other reason to buy 'Stars. Why else would they buy a mature business in a saturated market which is in slow decline?

I heard a number the other day that 'Stars made $400 milly pa or somesuch. If so, compared to what they can earn in those other sectors, that is peanuts. Bet365, who are more than uk facing, but cetainly not global, make more than that. Think they made £320 milly last year. If Online Poker contributed more than 1% of that figure I'd be extremely surprised. THAT is the scale of the Market that Amaya has it's eyes on. Potentially, they could dwarf their poker earnings. A well-run global Online Gaming & Sports betting Site? The mind truly boggles at the sheer immensity of that.

Yeah, in some ways it is a bit sad, but it's inevitable, so we may as well accept that & try to adapt. We can be as sure as God made little apples that they wont change their mind about monetising their new toy better.

 

Erm. They are about as global as it gets. All over Europe, as well as Asia, South America, Canada and Australia. So your plan is to go head-to-head with one of the best run sports betting businesses in the world? Yeah good luck with that.
Logged
theprawnidentity
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3602


8 high happens!


View Profile
« Reply #222 on: November 24, 2014, 12:15:00 PM »

As someone who has played on Stars for pretty much my entire 'career', if you could call it that, I'm officially done with them barring some of the 'Red' stuff on Sunday's.  Their only redeeming feature now is the software and field sizes (which seem to be reducing anyway).  Had the most tilting interaction with support last week which was the stick that broke the camels back.

I am 100% certain they won't care though, but still, stars can fuck off!!!
Logged
tikay
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: I am a geek!!



View Profile
« Reply #223 on: November 24, 2014, 04:14:17 PM »

i genuinely believe that the current standing of stars is a loss to poker, tony.

not just the players on stars, but to everyone involved in online poker. no matter how many shady sites, scams, bot-rings etc out there are uncovered, and whenever online poker catches some flack we, as players / room managers of other sites / poker - ambassadors / whatever could point to the overwhelming market leader and say "show me another company in ANY industry that serves and understands its customers like that"?

they were an upward pressure on other sites' standards, and the positives of that outweighed the potential pitfalls of having a dominant site in the market.

when the market leader sets incredible standards its all gravy, everybody wins.

i'm not in 'the sky is falling' camp, but i am saddened to see the old stars morph into this.






Hi Teddy,

I don't disagree with a word of that & I'm actually not sure why my stance on the matter is being so misrepresented.

Of COURSE we preferred it as it was.

But we must have thought we were living in an ideal world if we thought it could continue for ever. Surely you must have wondered why 'Stars never had House Games & Sports Betting platforms? It made no sense. Online poker is in gentle decline, not terminal, not at all, but 'Stars would struggle to increase profits. And the ONLY reason a business like that exists is to increase profits. NO OTHER REASON. Hence, Amaya spotted a golden opportunity, as the database had never been "stretched".

For all the hoohah, they are STILL a great, great site, make no mistake. Just not as "pure" as many would prefer. (Me included, as I don't own Amaya shares).

They might lose, I dunno, 5% of their market share in the next 12 months? Probably less. They have been in very gentle decline - fractions of a % - for a while now, but poker is no longer in it's growth phase, & like all things, it has "cycles".

They now plan to do other things, House Games, Sports Betting, maybe they will do those as well as they do poker, & set new standards in those areas?

If you owned Shares in Amaya, you would say do not buy 'Stars UNLESS you plan to leverage the database with other products. There could be no other reason to buy 'Stars. Why else would they buy a mature business in a saturated market which is in slow decline?

I heard a number the other day that 'Stars made $400 milly pa or somesuch. If so, compared to what they can earn in those other sectors, that is peanuts. Bet365, who are more than uk facing, but cetainly not global, make more than that. Think they made £320 milly last year. If Online Poker contributed more than 1% of that figure I'd be extremely surprised. THAT is the scale of the Market that Amaya has it's eyes on. Potentially, they could dwarf their poker earnings. A well-run global Online Gaming & Sports betting Site? The mind truly boggles at the sheer immensity of that.

Yeah, in some ways it is a bit sad, but it's inevitable, so we may as well accept that & try to adapt. We can be as sure as God made little apples that they wont change their mind about monetising their new toy better.

 

It made perfect sense.

Under new ownership it makes less sense. And they said from the very first day the deal was announced this is what they were going to do.

But I think the speed and the sudden shift in perspective has caught many people, including me, by surprise. To hear PokerStars happily describe itself as a gambling company? Well, I can hear the gear crunching from here.

Bit of confusion there, Alun - what I was saying is exactly what you are saying - perhaps I should have said "it made no sense NOT TO".

As to Sports Betting, noted, BetEveryDay are global, I had them pegged as Europe & Australia only.

I was also assuming they would get an experienced third party to run it for them, sort of sub-contract it out. Starting it from cold, in-house, without an experienced Partner, would be a big ask imo, given the sheer scale of 'Stars. 
Logged

All details of the 2016 Vegas Staking Adventure can be found via this link - http://bit.ly/1pdQZDY (copyright Anthony James Kendall, 2016).
AlunB
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1712


View Profile WWW
« Reply #224 on: November 24, 2014, 04:18:20 PM »

i genuinely believe that the current standing of stars is a loss to poker, tony.

not just the players on stars, but to everyone involved in online poker. no matter how many shady sites, scams, bot-rings etc out there are uncovered, and whenever online poker catches some flack we, as players / room managers of other sites / poker - ambassadors / whatever could point to the overwhelming market leader and say "show me another company in ANY industry that serves and understands its customers like that"?

they were an upward pressure on other sites' standards, and the positives of that outweighed the potential pitfalls of having a dominant site in the market.

when the market leader sets incredible standards its all gravy, everybody wins.

i'm not in 'the sky is falling' camp, but i am saddened to see the old stars morph into this.






Hi Teddy,

I don't disagree with a word of that & I'm actually not sure why my stance on the matter is being so misrepresented.

Of COURSE we preferred it as it was.

But we must have thought we were living in an ideal world if we thought it could continue for ever. Surely you must have wondered why 'Stars never had House Games & Sports Betting platforms? It made no sense. Online poker is in gentle decline, not terminal, not at all, but 'Stars would struggle to increase profits. And the ONLY reason a business like that exists is to increase profits. NO OTHER REASON. Hence, Amaya spotted a golden opportunity, as the database had never been "stretched".

For all the hoohah, they are STILL a great, great site, make no mistake. Just not as "pure" as many would prefer. (Me included, as I don't own Amaya shares).

They might lose, I dunno, 5% of their market share in the next 12 months? Probably less. They have been in very gentle decline - fractions of a % - for a while now, but poker is no longer in it's growth phase, & like all things, it has "cycles".

They now plan to do other things, House Games, Sports Betting, maybe they will do those as well as they do poker, & set new standards in those areas?

If you owned Shares in Amaya, you would say do not buy 'Stars UNLESS you plan to leverage the database with other products. There could be no other reason to buy 'Stars. Why else would they buy a mature business in a saturated market which is in slow decline?

I heard a number the other day that 'Stars made $400 milly pa or somesuch. If so, compared to what they can earn in those other sectors, that is peanuts. Bet365, who are more than uk facing, but cetainly not global, make more than that. Think they made £320 milly last year. If Online Poker contributed more than 1% of that figure I'd be extremely surprised. THAT is the scale of the Market that Amaya has it's eyes on. Potentially, they could dwarf their poker earnings. A well-run global Online Gaming & Sports betting Site? The mind truly boggles at the sheer immensity of that.

Yeah, in some ways it is a bit sad, but it's inevitable, so we may as well accept that & try to adapt. We can be as sure as God made little apples that they wont change their mind about monetising their new toy better.

 

It made perfect sense.

Under new ownership it makes less sense. And they said from the very first day the deal was announced this is what they were going to do.

But I think the speed and the sudden shift in perspective has caught many people, including me, by surprise. To hear PokerStars happily describe itself as a gambling company? Well, I can hear the gear crunching from here.

Bit of confusion there, Alun - what I was saying is exactly what you are saying - perhaps I should have said "it made no sense NOT TO".

As to Sports Betting, noted, BetEveryDay are global, I had them pegged as Europe & Australia only.

I was also assuming they would get an experienced third party to run it for them, sort of sub-contract it out. Starting it from cold, in-house, without an experienced Partner, would be a big ask imo, given the sheer scale of 'Stars. 

No I mean it made perfect sense, at the time, to not offer casino and sports betting.

They were active in the US, and then they were a company that was still facing ongoing criminal charges from the US. The whole poker is different, it's a skill game thing made a lot of sense.

Now? Meh. Break out the craps dice, let's GAMBLE!

They seem insistent on developing the sportsbook in-house with a few bought in third-party services AFAIK. And I agree it's a bit of a bold move. Many others have failed.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 ... 44 Go Up Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.482 seconds with 21 queries.