Feedback Thread: PokerStrategy.com CEO Dominik "Korn" Kofert's Blogs

Very good article, but there are things forgotten, or only not mentioned to keep the article simple. I don't know which is true.

1. $300m in rake, $600m in withdrawals => monthly deposits needed $900m.
   I don't know whether the $300m is 'pure' rake - i.e. room's profit from rake, or from this amount goes some rakeback back to players. I guess avg. rakeback in the industry can be around 30%. Yes, most players do not recieve any rakeback, but these players also rake less. There are hundreds of players, maybe even thousands, who actually rake a six-digit sum per year. These players usually recieve huge rakebacks in various forms. SNE on Stars is worth more than 70% rb, isn't it? Plus various deposit bonuses, which usually all players have, i think the rate of 30% can be realistic. That is $100m (almost). This can be considered as deposits, because it goes back to poker industry, or the rake can be smaller and thus less deposits needed to maintain whole industry.
2. I have no idea how significant thiscan be, but the withdrawals and deposits needed can be lesser because of people simply transferring funds between various poker rooms. Or people who chase every deposit bonus possible.
   edit: just realized this is covered in "'pseudo-deposits' made by winning players", but only reversed. From my point of view they withdraw first and deposit then.
3. "Drastically lower the rake on the micro and small stakes."

   I can't fully agree with this without further arguments. Again, it cocnerns the numbers above. This will definitely lower the overall rake, but it would also increase the withdrawals, and also probably decrease deposits. Part of the rake spared will go to players, who will become winners, or to players, who already winners are. These are the players making withdrawals. Some of them will withdraw immediately, some move to higher limits and withdraw later. The rest of the spared rake will go to losing players. But these player are those bringing new deposits. And they will bust later, and deposit another funds later. This second part is arguable, because $600 here - "average recreational player deposits $600 in his lifetime before he churns" - will probably not change, but he will deposit it over longer period. Thus this effect will be only short-term.
   But it would definitely have a meaning if it will come together with strong marketing strategies focused on creating the new target group.

What about growth into Asian markets - India and China? I suppose the only problem with these are these players are likely to go into the game looking for education? But there is a potentially exploitable rising middle class in these countries?

Originally posted by Quadzzzzzzz
What about growth into Asian markets - India and China? I suppose the only problem with these are these players are likely to go into the game looking for education? But there is a potentially exploitable rising middle class in these countries?

They will educate trust me. Since an avg monthly wage in china is only about $350-400. They will make NL10 and NL25 much harder.

I'm a recreational player.

I play because I enjoy it -- not because I ever hope to get rich, or even make a living. I'm happy to beat rake.  I could not image playing 24 tables for 8 hours a day could ever be an enjoyable way to spend a life -- I'll leave that for the ones who do enjoy it.

I enjoy the challenge of mastering new skills.

I enjoy the risk/reward tension.

But what makes it fun?

Pokerstrategy in large measure keeps the game worth playing. I've been here for just over a year, and I would have been long gone w/o PS.

Poker rooms need to do the same.

Some suggestions for poker rooms:
♦  Milestones. Cash rewards for your 100th, 1000th etc hands (kinda like sidekick)
♦  Rakeback/points programs that are achievable by the casual/recreational player. Even the lowest level at Party is out of my reach, for example.
♦  Achievable bonuses. It took all of my playing time in December to clear a Party bonus, and all I could manage was $20. Whoopee. Why not release it in $2.00 increments, so the reward part of risk/reward is more immediate.
♦  Add a social element to the rooms.

I like the idea the poker rooms might actually need to fight each other for my participation.

I strongly dislike the current "hype" method of marketing they use now -- In fact I find it somewhat insulting, and I have told them so.

Great article.

i hate break even players, you know who profits out?poker rooms, but rather be the b/e than the winning one pal, so keep up the good work.

Originally posted by phantommm92
i hate break even players, you know who profits out?poker rooms, but rather be the b/e than the winning one pal, so keep up the good work.

overall to him, yes. But b/e player overall doesn't equal b/e player vs you

Btw, Vorpal, what kind of social element do you have in mind?

Originally posted by phantommm92
i hate break even players, you know who profits out?poker rooms, but rather be the b/e than the winning one pal, so keep up the good work.

Well, first off, "recreational" does not necessarily mean "break even". I used the expression "happy to beat rake", which for me means I'm up a reasonable amount.
Am I happy with my play? No: which is why I'm here -- to keep improving, to keep adapting and to keep winning.

"Recreational" to me means I do it because I like it. Compare it to golf (except I hate golf). Millions of amateurs, yet only thousands of pros. But it is still a game.
Where would golf be if the pros publicly sneered at the amateurs, like the self-styled "sharks" do to the "fish".

Secondly, my OP was intended to be a reply post in the thread here:
The Future of Poker - Dominik Kofert Blog

So if you have not yet read Dominic's most recent blog post then read it, then my comment will make sense.

Originally posted by NightFrostaSS
Btw, Vorpal, what kind of social element do you have in mind?

Some social aspects poker rooms might do:
♥  Permit user-user "friending". There are several players I have > 1000 hands on, which whom I've developed a but of a connection. We take shots at each other, but generally (I think) respect each other. These "connections" exist in the Party DoNs, NL2 and on Stars 5CD. I would like the ability to send them a message invite, and perhaps get them on to PokerStrategy, but can't.
♥  Leagues. At each limit, join a team -- complete with a pro coach. Team members sweat each other, get session reviews from coaches, have team badges, mascots whatever. Prizes for first, second, third etc over and above table winnings. PokerStrategy could do this too. Team-restricted forum sections.
♥  Regional events. PokerStars (or Party or whoever) shows up in town and holds a 2-day shindig with a bunch of pros, speakers, merchandise -- whatever. Charge admission. Hey, it works for Star Trek. PokerStrategy could do this to. Lots of new recreational players.

Just want to point out even on Stars, the site with the lowest rake charges for 2 hour HUNL50 100bb!

Thats avg like 50bb/hour and 25bb/hour per user. No wonder the fish never have money.

Cool, thanks for the input. :)I think PKR has some similar things like you've mentioned. At least AFAIK user befriending is possible. (someone correct me if I'm wrong)

Originally posted by VorpalF2F
I strongly dislike the current "hype" method of marketing they use now -- In fact I find it somewhat insulting, and I have told them so.

Can you elaborate on that?

Hi

There's really great ideas but it´s funamental that it reaches to the right hands - someone who can change things.

This is something I have written and thought about before and it seems that a good answer to this is global/international regulation that enforces standards that benefit both the site and the players, which is - as Korn has pointed out - possible and indeed the only way to continue.

This may also result in sites working together more, as competitors still but also to realise what is best for the poker economy as a whole and the growth of the overall industry.

Originally posted by VorpalF2F

Originally posted by NightFrostaSS
Btw, Vorpal, what kind of social element do you have in mind?

Some social aspects poker rooms might do:
♥  Permit user-user "friending". There are several players I have > 1000 hands on, which whom I've developed a but of a connection. We take shots at each other, but generally (I think) respect each other. These "connections" exist in the Party DoNs, NL2 and on Stars 5CD. I would like the ability to send them a message invite, and perhaps get them on to PokerStrategy, but can't.
♥  Leagues. At each limit, join a team -- complete with a pro coach. Team members sweat each other, get session reviews from coaches, have team badges, mascots whatever. Prizes for first, second, third etc over and above table winnings. PokerStrategy could do this too. Team-restricted forum sections.
♥  Regional events. PokerStars (or Party or whoever) shows up in town and holds a 2-day shindig with a bunch of pros, speakers, merchandise -- whatever. Charge admission. Hey, it works for Star Trek. PokerStrategy could do this to. Lots of new recreational players.

+1
Good suggestions Vorpal.

I myself first came to online poker when my brother recommended me to join the old "Pokerroom", before it was bought out by BWin.
In my opinion one of the best sites ever.

Reasons:
1. They ran it for the player , so customer support was superb.
2. New players were encouraged to play freetables at first to learn the game, before ever depositing. (every site now rushes people to deposit wth bonuses etc)
3. Social aspect of poker was not forgotten, so chatrooms were there , for table, lobby, or the site as a whole. Any player could have their own profile and blog.
4. Friending and finding other player's was easy.
5. Teams were formed with their own lobbies and blogs available.
6. Teams could play themselves (ie: homegames) play and leagues against other teams.
7. On a number of occaisions that I know of at team get togethers in Nottingham Uk Pokerroom rep's flew over just to have fun with the customers and give away freebies.

That is the way to run a poker site and why they had sooooooo many players before being taken over.

Bwin dismantled most of this. I think they only wanted the "customer" base.

Hello Everyone

Just thought I would bump this thread as I found it really interesting and was wondering if any real positive changes have been made by any pokersites since this article was first released?

http://www.pokerstrategy.com/news/world-of-poker/The-Future-Of-Poker-Dominik-Kofert-Blog_56247/

One of the things about Dominiks article that I found interesting was his view on finding a different way to get new players into poker, it does not seem to me like the pokersites have made much effort in this direction.

In the uk and other countries aound the world many people play the lottery every week and dont consider this to be gambling, i wonder if it would be possible for one of the big pokersites to offer entry into a big tournament for one dollar or some other small amount, with no min deposit required, just the entry fee. This may entice non poker players to try their luck and give poker a go.
( my example of different approach, does not mean it would work though its just a random idea )

I know from my own experience that the stories of people winning big money from such a small outlay helped to entice me into the game and I was bitten by the poker bug. In fact I still play a qualifier for the 200k on party every week...still hoping

I'm not saying this is the answer to pokers struggling player pools, but I'm thinking if a dumb fish like myself can come up with an idea(albiet probably un-workable ) surely the pokersites with all there experience can work something out!! it seems to me they are so busy squabbling over there slice of the current cake they are keeping their heads in the sand.

Anyway just want to say great article!!

Roo