If poker was a stock how would you rank it and why?



Rock Star
If poker was a stock I would rank it as a buy, strong recommend.

I don't rank it as a strong buy or better as I see a number of areas concerning fragmentation, weakness in pubic legitimacy, acceptance, misogyny, lacking a broad ethics or standard, lingering public perception as poker as gambling and not a game of skill.

It's because of poker's weakness in the market that I see a bunch of upside, that with a clear mission, and subsequent objectives, strategies, and goals at the macro and micro level, the poker could improve it's public value 100x to 1000x.

Poker is a penny stock with a value of .o35 a share but has potential to be 3.5 or even 35.

I postulate that weakness is a function an undefined strategic objective of the at-large and broad poker community.

I suggest we start with a code of ethics, a player's union, perhaps as a derivative of the PPA.


I copied and pasted what I just from this thread:


I'm re-posting in a new thread here to encourage the discussion of poker in the large community sense.


Yesterday, I LIKED the PPA's FB page, went to their website and browsed around the various categories. I learned about the history of the PPA. I watched a view video clips. I became more informed.

In my day job, I consult on strategic positioning and various marketing - promotional campaigns towards the desired market position.

If I was to be so bold to state what the poker community's mission might be in two words: "Grow Poker."

To that end, the advocacy group and subsequent efforts of the PPA gratefully serve to lobby for legalization.

Might I also state the legitimization will help with legalization process.

If a strategic object to grow poker is "legitimization" especially in the eye of the public, how and what does that imply? How would it be measured etc? What goals distill from that?

These are big questions.

It seems clear that the PPA has been instrumental in efforts to define poker as a game of skill and not a game of chance - ie not gambling. Thank you for your past, present and future efforts.

My perception is that the poker community is very much in its infancy when it comes to communicating legitimacy to the general public.

Perception matters. With television broadcast of wsop and WPT, and others over the years, the public has a glimpse into the game.

Certainly, most if not all in this forum have played online or live.

I have not been able to determine if a broad and encompassing standard exists of play, conduct, standards, etc. Essentially a code of ethics. Such a code arguably is implied but has not been elevated as high as I think it should be.

Arguably, the game would benefit from a guiding constitution to govern how we play, conduct ourselves, one's appearance, etc in and out of the game.

Such a document would help guide how we promote the game as owners, patrons in and of the poker community.

Relating to the trees for a moment, I am aware that some casinos are prohibiting hoodies. The understood reason is for security reasons. While some will argue that hoodies and such reduce physical tells, the down-side is that the general public becomes a little nervous.

One can argue that if the public is a bit nervous, the public would want to protect itself and shy away.

With that in mind, poker as a community, is all about personalities. One's costume affects table image, and obviously can be wildly entertaining.

We think of poker as an adult game, and of course it is. That said, most poker players have not been born yet.

Some have concern of the sportification of poker. The emergence of broadcast poker, societal emphasis on winning. Ultimately the market will decide.

The interesting thing with poker is has growth potential in many areas, demographics, in social acceptance.

If poker was a stock, I would rank it as a buy or recommend.