PokerStars Changes to Rake, Spin & Go Prizes, and Battle of the Planets

[BluffMeAllIn]

I believe I used hookers to discuss my point? lol

programmers

thats a given, you use and abuse hookers for all discussions and aspects of your daily life do you not

as for programmers probably enough around cc to help out with that lol

on other notes do you always ignore pm's?

 

[LD1977]

Ignoring PMS is a survival skill.

 

[PokerFunKid]

Isn't pokerstars still lower than any other poker site?

I mean, don't get me wrong a rake increase is never great but I feel most of the people kicking off about it are just the break-even slightly winning players which, stars really doesn't care about.

I've seen (profitable) proffesional poker players who said they won't play the games with higher rake anymore. I think these people also care. To be honnest i also say the rake is bad blah blah no one likes it obviously but i don't really care because i don't feel it. I'm also not a proffesional. I think the proffesionals care more about it.

 

[LD1977]

Rakeback pros will hurt the most and this will knock some of them out of circulation. They are grinding heavy volume and are barely winning only due to rakeback... but that is only a portion of the rake they pay so in total they will lose a big part of their winnings (much more rake for slightly more rakeback = bad).

 

[A2345Razz]

The new owner apparently hasn't heard of "If it's not broken don't fix it"

I wonder what Daniel Negreanu thinks of the new management decisions lol - I'm sure these changes don't conflict with him at all but he prides Stars on being the best and looking out for the players... Stars is looking out for Stars atm

Ok, here is the crux of the problem, and actually the root of many problems with the US economy (won't go down that rabbit hole).

Amaya is not a company that an invidual or family or even a group of like-minded individuals own; it is a PUBLICLY traded corporation.

These types of corporations HAVE TO maximized profitability in the short term to a major degree to ALWAYS build margins and baseline growth (revenue). They can't really (the execs) sit back and say to themselve, "hey, I can make a good bit more here, but for the best of the poker economy in the long run, or my employees, or just because I want my customers to enjoy my product.....i'll refrain from exploit a de facto monopoly..."

THAT ISN'T HOW A PUBLICLY TRADED CORPORATION OPERATES....IT'S A CANCER THAT WANTS SHORT TERM PROFITABILITY AND GROWTH, AND DOESN'T REALLY CARE ABOUT MUCH ELSE INCLUDING THE LONG TERM VIABILITY OF AN ECONOMIC SECTOR/ETHICS OR SUSTAINABILITY OF A BUSINESS MODEL.

When the Scheinbergs owned the company they weren't beholden to shareholders and the whims of the equity market. They could deliver great earnings year after year; they could run their site in an ethical way that might have delivered 85% of profits but been healthy for the poker environment at large/their long term health. They could pass up on expansion that didn't make sense. They didn't have a huge debt built up from buying Pstars like Amaya does.....etc. etc.

Anyone who wasn't hugely scared after Amaya bought Pstars is either a moron or just naive....it was bound to be detrimental to poker, and this is JUST THE BEGINNING.

 

[Daniel72]

Spin & Go will kill all games..
RIP PokerStars..

Not the 50 cent games and lower, because spin & go starts with 1 Dollar

 

[LD1977]

--- They didn't have a huge debt built up from buying Pokerstars like Amaya does.....---

Actually that don't have a huge debt either, from figures I have seen this was a pretty cheap acquisition.

 

[curtinsea]

Actually that don't have a huge debt either, from figures I have seen this was a pretty cheap acquisition.

the figures you've seen must be incorrect. They paid a lot ($4.9B), they paid more than its market value, and they bought it with significant debt.

It breaks down like this:

• $1.642 billion of equity in the form of $1bn in convertible preferred shares and $642mm of common equity.
• $2.9bn of committed debt, including $2.1bn in senior secured credit facilities and $800mm in a second lien term loan.
• Remainder is cash and cash equivalents.

 

[curtinsea]

Lol Dave and I briefly discussed this in a CC game about PokerStars not having any competition and will be able to do this type of stuff when they decreased the benefits of Super Nova players, as it surely will have to effect the rest of the ladder..

I believe I used hookers to discuss my point? lol

Pokerstars is making a mistake IMO, It's only a matter of time till some one new comes along everyone wants the top spot in their field and even if it's 5 years down the road people will remember... Stars screwed their loyal players and now some one bigger is here...

In fact I'm off to create a new poker site... Just need osme lawyers, investors, programmers, Security team, a support team, a promotions team, and more... Let you guys know how it goesss....

I don't necessarily disagree with you.

This is the bill come due for everyone being diehard pokerstars fanboys, who think they can do no wrong, and yearn for their return in any way, shape, or form. It's good to see the outrage, IMO.

Poker media still is doing its best to say this is no big deal, which drives me a bit crazy.

But this really is what they can do, because they have unwavering loyalty from the masses. Those who believed their beloved Pokerstars could do no wrong are getting what they have coming to them.

 

[A2345Razz]

Actually that don't have a huge debt either, from figures I have seen this was a pretty cheap acquisition.

Pokerstars was/is hugely profitable, and Amaya simply didn't have that much cash on hand/value for a stock trade....ergo, what you're saying is nonsensical.

For Apple maybe it wouldn't be considered expensive as a multiple of earnings or something. A lot of that would simply be a function of how much people believed earnings could be multiplied. Personally, I think it was inevitable with or without all the debt that Pokerstars would try to squeeze the customer because baseline growth is going to be hard to come by. There are new booms to be had unless something really changes with China or American legalization happens (not happening anytime soon), and the legal environment is such is such Russia and many other countries may be opting out soon. Also france and a lot of the segregated national sites are flagging.

The problem is the fact that Pokerstars isn't owned by a family anymore; it is owned by another amoeba like publicly traded corporation whose sole interest is hitting "numbers" every quarter and pumping stock prices for a few yrs so execs/stock owners can get out with dough aplenty and the long/medium term issues can be somebody else's problems.

 

[A2345Razz]

the figures you've seen must be incorrect. They paid a lot ($4.9B), they paid more than its market value, and they bought it with significant debt.

It breaks down like this:

• $1.642 billion of equity in the form of $1bn in convertible preferred shares and $642mm of common equity.
• $2.9bn of committed debt, including $2.1bn in senior secured credit facilities and $800mm in a second lien term loan.
• Remainder is cash and cash equivalents.

It was so cheap they couldn't even pay 10 percent in cash and cash equivalents.

Again, this is secondary anyway.....just adds fuel to the Amaya fire to rape and pillage their way to good earnings for a few quarters...

 

[PokerFunKid]

Its the problem of having one dominant pokersite out there. If I was the owner of Stars I would be doing the exact same thing. Regardless of all the outcry, people will still play there, mainly because no other site compares. Make hay !

Sucks for the players though. Combine this with the promise of a much reduced VIP system in 2016, its not looking good for anyone thats playing for a living.

Exactly ^

 

[A2345Razz]

I've seen (profitable) proffesional poker players who said they won't play the games with higher rake anymore. I think these people also care. To be honnest i also say the rake is bad blah blah no one likes it obviously but i don't really care because i don't feel it. I'm also not a proffesional. I think the proffesionals care more about it.

This attitude is what scares me!!

It mostly definitely affects all of us.....even small players.

They are raising the rake, and just because RIGHT NOW it only affects some player areas, don't for a second think the changes will stop here.

They've already started cancelling all/most of the GTD sattys that are going to have an overlay....those are huge with the non-professional crowd.

They are heavily penalizing HU play which is how tables get started; the less tables available the more wait time/less liquidity eventually.

Less regs mean smaller/lower gtds on MTTs. Also, you didn't need to be a pro to benefit from BOP!!! There were many winners in the two smallest divisions that hardly could be described as pros.

 

[babydrago9]

Spin & go's are horrible, just when it seemed that there was a shot at showing poker is a skill game, this is released and turns it into gambling. The rake is now increased and so less people will be playing real poker. This has to be one of the worst changes to online poker. The top professionals aren't going to be playing HU anymore which has been ranted about by many people on social media, damn I hope online poker takes an upswing pretty quick

 

[guutox]

Idk why people play spin&go, too difficult win good prize....

 

[calheiros_33]

pokerstars is trying to be more profitable by removing the maximum profit on their types of games such as the spin. Play on pokerstars but recreationally, not put more in there even one US dollars. perdir on average $ 5,000 there. I do not believe this site.

 

[calheiros_33]

pokerstars i see

pokerstars is trying to be more profitable by removing the maximum profit on their types of games such as the spin. Play on pokerstars but recreationally, not put more in there even one US dollars. perdir on average $ 5,000 there. I do not believe this site.

 

[credsfan03]

Pokerstars new ownership is not looking too good so far.

 

[JonnnyEPT]

In my opinion, competition spin-and-go should try your luck, but this is not poker - it's a lottery ...

 

[Gorak]

We WERE Poker…

 

[S3mper]

I've been waiting forever for Stars to come to the US... By the time it gets here it will suck

 

[IvanShovski]

If you can't beat 'em, join 'em. Time to buy shares in Amaya?

 

[LD1977]

curtinsea, A2345Razz

Amaya paid 4.9 billion for an established business (almost monopolist) with yearly 1.1 billion in revenues and 420 million in profits (2013.) and potential for further growth if US market reopens or world economy grows. Even without the last part (potential) this is pretty cheap any way you want to look at it.

Obviously they do with the business what they want but just continuing with it "as is" is a sure way to repay the investment comfortably.

I can only assume they think that buying and milking a cash cow is a better idea, competition is inert and customers have little alternative so they can really make a killing short term. It is not rocket science.

 

[S3mper]

If you can't beat 'em, join 'em. Time to buy shares in Amaya?

not necessarily, it depends... Since stock prices don't really go up or down based on if the companies making more money or not. It goes up or down based on supply and demand of the stock which is driven on public conception.

So it really depends on the way the public thinks about it..

Are they thinking like you just mentioned? "Their revenue must be going up on all this price cutting" or are they thinking "This new management is going to run this company into the ground"

 

[curtinsea]

curtinsea, A2345Razz

Amaya paid 4.9 billion for an established business (almost monopolist) with yearly 1.1 billion in revenues and 420 million in profits (2013.) and potential for further growth if US market reopens or world economy grows. Even without the last part (potential) this is pretty cheap any way you want to look at it.

Obviously they do with the business what they want but just continuing with it "as is" is a sure way to repay the investment comfortably.

I can only assume they think that buying and milking a cash cow is a better idea, competition is inert and customers have little alternative so they can really make a killing short term. It is not rocket science.

The only thing we disagree about is your characterization of the deal as being cheap. It is acknowledged they paid more than market value.

Pokerstars turns a profit margin of 40%, so any of this slimming down, belt tightening, whatever you want to call it, is just gouging players because they can.

It is the result of too much loyalty to the brand, and those defending Pokerstars' actions are contributing to the inevitable further loss of player rewards.