Skip to forum
Notifications
Clear all

[Closed] The Rake

124 Posts
48 Users
0 Reactions
25.6 K Views
MichaelGotAA
Joined: 23.03.2010

Yes I do believe you pay less rake in micro cash games than micro sit & go's. Rake is different on different sites/networks though. So its worth looking into.

I only recently realised how much rake we actually pay. As Hahaownedlolz said you don't think the rake is much until you start using tracking software. Then you realise your being screwed quite badly.

One thing I have noticed is that over the same number of hands, I have paid just over 40% more rake at Ipoker than I have at Party poker playing 1c/2c Full ring. So there are deffo differences in rake at different sites/networks.


mbml
Joined: 27.11.2008

can anyone estimate how much it costs to set up a new site? I'll try to make a few hundred k in the next few years, then come up with it lol


fuzzyfish
Joined: 12.01.2010

Originally posted by mbml
can anyone estimate how much it costs to set up a new site? I'll try to make a few hundred k in the next few years, then come up with it lol

In addition to set up costs you also need traffic, which very hard (if not impossible) to obtain, since traffic creates traffic. These two points - high set up cost and lack of traffic form a barrier that keeps cheaper providers off the market and allows the major providers milk their customers to the max.

I'd like to quote a very informative post from 2p2 forums (author momo_the_kid) that pretty much says it all:

"An oligopoly is a market form in which a market or industry is dominated by a small number of sellers (oligopolists). The word is derived, by analogy with "monopoly", from the Greek ὀλίγοι (oligoi) "few" + πωλειν (polein) "to sell". Because there are few sellers, each oligopolist is likely to be aware of the actions of the others. The decisions of one firm influence, and are influenced by, the decisions of other firms. Strategic planning by oligopolists needs to take into account the likely responses of the other market participants.

Profit maximization conditions: An oligopoly maximizes profits by producing where marginal revenue equals marginal costs.[1]

Ability to set price: Oligopolies are price setters rather than price takers.[1]

Entry and exit: Barriers to entry are high.[2] The most important barriers are economies of scale, patents, access to expensive and complex technology, and strategic actions by incumbent firms designed to discourage or destroy nascent firms.[3]

Number of firms: "Few" – a "handful" of sellers.[2] There are so few firms that the actions of one firm can influence the actions of the other firms.[4]

Long run profits: Oligopolies can retain long run abnormal profits. High barriers of entry prevent sideline firms from entering market to capture excess profits."


fuzzyfish
Joined: 12.01.2010

Originally posted by MichaelGotAA
Yes I do believe you pay less rake in micro cash games than micro sit & go's. Rake is different on different sites/networks though. So its worth looking into.

A cash game players' rake cost is usually around 10bb/100. That means, you need to beat your opponents by 10bb/100 to break even. If you make 5bb/100 net profit that means you beat your opponents by 15bb/100. Thus you get to keep 33,(3)% of the money won and you pay 66,(6)% as a rake. If you make 10bb/100, you beat your opponents by 20bb/100 and keep 50% and so on.

I don't know the numbers for sng-s, maybe some of the sng grinders can look them up from the pokertracker/HEM, should be fairly easy.


Paying montly fee or paying % on withdraw is a very good idea and would be a step in the right direction. Main idea keep the money in the games as long as possible and make the winning players pay for being winners, not make all pay for sucking at the game or for being mega good.


The point of lowering the rake is not to increase our winrates and attract new customers but to stop killing the current ones so rapidly. Right now the levels of rake currently being paid are clearly unsustainable. As edges have decreased and rake has increased, the games are clearly starting to die. If no change is made there simply will be no more online poker as we know it in a couple of years. This isn't good for the sites and it certainly isn't good for the players. A somewhat morbid analogy would be cigarettes. Imagine if a company could sell a super cigarette which would be ever more addictive and sell for even more but instead of killing off your average customer in 20 years, it killed them off in 2 years. You would certainly make way more in the short term, but after you've killed off all your customers its game over.


Reanimater
Joined: 12.11.2008

Originally posted by BammP
I was inspired by this thread and just created this petition http://www.petitiononline.com/AntiRake/petition.html

5 signatures only. that's pathetic :/


fusionpk
Joined: 21.01.2010

I didn't read the whole thread because frankly it was a bit long.

However point from page2, aimed @Atoks:
Ribbo is right, your thought process is "regs will play 100k hands a month and rake shit loads", "a fish will play 5k a month and rake fuck all", actually the reg isn't paying any rake, the fish is, the only rake the reg pays is from what the fish loses, I guess its a dodgy concept to get your head around but when you think abt it the reg rly isn't paying any rake at all (providing he is a winning plr). A reg didn't rake them 100k hands, the many fish he busts did, and the reg takes the left overs.


I'm sure every single player on these sites wants a lower rake. Including me. But I don't really see the big deal of why so many people are complaining about the big rakes.

I'm used to playing cash games at the casino where the rakes are 10% (max $5), plus you pretty much always have to tip at least a dollar for every pot you win when you play $1-$2 (in $3-$6 You usually have to give $5), plus you spend gas going to and from the casino.

Compare that to only 5% rake online, you don't have to tip the dealer, and you can play in your underwear in your own house.

I'll pick online over live play any day. Again I'd love it if the rakes where lower or if they had better rakebacks, I just don't see what the big deal is as far as all the complaining. Try getting a rakeback from your local poker room and see what they say lol.


Kruppe
Joined: 20.02.2008

Originally posted by NightFrostaSS
There are (or at least was) rooms that would give up to 100% rakeback an no one plays there so don't think that someone who'd make a 50$ monthly fee room would suddenly make millions, also he'd have to invest millions firstly. And until then no major room will randomly decide to make such rake options available. So nice dream, but not gonna happen.

those 100% rakeback means zero rake, which is very different to $50 per player per month...

and why do you think it one would have to invest millions? let's say you start off with little advertisement, just word of mouth mainly, what would cost millions?


fusionpk
Joined: 21.01.2010

Originally posted by rarama
I'm sure every single player on these sites wants a lower rake. Including me. But I don't really see the big deal of why so many people are complaining about the big rakes.

I'm used to playing cash games at the casino where the rakes are 10% (max $5), plus you pretty much always have to tip at least a dollar for every pot you win when you play $1-$2 (in $3-$6 You usually have to give $5), plus you spend gas going to and from the casino.

Compare that to only 5% rake online, you don't have to tip the dealer, and you can play in your underwear in your own house.

I'll pick online over live play any day. Again I'd love it if the rakes where lower or if they had better rakebacks, I just don't see what the big deal is as far as all the complaining. Try getting a rakeback from your local poker room and see what they say lol.

You have much much much bigger edge in them games anyway. Online poker @ the higher stakes there is so little edge, so with rake there is even smaller edge. If rake was even a fraction smaller they would make alot more money.


steven5656
Joined: 11.03.2010

My last 40k hands at NL 10 party poker have been break even but i have paid $2000 in rake. For someone with a $300 bankroll that is unreal. Is the rake any smaller at stars or full tilt?


Originally posted by steven5656
My last 40k hands at NL 10 party poker have been break even but i have paid $2000 in rake. For someone with a $300 bankroll that is unreal. Is the rake any smaller at stars or full tilt?

I have paid 1250 on 37k jhands on NL50 ... Sikc sick sick


steven5656
Joined: 11.03.2010

I think i got it wrong actually and that was the rake everyone had paid. Think my rake was about $400.


Only read OP but i have to say that rake is clearly obscenely high and all poker players really need to put pressure onto the big sites to reduce it to a fraction of what it is now. They charge it because we pay it, the overheads cannot possibly justify it. So how can we get rake reduced? I can only think of two ways: 1) move sites to lower raked sites 2) moan. a lot.

I see the main barriers to moving is not trusting smaller sites, not finding enough games/fish there and not liking the software. Well, once I get up to a decent level of bankroll I will still move if I research a site and decide these factors are not going to be a problem. Also, can't we play ftp and stars against each other? Everyone should move to whichever has the lowest rake at the time for the limits. Isnt what they are doing basically price fixing? Cmon, we need to instigate a price war and keep it going so that we get the same good value as from a supermarket.

As for moaning, its going to be less effective, but I see a couple of threads about it in all the poker forums and thats as far as protesting goes. Why not actively campaign against it, everyone email their sites, put lower rake demands in signatures and pm the forum reps type thing. Just make the dissatisfaction felt and again emphasise the willingness to take custom to whoever can offer the best value.

Just some ideas I had.


Originally posted by silent21
The point of lowering the rake is not to increase our winrates and attract new customers but to stop killing the current ones so rapidly. Right now the levels of rake currently being paid are clearly unsustainable. As edges have decreased and rake has increased, the games are clearly starting to die. If no change is made there simply will be no more online poker as we know it in a couple of years. This isn't good for the sites and it certainly isn't good for the players. A somewhat morbid analogy would be cigarettes. Imagine if a company could sell a super cigarette which would be ever more addictive and sell for even more but instead of killing off your average customer in 20 years, it killed them off in 2 years. You would certainly make way more in the short term, but after you've killed off all your customers its game over.

It's time they tried to pry open some new markets like India and China, More than a third of the world's population live in those two countries. If we can get each of them to deposit $1, that's 3 birrion dorra!


ABShortland
Joined: 21.11.2008

Originally posted by elhh82
It's time they tried to pry open some new markets like India and China, More than a third of the world's population live in those two countries. If we can get each of them to deposit $1, that's 3 birrion dorra!

you fucking hero!


fuzzyfish
Joined: 12.01.2010

It's time they tried to pry open some new markets like India and China, More than a third of the world's population live in those two countries. If we can get each of them to deposit $1, that's 3 birrion dorra!

Yeah, all those Chinese dumbasses that have an IQ of 80 and make a 50 000$ a year working in a warehouse, spewing money after returning drunk from a football game. Wait, that wasn't China, never mind.


Edukator99
Joined: 18.07.2010

Anti rake petition. I signed it....with 6 others! Whoo hoo!
http://www.petitiononline.com/AntiRake/petition.html

I played about 3500 hands on Everest and paid 288.00 in rake and made 12.00. Come on that's crazy.

As for the notion that fish are the only ones paying this that's incorrect. The money moves back and forth between players all the time. And when it moves, the poker room takes a huge slice of it.


Edukator99
Joined: 18.07.2010

Originally posted by yossarian12
can't we play ftp and stars against each other? Everyone should move to whichever has the lowest rake at the time for the limits. Isnt what they are doing basically price fixing? Cmon, we need to instigate a price war and keep it going so that we get the same good value as from a supermarket.

Now THAT'S an idea. Surely we can create a website that tracks the rake and then people can switch accordingly? This is the information age people!