Originally posted by blackops888
I hope it means the number of new players that a site can absorb... so we don't have always the same guys playing. If I'm wrong, I'd appreciate if you explained me.
Player liquidity is about acquiring players, but it also tries to measure the cost of acquisition. Sometimes it will be closer to a conversion ratio, that is how many of your players are logging on and playing for real money, and other times it will be a market-share ratio, how much of the total market you are accounting for.
Internally there are tons of uses for this, but you probably don't care about that one bit.
If I were a site owner and you were a player and you wanted to discuss my site's player liquidity then I personally believe we both understand that you care mostly about my sites ability to attract and keep net depositors. So you want me to acquire new players at the lowest cost possible, but still run enough incentives for them to continue playing. (It's also worth noting that this is almost always what it means in press releases.)
The reality of the business right now is that the PokerScout ranking is an excellent proxy for overall player liquidity especially when comparing the privately owned sites. (They don't release quarterly statements for us to ponder.)
I doubt that me checking right now is useful information for you, so I suggest you check during peak hours, but for $10 PLO I currently show in order: Stars, Tilt, Everest, Merge, and then iPoker. OnGame is currently not working due to their new software upgrade, but they would normally fall between Everest and Merge. Also, Stars has more PLO players than everyone else combined.