Micro Rakes????

    • Deadbillis
      Joined: 24.08.2011 Posts: 308
      Why do some sites charge more% rake on micros than Low+???????

      With the majority of players having micro/low bankrolls would it not make sense for sites which are trying to increase their membership to charge an even rake across the board to encourage more play?

      My current site struggles to keep a decent flow of players at micro level and I think this is the main problem. If they charged the same rake for micros as they do for other levels I am certain their numbers would increase and less players would leave their site.

      Since April I have played nearly 500 micro sng or mtts and so double rake has cost me $50!!! At micro level this would have made a difference to my overall winnings and I would not be leaving them.

      Of course there is an exception to the rule... One site charges 50% for micro sngs and never seems to slow down on the amount of players willing to play here!

      I personally think 15% should be the max rake a decent site should be looking to take at micro level.
      This would give them a good return, encourage new players to join and regs to stay.
      I think it would also increase the amount of multi tablers which again would mean more rake for them.

      Their main argument seems to be that it costs them more to account for high levels of micro games but this seems like an excuse to me.

      Yes if there are more games played then there would be more acounting to be done but as all the calculations are done by computer I cannot see how this is costing them more than around 1% rake increase.

      I would be interested to know what other micro players think.

      How much rake are you willing to spend?
      Have you looked at how the rake has effected your br?
      Would you move site if a new site offered 10% rake at micro level?
  • 3 replies
    • VorpalF2F
      Super Moderator
      Super Moderator
      Joined: 02.09.2010 Posts: 10,338
      Originally posted by DeadbillisOf course there is an exception to the rule... One site charges 50% for micro sngs and never seems to slow down on the amount of players willing to play here!
      In that case, they would be foolish to charge less.

      If you take a look at this table:
      PartyPoker & WPT Poker: Rake Analysis
      There are two things that you notice right off.

      Hyper Turbos have less rake.
      10-50 dollar standard SnGs have the same percentage.

      A poker site has fixed costs -- in other words, the cost of providing the service even it nobody plays.

      Then there are the costs associated with providing the services.

      You can see that it costs you $1.00 to play a 11$ SnG, but only $0.15 to play a 1.00 SnG. and only $.10 for the $1.00 Hyper.

      The Hypers are cheaper because the room gets more $/hr that way.

      My guess is that rooms put their micro rakes as low as they can to be competitive, but they must set them high enough to survive.

      Also just a guess, but I'm also guessing that the $11 -- $55 level (or mid-stakes cash games) are what really pay the bills.

      Besides rake, there are lots of other factors that determine whether or not players play at a site.

      These include such things as:
      :diamond: Quality of the software
      Level of competition
      Ease & security of deposits & withdrawals

      Thanks for bringing this up,
      I'd love to know more about the real economics of online poker

    • Deadbillis
      Joined: 24.08.2011 Posts: 308
      Thanks for the input.

      I agree that the low-mid levels are where these sites make a large % of their income.

      I've had a think about the micros and I guess there are a lot more 'Man Hours' involved as each game will need to be manually documented 'somewhere' so the site is protected. With the thousands of games played at this level this will soon add up to a large amount so the extra rake at micro level is justified.

      Also, a large number of micro players are 'one time wonders'. They register for a site, load the minimum $ possible (which can be as little as $5) and play that br and then never come back. These players prob. cost the site due to the administration costs of setting up a new player account and so the site needs to allow for this cashflow loss by charging a higher rake.

      It's an interesting subject. Maybe one of the sites would be interested in producing a video for PokerStrategy demonstrating how they decide on their charges? They could call it "Where's My Rake Gone?"

      I think it would be good P.R. for the first site brave enough to be so open!
    • Quadzzzzzzz
      Joined: 24.10.2011 Posts: 151
      This is probably where 80% of it goes ;)