What attracts players to poker sites besides the love of poker,winning etc etc, rakeback is a important part of sites and im sure if sky was gonna do this{ the removal of rb} im sure they would of put something up by now,as they havn't then im sure it aint gonna happen,and if i remember right on your thread paul u said something about joining a site for reasons of what they offered,if they never offered nothing would u have joined.
What attracts players to poker sites besides the love of poker,winning etc etc, rakeback is a important part of sites and im sure if sky was gonna do this{ the removal of rb} im sure they would of put something up by now,as they havn't then im sure it aint gonna happen,and if i remember right on your thread paul u said something about joining a site for reasons of what they offered,if they never offered nothing would u have joined. Posted by CHILLIE
What Lambert was suggesting equated to the same reward to the player, actually it would of meant that lower stake players would of been better off, but there was some confusion and none of that matters anymore.
If sky really wants to attract more players they should make a lot more satellites into target tornies. What attracts recreational players to Pokerstars? Mostly the Sunday Million and the change to win 200k for a few dollars.
More satellites = bigger guarantees = more traffic.
And please stop raking satellites Sky, double tax on tornies is straight up BS!
Satellites should be running every second of every day with much smaller buyins.
Everything I have read the tax is after rakeback and it also includes other gambling So if I pay say 1000 in rake and get 100 in rakeback then win 600 on blackjack. They only pay 15% on £300. Can Sky clarify this? Posted by ajs4385
Hi Aiden,
I don't imagine they will say anything yet awhile, some of the legislative processes are currently under Legal appeal, but the whole thing has been on the table for a very long time, & all Online Gaming Sites, including SB&G, will have formulated their general policies & approach to it some time ago.
We have already seen 'Stars UK defer their changes from Oct 1st to November 1st, so announcing anything too early is probably not wise.
Poker, here & elsewhere, will be just fine, life will go on as usual, & Online Poker will be a better place generally for Licencing & improved regulation.
How are your ferrets? Still got them? Can't imagine too many folk outside Yorkshire keep ferrets as pets......proper Yorkshire thing, that.
Down to two ferrets, I lost a couple to cancer over past couple of years. They are very susceptible to it Im afraid. Apparently around 70% get cancer.
I would recommend any poker player get some ferrets and a good lurcher. When I am in middle of a downswing and have no money for food, I just go in woods and we eat like kings. I have largest lurcher they do, amazing athlete she holds her own play fighting against my Doberman and goes from 0-40 in 1 second.
If sky really wants to attract more players they should make a lot more satellites into target tornies. What attracts recreational players to Pokerstars? Mostly the Sunday Million and the change to win 200k for a few dollars. More satellites = bigger guarantees = more traffic. And please stop raking satellites Sky, double tax on tornies is straight up BS! Satellites should be running every second of every day with much smaller buyins. Posted by dub1
No point putting more satellites up if they don't attract the numbers. I'm sure sky want to increase the GTD's as much as you and I but you'll never be able to win 200k for a few dollars on sky in the near future - there just isn't anywhere near as much traffic to do that.
As for them stop raking satellites - that won't happen unless they make it so you can't play the satellites for cash. Right now you can register a tourney, play the satellite for that tourney and then take the cash. So sky want to charge rake on those players that do that since otherwise it makes it even more lucrative to play satellites for the cash. And you'll end up seeing even more people play the satellites for the cash. What this means is that those playing the satellites for what they're intended for will stand even less of a chance than they do now to qualify - and as such, sky won't have them increased numbers in the main event.
So yeah, if they instead create a satellite where you can't take the cash regardless if you're in the tournament already or not - then yes, they shouldn't charge rake on those satellites. But right now that's not the case.
In Response to Re: New UK Gaming Regulations - Idea for Sky : What Lambert was suggesting equated to the same reward to the player, actually it would of meant that lower stake players would of been better off, but there was some confusion and none of that matters anymore. If sky really wants to attract more players they should make a lot more satellites into target tornies. What attracts recreational players to Pokerstars? Mostly the Sunday Million and the change to win 200k for a few dollars. More satellites = bigger guarantees = more traffic. And please stop raking satellites Sky, double tax on tornies is straight up BS! Satellites should be running every second of every day with much smaller buyins. Posted by dub1
I am not aware of a site that doesn't charge rake on sats.
Sky isn't and shouldn't be trying to compete against stars.
I've just been discussing this with a few mates on FB and it seems to be a complete no-brainer to do it, but I'm sure there are lots of things to think about that we've overlooked so maybe it's not so cut and dry. The new ruling means Sky will have to pay 15% tax on all gross rake ( BEFORE rakeback). Sky haven't discussed their future plans regarding this afaik but you would assume they would like to recoup at least some of this 'loss'... whether it be by reducing the budget for promotions, increasing rake or, the most likely candidate imo, reducing Sky Rewards... So.... Why don't Sky completely do away with RB, and lower the rake by say 20-30% ? It would mean that players are no worse off than the current system but Sky would be paying 15% tax on a figure which is now 20-30% smaller than it was. They've lost nothing because what they reduce the rake by is recouped by not paying out any RB at all. To use me as an example... (under the 20% idea) Say under the current system, I play cash all month, and pay £2000 in rake. At 6 points per £1 that puts me at 12,000 points so 20% RB, so I'd get £400. Sky would pay 15% of £2000 which = £300 Now under the proposed system, I play cash all month, exact same volume but the rake is 20% lower and as a result I only pay Sky £1600 in rake. I don't get any RB at all, but my overall end result is identical. The only difference is Sky pay 15% tax on £1600 instead which = £240 Multiply that by the number of players on the site and it's a large saving when no-one loses out. The reason I mentioned 20 or 30% is because obviously it does make a difference to people who currently earn 20,000+ points if it's only reduced by 20%. Maybe Sky could go with the 30% idea so while they are taking a hit on the players that earn <30,000 points, that's probably not as big a hit as if they had to pay 15% tax on a much larger amount of total rake. It's not necessarily a potential USP for the site, but it can't be seen as negative really and it would certainly be another unique attribute of the site. Sure, a rec is never going to sign up to a site because their rake is lower (most don't even think about rake), but equally are they really gonna sign up because they can earn <£5 per month in RB, I don't think so. So it shouldn't have a detrimental affect on new player sign ups. Games should get better Certain games which were previously unbeatable due to rake may now become beatable. Winrates should go up all round. Any flaws/thoughts? Posted by Lambert180
How do you get this result? At 6 points per £1 that puts me at 12,000 points so 20% RB, so I'd get £400.
I reach 15k + points a month and 12k points at 20% is surely £240? Or am I working it out wrong?
In Response to New UK Gaming Regulations - Idea for Sky : How do you get this result? At 6 points per £1 that puts me at 12,000 points so 20% RB, so I'd get £400. I reach 15k + points a month and 12k points at 20% is surely £240? Or am I working it out wrong? Posted by JimiAls1
Depends on how you make your points....
12k points made solely on cash... 12,000 if you get 6 points per £1 = you paid £2000 rake. If you're between 10k and 19,999 points you get 20% RB... 20% of £2000 = £400
However...
12k points made solely on MTTs/SnG.... 12,000 when you get 10 points per £1 = you paid £1200 rake. Again 12k points = 20% RB and 20% of £1200 = £240.
Some will say 'ohhh cash players get more RB', but it's not, when you get over 10k points then it's a flat %, if cash players get more £££ back then that's cos they've paid more rake in the first place.
Out of interest, if the new regulations are aiming to reduce sites encouraging people to gamble too much (ie banning auto top-up), does that also mean that the current Punta Cana promo will be the last time Sky will be able to invoke a rake race... given that the whole premise is to encourage people to significantly increase how much they gamble (or any other volume-based promo that has been considered previously or in the future)?
Out of interest, if the new regulations are aiming to reduce sites encouraging people to gamble too much (ie banning auto top-up), does that also mean that the current Punta Cana promo will be the last time Sky will be able to invoke a rake race... given that the whole premise is to encourage people to significantly increase how much they gamble (or any other volume-based promo that has been considered previously or in the future)? Posted by shakinaces
Out of interest, if the new regulations are aiming to reduce sites encouraging people to gamble too much (ie banning auto top-up), does that also mean that the current Punta Cana promo will be the last time Sky will be able to invoke a rake race... given that the whole premise is to encourage people to significantly increase how much they gamble (or any other volume-based promo that has been considered previously or in the future)? Posted by shakinaces
The latest promo appears to be a hands race not a rake race!
Out of interest, if the new regulations are aiming to reduce sites encouraging people to gamble too much (ie banning auto top-up), does that also mean that the current Punta Cana promo will be the last time Sky will be able to invoke a rake race... given that the whole premise is to encourage people to significantly increase how much they gamble (or any other volume-based promo that has been considered previously or in the future)? Posted by shakinaces
Hi shakin,
I don't think we can assume that, no.
The various legislations currently being enacted are extremely complex, & involve a mix of directives, & advice. In many cases, it is open to interpretation by the sites as to how they implement certain things. "Responsibly Gaming" is at the heart of much of it, & Sky Poker will presumably continue to encourage that, & comply in every way possible with the legislation, in both practice & spirit.
Comments
I don't imagine they will say anything yet awhile, some of the legislative processes are currently under Legal appeal, but the whole thing has been on the table for a very long time, & all Online Gaming Sites, including SB&G, will have formulated their general policies & approach to it some time ago.
We have already seen 'Stars UK defer their changes from Oct 1st to November 1st, so announcing anything too early is probably not wise.
Poker, here & elsewhere, will be just fine, life will go on as usual, & Online Poker will be a better place generally for Licencing & improved regulation.
How are your ferrets? Still got them? Can't imagine too many folk outside Yorkshire keep ferrets as pets......proper Yorkshire thing, that.
I just read today they are delaying things.
Down to two ferrets, I lost a couple to cancer over past couple of years. They are very susceptible to it Im afraid. Apparently around 70% get cancer.
I would recommend any poker player get some ferrets and a good lurcher. When I am in middle of a downswing and have no money for food, I just go in woods and we eat like kings. I have largest lurcher they do, amazing athlete she holds her own play fighting against my Doberman and goes from 0-40 in 1 second.
So yeah, if they instead create a satellite where you can't take the cash regardless if you're in the tournament already or not - then yes, they shouldn't charge rake on those satellites. But right now that's not the case.
Sky isn't and shouldn't be trying to compete against stars.
12k points made solely on cash... 12,000 if you get 6 points per £1 = you paid £2000 rake. If you're between 10k and 19,999 points you get 20% RB... 20% of £2000 = £400
However...
12k points made solely on MTTs/SnG.... 12,000 when you get 10 points per £1 = you paid £1200 rake. Again 12k points = 20% RB and 20% of £1200 = £240.
Some will say 'ohhh cash players get more RB', but it's not, when you get over 10k points then it's a flat %, if cash players get more £££ back then that's cos they've paid more rake in the first place.
I don't think we can assume that, no.
The various legislations currently being enacted are extremely complex, & involve a mix of directives, & advice. In many cases, it is open to interpretation by the sites as to how they implement certain things. "Responsibly Gaming" is at the heart of much of it, & Sky Poker will presumably continue to encourage that, & comply in every way possible with the legislation, in both practice & spirit.