In Response to Re: New Sky Poker Rewards : Hi Neil, Yes, based on raking on average 5000 points a month, and using the table you yourself posted, i have worked out that on average I am likely to lose around £450 a year. That's a lot of money to many. I assume when you speak of the "very clever people working at sky" you aren't referring to the people that create the software (very poor when compared to leading sites) or are on 24/h chat (that sometimes doesn't even work, and when you do get through who knows what you might get!). Let's assume that the ones behind this idea aren't those people ;-) Anyway, these aren't the reasons I play here, I can live with these side issues. I hope I am not suggesting that the reps are lying, certainly not my intention. I am also not saying things can't change, but one would think as SkyPoker gets bigger and better and we head towards 2020 leaving the recession behind and with all the money SkyPoker/Vegas makes as a company overall, one would hope that a change to a rewards system would be an improvement for every single player, not some and not others? I believe having loyally played on this site almost daily for two years (allbeit not full time), raking approximately $10,000 a year for the site, I am entitled to be disgruntled at something that is going to lose me money, and worst still, potentially affect the traffic in the games that I tend to play on your site. Don't you think that's fair enough? If I was one of the clever people at Skypoker, I would want to reward loyalty from someone who visits my business daily (more often), instead of rewarding many people with a miniscule £2.30 token that visit the site sporadically (less often) - as a frequent flyer and a nectar card points holder (your example), this is also how they tend to work - don't fly, no airmiles as opposed to "you fly a lot with us, lets use some of your money to reward the masses that only fly with us once or twice". It would appear that "the clever people" are trying to adopt a policy that improves rewards for the masses (most of the masses being those that play very low stakes poker) and also those that play high stakes non cash poker - that's what I can gather from the table anyway. You've tried to cater for everyone, but left out that group on 5000 points that i unfortunately fall into. The way I see it, it is the equivalent of SkyPoker opening a restaurant and trying to fill it with 100 people wanting a burger and a soft drink, rather than 30 people wanting a Wagyu steak and a glass of wine. However, what if all the customers that come to Sky on a daily basis, raking 5000 points a month all decided to leave because they knew they could get their £450 back at another site (and more I would expect), then you would need even more customers to buy the burger and soft drink. Indeed, having waited over 45 minutes for a DYM game this morning, and all the other mornings this week - a game which would normally fill in 10 minutes, it looks like this could be happening right before our eyes, right now. As DCM002 mentions on page 15 - why can't we have a choice whether to switch to the new system or not, or is that too difficult for the "clever people"? ;-) As a company owner myself, I of course welcome new customers to my business. However, the retention of customers (especially those giving me $10,000 a year) is also vitally important, if not more so (new customers can come, not enjoy the product and leave). As previously mentioned by DUNMIDOSH on page 14, with the demise of the tv channel, lowering of guarantees in tournaments, industry high rakes, and now these changes that are going to cost myself and other 5000 points earners a lot of money, which in turn is lowering the traffic in the DYM games I like to play, can SkyPoker or yourself give me a good reason as to what incentive there is for me to stay? Many thanks. Posted by Jacquelyn
Had a hectic day and a long thought out post deserves a decent reply. I have read every post on this thread and I read them from the start but given that the system will be better for some people, worse for others and the same for many people in terms of how much they get, and given that people are way more likely to make a post and to be grumpy if they are one of the people who are likely to be worse off under the scheme it did feel like posting to reply would be waste of time in a lot of cases.
Firstly though as a general point I will say again that everyone who is upset and who feels they are likely to be worse off should remember that part of the purpose of the reward system is to encourage changes in behaviour. Maybe Sky feel they'd like to give a little extra to Mtt players and to really encourage Stt players and possibly they feel that certain cash game players they would prefer to reward less or they'd prefer to encourage to make that leap to the next level. It is possible to change the kind of games we play, to play more tables or to play different hours and if people feel so strongly that they want to get the rewards they were getting before and they need to change their behaviour to do that then they do have that option.
On the airline point though I would argue that poker sites are totally different. There are players who are very good for poker sites and some who are not so good. Generally you could split players into four categories...
Those who deposit regularly a lot of money, who play slowly over many tables and hours, they lose and they start games and are happy to keep games going out of hours.
Players who do all of that but lose slightly too quickly and do less hours.
Players that never really lose so they don't deposit but they put in lots of hours and help start games.
Players that never lose or deposit, who play the minimum get the maximum by "gaming" the rewards scheme and they never start games.
If online poker was starting again tomorrow all sites would start by rewarding the top ones on the list and they wouldn't bother rewarding the fourth category at all. Those people are paying a lot of rake but they do not contribute to the economy, they win lots of money and they cause the site to have to spend huge amounts on attracting new players who they keep destroying really quickly. They win large amounts from playing and do not need rewarding.
I'm not sure which one of those you are closest to but I know that every site when making any changes is looking always to make things slightly better for the top people at the expense of the bottom ones. The more they do that the better the games will be for all and therefore the pros that do stay will make enough extra to get the money they lost back. I think the tokens do a great job of encouraging more money into the poker economy at the lower levels and that money will travel upwards and benefit all.
I agree it does sound like you are going to be worse off under the reward scheme as definitely some people will and you will have to look at what you get out of poker on Sky in terms of winnings/losses in terms of enjoying the games and the community and in terms of rewards and decide what you can get elsewhere, but I would say that I know of one network in Europe where you can easily get 80% rakeback but I know almost no pros that play there as the games are full of bots and semi pro grinders attempting to simply break even and live off the rake. That isn't the kind of poker you get to play at Sky and that's because the extremely smart team that make these decisions really do understand the ecology of the poker site.
On the subject of giving people the option of joining the new system or sticking with the old the answer is obvious. The majority of people are not going to be effected too much either way so they'd be confused, the smallest of the three groups will be worse off so they'll stick with the old system and the middle size group will be better off so they'll change. Sky will have masses of extra hassle running two systems and the whole thing will cost them masses more and discourage new players who will find it complicated.
On the subject of just giving everyone extra they could. You are right, Sky Betting and Gaming is very successful and they could email the bosses of the Bingo, Betting and Vegas parts of the business and ask them to pay for everyone to get double rewards, they could also make all games rake free. They are running a business though which employs lots of people dealing with all kinds of things and I think they would argue they are entitled to make a profit...in fact they are legally obliged to attempt to make a profit for their shareholders.
The estimate I heard today was that modelling that has been done estimates the changes to the rewards system will cost around 10% more than the system cost Sky Poker two weeks ago.
When you sit down at a poker table three people can make money...you...your opponents...the site or casino running the game.
One of these three has just given 10% more than they were before of what they are making back to the other two and we have a 20 page thread where 75% of the people appear to think that is a terrible idea.
In Response to Re: New Sky Poker Rewards : I have to go to work, thank you for responding so quickly... I play at Sky Poker for three main reasons: 1. A UK only player pool (I find this site has very little, if any collusion, and Itrust it more because it is more UK based) 2. You offer DYM games which is what I find the most fun and profitable 3. A generally weak poker level of players (and I know you may respond by saying that that is what this new rewards system is trying to promote, but, 99% of these players that this system will help, will not be present in the games and stakes i play at). Many thanks! Posted by Jacquelyn
I sort of thought these might be some of the reasons you would give.
I think they are great advantages. A lot of people love the fact that it's a UK site with a big brand that can be trusted. If you do have a query you sometimes talk to someone who mostly deals with SkyBet, SkyBingo and SkyVegas enquiries but you can ring and talk to a real person and I've found them to be very helpful. I know what it's like to play on some of the networks and there are problems with bots and collusion on a much bigger scale than the small incidents that happened at Sky recently.
I don't really play DYMs and I'm not sure how easy it is to play them elsewhere. I would say that any troubles getting a game today may have had a large connection with the fact it was the hottest day of the year and people spent the morning in the garden.
I often hear people say the standard is weaker on Sky. I do think the fact that it's a large trusted brand...many people have a standing order every month for their TV and internet and that is why they came here first and that means the percentage of recreational players is higher. It isn't possible to use tracking software and the time bank issue discourages massive multi-tabling. All of those things definitely make the games more friendly, people are gambling more and the skilled player should be able to turn that to his advantage.
Sure, it's possible to go elsewhere and I'm sure some on this thread will but my nan always used the expression "cutting of their nose to spite their face" and I think that might be what some people in this thread are doing.
If you do play poker as a job or to supplement your income then rewards are often an important part of your bottom line but the most important part is always going to come from how you do in the games. I think many of the pros that do play here did not come because of the rewards.
Excellent reply and information Neil. No more complaints from me. I don't think any other sites ambassador would have taken the time and trouble to post on this thread. Replys like this are beyond the call of duty IMO.
OK, where to start in this reply? Firstly, before responding to Jacquelyn I'll address the table that Neil posted. I haven't checked if the figures are correct but know who posted them so will assume they are. You said that from looking at the table that everyone will be better off but the table doesn't include every single points amount that could be earned. Rather, it includes a lot of the minimum points needed to make it to the next level - and these are either the same or better off. But it doesn't show enough of the in-between level points where you will always be worse off under the new system. It was mentioned earlier in the thread that this new system is like a points race and I would agree that to some extent, it is. Every week you need to reach X points to get the most benefit out of the reward system. If you get to Saturday and have made 1000 points, then you have to evaluate if it's worth playing over the weekend to make the extra 500 points and go up from 1.25p per point to 1.5p per point. If you think you have a chance of it (and with rewards accelartor over the weekend for cash players, then they would have a good chance - and ofc, there is a SNG double points next weekend) otherwise, then you "may as well not play" - but what then? Are you going to do something else with your weekend other than poker? Or are you going to play on another site for the remaining 2 days? Problem is, if you play on another site for 2 days and can't manage to earn close to 500 points on sky in 2 days, then your reward on any other site is going to be pittance anyway. Overall you get the most rewards by sticking to one site for X amount of time depending on the reward scheme of each site. Because the more you play, the bigger the increase in rewards. Playing volume over multiple sites means your rewards on each site will add up to less amount of money. If you have to cut out volume for 2 days on Sky because you won't be able to reach the next level, then it might make sense to play somewhere else for the entire week (rather than the last 2 days where your rewards on that site for just 2 days won't be worth it) Now, to address some of Jacquelyn's points. "I do not have time to play more" - You say you average 5000 points per month which is 1250 per week and happens to be right inbetween the Silver badge level. Under the new system you are definitely one of the worst affected but I wouldn't despair about it. 250 points more every week I'm sure is going to be doable especially if you don't work weekend evenings and can play a bit of cash on the side of your regular DYM's when the rewards accelarator is on. If this isn't possible on one week, then you can always play slightly less than usual to just make 1000 points rather than 1250. After all, the 5000 ppw you said was only an average - I'm sure some months you only make 4000 and others you make 6000 or a bit more. Or some weeks you make 800 where other weeks you make 1700. Losing £450 per year is only going to happen if you make 1250 per week every week. As for it being a lot of money to "many" - you said yourself you rake £18,500 over 2 years. You've made £8500 from sky in that time. (excluding any rewards you've had) £450 is a worst case scenario - most likely you will lose no more than £50 at most because each week you will either stop/not play much more when you reach 1000 points or carry on to 1500. Of course, if there are good games at the weekend then you may want to carry on playing - so you may lose out on rewards, but you are still making money from poker itself. As for rewarding the little guys and you not caring because they don't play in your games - this is just not true. The only reason people like me and you can win money at poker is because of the tens of thousands of these little guys that come and put money into the poker economy. Even if they don't play at your game directly, the money will trickle into the games you play. That's what makes the games beatable - if everyone you played against was solid, you would struggle to make any profit at all. Lets say JoeBloggs saves up his £2.30 tokens from micro stake DYM's and enters an £11 Turbo and FT it for £300 - he now has money to play low stake DYM's of £5-£22 level. As Mattbates said earlier in the thread - having 50% RB would be all well and good in theory until you realise that you can no longer beat the games. So whilst you might be making £300 per month instead of £100 per month on rewards, you are now breaking even every month on the poker table instead of making £400. A £200 loss on profits despite getting £200 more in rewards every month. If the little guys don't get rewarded and put more money into Skypoker, then that is what would happen. Anyway, post is getting fairly long now, so think I'll leave it at that. Posted by F_Ivanovic
Did plan to respond to this as it was well written and thought out but it turns out my only response is a bit boring...
I have read a lot of these posts and I do agree with a lot of opinions stated.
Rewards/Bonus's are exactly that, a bonus and shouldnt be a reason to quit a site. Yes some are worse off and some are better off but that is the nature of change.
Most poker players come under 3 catagories ....
Recreational - just loves to play, not too fussed on making money
Semi-professional - plays to win and hopefully make a few quid
Professional - plays full time to win regular money
Professionals will be looking for rakeback primarily as this can be a considerable amount to supplement there income which is solely poker based. Semi-pro's see it as a bonus few quid but dont really rely on it and it tends to fizzle away. Recreational players who play lower stakes dont really see a lot of reward in cash so isnt as relevent.
The new system I think rewards quite well .... the low stakes recreational players can get into Freerolls and maybe a tourney token, the big players still seem to get to a reasonable rakeback when they are hitting Priority Status, Semi-pro players and higher stakes recreational players, seem to be more in limbo.
I fit into this last catagory but a reward program would never make me move sites. Most players in the middle ground aspire to get to the big game and play the big players. If I was Sky, I would look at promoting this band of players with free tickets to maybe the Super Roller or UKPC satellites or alike instead a just dishing out a few quid here and there. There is also the benefit of offering a 10% higher value of reward due to the rake of the ticket. Not only will this promote the numbers in the Big Games, it lets this bracket of player "taste" the big time and you never know may make a dream win.
Sorry is this the jacqueline that was disqualified from the heads up promo? Now moaning? Perhaps I have the wrong one and apologies if I do. Gosh I'd be happy Im still playing on the site ifI was disqualified from a promo. Ger Posted by gerardirl
Sigh; this has nothing to do with this thread, but seeing as you brought it up
a) you can't even spell my name correctly when its in front of you (!) and
b) You are ill informed - yes i was removed from the promo for the soul reason of logging in from abroad (didn't know this wasn't allowed, and the software still loaded up as normal) - hardly a crime.
In Response to Re: New Sky Poker Rewards : Had a hectic day and a long thought out post deserves a decent reply. I have read every post on this thread and I read them from the start but given that the system will be better for some people, worse for others and the same for many people in terms of how much they get, and given that people are way more likely to make a post and to be grumpy if they are one of the people who are likely to be worse off under the scheme it did feel like posting to reply would be waste of time in a lot of cases. Firstly though as a general point I will say again that everyone who is upset and who feels they are likely to be worse off should remember that part of the purpose of the reward system is to encourage changes in behaviour. Maybe Sky feel they'd like to give a little extra to Mtt players and to really encourage Stt players and possibly they feel that certain cash game players they would prefer to reward less or they'd prefer to encourage to make that leap to the next level. It is possible to change the kind of games we play, to play more tables or to play different hours and if people feel so strongly that they want to get the rewards they were getting before and they need to change their behaviour to do that then they do have that option. On the airline point though I would argue that poker sites are totally different. There are players who are very good for poker sites and some who are not so good. Generally you could split players into four categories... Those who deposit regularly a lot of money, who play slowly over many tables and hours, they lose and they start games and are happy to keep games going out of hours. Players who do all of that but lose slightly too quickly and do less hours. Players that never really lose so they don't deposit but they put in lots of hours and help start games. Players that never lose or deposit, who play the minimum get the maximum by "gaming" the rewards scheme and they never start games. If online poker was starting again tomorrow all sites would start by rewarding the top ones on the list and they wouldn't bother rewarding the fourth category at all. Those people are paying a lot of rake but they do not contribute to the economy, they win lots of money and they cause the site to have to spend huge amounts on attracting new players who they keep destroying really quickly. They win large amounts from playing and do not need rewarding. I'm not sure which one of those you are closest to but I know that every site when making any changes is looking always to make things slightly better for the top people at the expense of the bottom ones. The more they do that the better the games will be for all and therefore the pros that do stay will make enough extra to get the money they lost back. I think the tokens do a great job of encouraging more money into the poker economy at the lower levels and that money will travel upwards and benefit all. I agree it does sound like you are going to be worse off under the reward scheme as definitely some people will and you will have to look at what you get out of poker on Sky in terms of winnings/losses in terms of enjoying the games and the community and in terms of rewards and decide what you can get elsewhere, but I would say that I know of one network in Europe where you can easily get 80% rakeback but I know almost no pros that play there as the games are full of bots and semi pro grinders attempting to simply break even and live off the rake. That isn't the kind of poker you get to play at Sky and that's because the extremely smart team that make these decisions really do understand the ecology of the poker site. Posted by NChanning
Thank you Neil, you talk a lot of sense; i think if Sky had announced this change and explained it like you do then there would be half the number of complaints.
You speak wise words, and I am learning from your experiences in the business with this thread - thank you.
Excellent reply and information Neil. No more complaints from me. I don't think any other sites ambassador would have taken the time and trouble to post on this thread. Replys like this are beyond the call of duty IMO. Posted by spinky6108
In Response to Re: New Sky Poker Rewards : I sort of thought these might be some of the reasons you would give. I think they are great advantages. A lot of people love the fact that it's a UK site with a big brand that can be trusted. If you do have a query you sometimes talk to someone who mostly deals with SkyBet, SkyBingo and SkyVegas enquiries but you can ring and talk to a real person and I've found them to be very helpful. I know what it's like to play on some of the networks and there are problems with bots and collusion on a much bigger scale than the small incidents that happened at Sky recently. I don't really play DYMs and I'm not sure how easy it is to play them elsewhere. I would say that any troubles getting a game today may have had a large connection with the fact it was the hottest day of the year and people spent the morning in the garden. I often hear people say the standard is weaker on Sky. I do think the fact that it's a large trusted brand...many people have a standing order every month for their TV and internet and that is why they came here first and that means the percentage of recreational players is higher. It isn't possible to use tracking software and the time bank issue discourages massive multi-tabling. All of those things definitely make the games more friendly, people are gambling more and the skilled player should be able to turn that to his advantage. Sure, it's possible to go elsewhere and I'm sure some on this thread will but my nan always used the expression "cutting of their nose to spite their face" and I think that might be what some people in this thread are doing. If you do play poker as a job or to supplement your income then rewards are often an important part of your bottom line but the most important part is always going to come from how you do in the games. I think many of the pros that do play here did not come because of the rewards. Posted by NChanning
Ultimately, the changes will not affect an overall profit for myself, I probably should have added that one more of the reasons I play is because I win (!) - not huge amounts, but enough to pay for a holiday over the course of a year.
It is annoying/upsetting that in theory i will lose side income, and effectively take a pay cut BUT, if the reasons that you give for the changes become fruitful then long term it will mean more players anyway so it should be ok.
In Response to Re: New Sky Poker Rewards : I don't really get this. Are you saying they should have said..."We've changed the rewards scheme a lot of you are going to be much better off and some of you are going to be worse off but collectively you'll all be better off despite the fact that most people won't really have worked out how it will effect them before they start moaning". They came up with a change that puts money onto the site...whether that money goes directly into every individual players pocket as rakeback or not, it has to be a good thing for ALL players that in the three-pronged poker game where you/your opponents and Sky Poker are attempting to get something out of every game played one of the three has made a change that benefits the other two. Surely Sky Poker were entitled to trumpet that change? Posted by NChanning
Hi Mr Channing - thank you for your responses on this thread, excellent stuff.
I just think there was an opportunity for Sky to have used a similar message to the one you've added in recent posts. If it was sold in a manner that they were making changes to improve player pools (which is the main point of any rewards scheme) and ergo the games, it may have elicited a more positive response.
As it is, the OP was offering a red rag to poker players (who do seem to be predisposed to a moan) by trumpeting 'new and improved' when it was obvious that a decent chunk of players would lose out in terms of direct rewards (so not improved at all)...
Then there seemed to be a mix of more moaning (about the people moaning) and incredulity that people were posting anything less than super positive above the changes... which much have been easily predictable... and potentially avoidable when it's a win for all parties to have a more harmonious forum?
Anyway, as per my last post I totally agree with your summary of the changes. Puts a much more positive (and honest) lens on the way Sky are looking to improve the site for all. Thanks again for your responses, Sky have done a great deal getting you on their team.
Quuestion for Sky JP if he is around. Under the old scheme, you were guarenteed 2p a point for making priority. If you were to make priority under this scheme playing just SNGs and say make 10,000 points exactly, you are entitled to 10% of rake paid. Given there is a double point weekend approaching, will the 10% of rake paid for making 10,000 points be purely 10% of rake paid or is there are minimum buffer, like before? Basically, if you were to make all 10,000 points during the double points weekend, playing only SNGs, would you receive £50 as the 10% or more? Thanks in advance. Posted by YouMad
To put it simply, you're now guaranteed 2p per point (presuming you earn 2,000 points or more in any week you play), with rakeback on top.
If you were to earn exactly 10k points in the double points weekend, and not play any more this month at all, the breakdown would be as follows;
10k points @ 2p per point - £200
10% rakeback based on £500 rake paid - £50
Total - £250
Hope this helps. Let me know if you want to discuss it more - would be good to see you back in Priority!
Im on the fence, ive never taken much notice of rakeback or rewards, but since this debate started, im more aware and take a interest.
Ill be getting between 400-600 points a week, the one thing that will reduce the amount of points I get, is playing in a nightly freeroll, this freeroll will mean Im playing one table fewer , I expect a lot of people will be doing the same.
Is it actually creating more volume if there is one less table thats contributing rake?
Im on the fence, ive never taken much notice of rakeback or rewards, but since this debate started, im more aware and take a interest. Ill be getting between 400-600 points a week, the one thing that will reduce the amount of points I get, is playing in a nightly freeroll, this freeroll will mean Im playing one table fewer , I expect a lot of people will be doing the same. Is it actually creating more volume if there is one less table thats contributing rake? Posted by mumsie
Only time will tell!
However, we have reason to believe that people will come on site for these freerolls, who wouldn't be on site without them. We also have reason to believe that people are more likely to play other games if they're already on site. Will be interesting to see if there's a noticeably difference in traffic on an evening from a players point of view.
In Response to Re: New Sky Poker Rewards : Only time will tell! However, we have reason to believe that people will come on site for these freerolls, who wouldn't be on site without them. We also have reason to believe that people are more likely to play other games if they're already on site. Will be interesting to see if there's a noticeably difference in traffic on an evening from a players point of view. Posted by Sky_JP
Ahh, I see , im an example of this working , I came here as a cash player , I find myself loving the DYM and tournies.
In Response to Re: New Sky Poker Rewards : Ahh, I see , im an example of this working , I came here as a cash player , I find myself loving the DYM and tournies. Posted by mumsie
Good to here! I'm a fan of DYMs especially because my money seems to last longer! (Not that I can play on Sky!).
In Response to Re: New Sky Poker Rewards : To put it simply, you're now guaranteed 2p per point (presuming you earn 2,000 points or more in any week you play), with rakeback on top. If you were to earn exactly 10k points in the double points weekend, and not play any more this month at all, the breakdown would be as follows; 10k points @ 2p per point - £200 10% rakeback based on £500 rake paid - £50 Total - £250 Hope this helps. Let me know if you want to discuss it more - would be good to see you back in Priority! Posted by Sky_JP
Comments
Firstly though as a general point I will say again that everyone who is upset and who feels they are likely to be worse off should remember that part of the purpose of the reward system is to encourage changes in behaviour. Maybe Sky feel they'd like to give a little extra to Mtt players and to really encourage Stt players and possibly they feel that certain cash game players they would prefer to reward less or they'd prefer to encourage to make that leap to the next level. It is possible to change the kind of games we play, to play more tables or to play different hours and if people feel so strongly that they want to get the rewards they were getting before and they need to change their behaviour to do that then they do have that option.
On the airline point though I would argue that poker sites are totally different. There are players who are very good for poker sites and some who are not so good. Generally you could split players into four categories...
Those who deposit regularly a lot of money, who play slowly over many tables and hours, they lose and they start games and are happy to keep games going out of hours.
Players who do all of that but lose slightly too quickly and do less hours.
Players that never really lose so they don't deposit but they put in lots of hours and help start games.
Players that never lose or deposit, who play the minimum get the maximum by "gaming" the rewards scheme and they never start games.
If online poker was starting again tomorrow all sites would start by rewarding the top ones on the list and they wouldn't bother rewarding the fourth category at all. Those people are paying a lot of rake but they do not contribute to the economy, they win lots of money and they cause the site to have to spend huge amounts on attracting new players who they keep destroying really quickly. They win large amounts from playing and do not need rewarding.
I'm not sure which one of those you are closest to but I know that every site when making any changes is looking always to make things slightly better for the top people at the expense of the bottom ones. The more they do that the better the games will be for all and therefore the pros that do stay will make enough extra to get the money they lost back. I think the tokens do a great job of encouraging more money into the poker economy at the lower levels and that money will travel upwards and benefit all.
I agree it does sound like you are going to be worse off under the reward scheme as definitely some people will and you will have to look at what you get out of poker on Sky in terms of winnings/losses in terms of enjoying the games and the community and in terms of rewards and decide what you can get elsewhere, but I would say that I know of one network in Europe where you can easily get 80% rakeback but I know almost no pros that play there as the games are full of bots and semi pro grinders attempting to simply break even and live off the rake. That isn't the kind of poker you get to play at Sky and that's because the extremely smart team that make these decisions really do understand the ecology of the poker site.
On the subject of giving people the option of joining the new system or sticking with the old the answer is obvious. The majority of people are not going to be effected too much either way so they'd be confused, the smallest of the three groups will be worse off so they'll stick with the old system and the middle size group will be better off so they'll change. Sky will have masses of extra hassle running two systems and the whole thing will cost them masses more and discourage new players who will find it complicated.
On the subject of just giving everyone extra they could. You are right, Sky Betting and Gaming is very successful and they could email the bosses of the Bingo, Betting and Vegas parts of the business and ask them to pay for everyone to get double rewards, they could also make all games rake free. They are running a business though which employs lots of people dealing with all kinds of things and I think they would argue they are entitled to make a profit...in fact they are legally obliged to attempt to make a profit for their shareholders.
The estimate I heard today was that modelling that has been done estimates the changes to the rewards system will cost around 10% more than the system cost Sky Poker two weeks ago.
When you sit down at a poker table three people can make money...you...your opponents...the site or casino running the game.
One of these three has just given 10% more than they were before of what they are making back to the other two and we have a 20 page thread where 75% of the people appear to think that is a terrible idea.
The world is a strange place.
I sort of thought these might be some of the reasons you would give.
I think they are great advantages. A lot of people love the fact that it's a UK site with a big brand that can be trusted. If you do have a query you sometimes talk to someone who mostly deals with SkyBet, SkyBingo and SkyVegas enquiries but you can ring and talk to a real person and I've found them to be very helpful. I know what it's like to play on some of the networks and there are problems with bots and collusion on a much bigger scale than the small incidents that happened at Sky recently.
I don't really play DYMs and I'm not sure how easy it is to play them elsewhere. I would say that any troubles getting a game today may have had a large connection with the fact it was the hottest day of the year and people spent the morning in the garden.
I often hear people say the standard is weaker on Sky. I do think the fact that it's a large trusted brand...many people have a standing order every month for their TV and internet and that is why they came here first and that means the percentage of recreational players is higher. It isn't possible to use tracking software and the time bank issue discourages massive multi-tabling. All of those things definitely make the games more friendly, people are gambling more and the skilled player should be able to turn that to his advantage.
Sure, it's possible to go elsewhere and I'm sure some on this thread will but my nan always used the expression "cutting of their nose to spite their face" and I think that might be what some people in this thread are doing.
If you do play poker as a job or to supplement your income then rewards are often an important part of your bottom line but the most important part is always going to come from how you do in the games. I think many of the pros that do play here did not come because of the rewards.
Great post, I agree 100%.
I just think there was an opportunity for Sky to have used a similar message to the one you've added in recent posts. If it was sold in a manner that they were making changes to improve player pools (which is the main point of any rewards scheme) and ergo the games, it may have elicited a more positive response.
As it is, the OP was offering a red rag to poker players (who do seem to be predisposed to a moan) by trumpeting 'new and improved' when it was obvious that a decent chunk of players would lose out in terms of direct rewards (so not improved at all)...
Then there seemed to be a mix of more moaning (about the people moaning) and incredulity that people were posting anything less than super positive above the changes... which much have been easily predictable... and potentially avoidable when it's a win for all parties to have a more harmonious forum?
Anyway, as per my last post I totally agree with your summary of the changes. Puts a much more positive (and honest) lens on the way Sky are looking to improve the site for all. Thanks again for your responses, Sky have done a great deal getting you on their team.
Ill be getting between 400-600 points a week, the one thing that will reduce the amount of points I get, is playing in a nightly freeroll, this freeroll will mean Im playing one table fewer , I expect a lot of people will be doing the same.
Is it actually creating more volume if there is one less table thats contributing rake?