You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Options
SPT sats
HENDRIK62
Member Posts: 3,162
in Poker Chat
I guess the thinking behind the changes was to try and discourage sats for cash and hopefully enable more recs to gain seats.
I have to say I think is having the opposite effect, there are virtually no £5 games running and very few £10 making it pretty tough to get to the semis
I know I could buy in but £48 is a bit steep for me, its a shame as I really want to get to Glasgow.
I bought in direct to Manchester but I really can't justify it at my level.
Just an observation,
I have to say I think is having the opposite effect, there are virtually no £5 games running and very few £10 making it pretty tough to get to the semis
I know I could buy in but £48 is a bit steep for me, its a shame as I really want to get to Glasgow.
I bought in direct to Manchester but I really can't justify it at my level.
Just an observation,
Comments
It is a shame that Sky chose to change the rules, particularly for the furthest North SPT - surely the place to trial this was 1 of the "middle" 2 (Nottm/Manch).
I qualified for Unibet Glasgow a few months ago, but the hotel prices at that point made it unviable. I swapped the seat and will be at Brighton next weekend. The same 2 venues as the 2 SPTs, but a flexibility that Sky no longer entertain. Great shame, as SPTs are very good tournaments.
No, not really.
The idea was that qualifying ONLY for a specific day - 1A or 1B - was causing all sorts of problems, Admin problems at Sky's end, & a lot of negativity from Customers who, despite being advised that they cannot "swap" days, still demanded to swap days. However, fair to say, the baby went down the plughole, as it caused unexpected collateral problems.
The ability for players to now choose what day they play has really helped, IMO. So yeah, not ideal, but some plus points too.
Bottom line is the cost benefit analysis
Did it work?
Did Sky make more money?
Did more people play the sats?
Did Sky pay out less cash(either in real terms or as £220 seats)
and a whole host of other factors that will (rightly) remain confidential
As someone who has
a) won less seats
b) played less sats
c) continues to try to win that elusive 4th seat( if only to save me bothering to pay and play the next SPT sats)
d) watched so many sats cancel
e) seen so many 'faces' not bother playing them-ok they may have been playing for the cash but at least they regged
As I've stated previously, I'm a recreational player who loves the SPT format and am looking forward to Glasgow...but at a real £ cost to myself compared to Brighton/Manchester as previously I was lucky enough to win more seats/get the cash to pay for flights/accommodation- at a cost, mind through lots of registrations...like many of the people who are now missing playing these
I just wonder when the accountants to the 'math' it might prejudice the SPT's for the future?
Pity
^^^^
Interesting & constructive Post from Lord Silly Hat there.
And yes, when Glasgow is done & dusted, I'm sure Sky will look again at SPT qualifying procedures & see, given the software limitations, if they can tweak them for the betterment of all.
Yo Hendo @HENDRIK62
No, not really.
The idea was that qualifying ONLY for a specific day - 1A or 1B - was causing all sorts of problems, Admin problems at Sky's end, & a lot of negativity from Customers who, despite being advised that they cannot "swap" days, still demanded to swap days. However, fair to say, the baby went down the plughole, as it caused unexpected collateral problems.
The ability for players to now choose what day they play has really helped, IMO. So yeah, not ideal, but some plus points too.
I see, that makes sense, thanks for clearing that up.
It may just be coincidence and perhaps lack of numbers are due to strict border controls forced Irn Bru consumtion, Tennents and lack of jellied eels.....who knows :-)
Anyways, nearly made it last night. I made a terrible call on FT which put paid to my chances....c est la vie.
I will try again tonight.
Thanks guys.
Sky will always try to improve things, like any Business will. That's not because they are nice people, it's because they want their Business to do better, & to do that they need to keep their Customers engaged & happy.
Sometimes they hit the sweet spot, sometimes they get it right round their neck. And when they get it wrong, I'm always here to be honest about it & fess up.
The weird thing on this occasion, which really shocked me, was that although Sky Poker have always been scrupulously fair with their Customers, numerous long-term, loyal Customers instantly said "that's it, I'll never play an SPT again" sorta thing.
Nobody said "well it's not like Sky usually lift our legs, so first up, let's challenge it & ask what gives". It was insta "Sky are trying to steal from us". I guess the guys in the office who research Brand Loyalty took a lot away from that.
Anyways, live & learn & all that.
Turning first to the question of 1As/Bs, i can quite understand why Sky initially wanted to ensure there were enough "A's". Certainly other sites have had trouble getting enough players on earlier days. However, having been to all the recent SPTs, the Fridays have (if anything) been busier than the Saturdays. Until that changes, Sky can save themselves a whole load of work just letting people play on the day they want.
I can quite understand why some people object to "sats for cash". But what has this been replaced with? People with multiple seats giving Sky an interest-free loan. For sats to a tournament that might not run/run very differently next year.
Stars are clearly concerned about the fragile economy of poker players. They even now pay out the min-cash while you are still in the tournament, to try and get earlier registrations with that money. In bounty hunters, other sites pay the bounty while you are still in the tournament, for the same reason. Meanwhile, Sky take money (from the regs/more active recs) into money that cannot be used rather than return it to the players. You really really need some form of "tournament £" system.
I have some sympathy in relation to software limitations. However, I would have more if Sky had not told us all that new software was in development when it was not. That was not a case of treating the customer fairly. Sky generally are very fair to us all, and that was an isolated example where you fell short.
PS. Irn Bru for the win. Stop fobbing us English off with Tizer-we might sometimes be rude to the Scots, but that is taking things too far
Average runners for SPT Brighton Semi - 12.86. Cash for sat winners - 15
Average runners for SPT Glasgow Semi - 11.62. Cash for sat winners - 0
Using actual facts I can say the sats for Notts went terribly. Towards the end every semi was overlaying and all 3 seats were going as cash. Brighton sats went a bit better but that is mainly due to the location. Many of the top MTT regs who play cash for sats happen to be from down south which boosted runners. It also makes it much harder for rec players to qualify if half the field are pros. The system needed changing.
Have we made more money from these changes? No, that wasn't the point.
Have more unique players qualified for the SPT that otherwise wouldn't have? Yes without a doubt.
It is often impossible to keep customers informed, due to Stock Exchange Takeover Rules. There is inevitably a period when such work would stop without customers (and staff) being made aware of it.
I'm not accusing Tikay or anyone else of deliberately misleading us. People are prevented from being open and honest as part and parcel of a takeover to prevent insider trading etc. It is often restricted to very few employees. So (as an example) when Tikay was talking in Manchester he could not have said anything else (and I am sure he did not know at that time).
There are all sorts of regulatory hurdles delaying anyone being able to tell customers (both before and after) in this sort of scenario. This often results in the info being officially released without telling Staff-as an example, the proposed takeover was revealed by Tommy D as he read a Press Release.
Finally, Tony refers to long term regulars saying they would "never play an SPT again". Can't speak for others, but I only said I would not play an SPT Sat again, and only while Sky (very briefly) proposed keeping some of the money.
like most aspects of poker there is no right or wrong just opinions but I share that of Sky here for what its worth
Factual numbers speak louder than hearsay.
Once it happened, again, as far as I was allowed (or knew), I kept everyone appraised of what was happening, & how it was affecting things, especially as to the CMA Rulings.
I honestly don't think I could have been more open & honest at any stage.
Anyways, we are getting way off track here. My point was a personal aside as to the depth of loyalty, & how it "surprised me". No more, no less. I genuinely believe Sky Poker, for all it's shortcomings - & it has more of those than Shorty Mc Short from Shortville, and which have always been admitted - has always been completely honest & fair with it's Customers, & I'm much surprised than anyone would think otherwise. Cutting edge, state of the art software? Absolutely not. Honest with it's customers? 100%.
1. Do we know roughly at what point the full integration between Sky and TSG will be complete? My understanding is that at present the takeover has been completed but the two groups have to continue to run as entirely separate entities for a certain period.
2. Is there much likelihood of the SPT running again in 2019?
Q2. I can't answer that with any certainty, but the last time I discussed it with my immediate boss the basis of his reply suggested it would continue in 2019, or at least that was the wish & intention of the Business at the time, & I got involved in discussions with third parties. However, then the CMA Ruling arose, so it all stopped immediately.
However, a lot of stuff has happened since then, & I've not asked the question since, so as of now, I genuinely don't know. There is so much integration to be done, right across SB&G, & it's not really my place to mither him repeatedly with what are, in relative terms, minor matters. Do I THINK it will happen in 2019? Yes, but that's only my personal opinion. And I have been known to be wrong. Just, you know, once or twice.
I mean, we have come full circle here, but do we really think Sky Poker would have suggested spare Glasgow seats could be used next year if they have no real intention of running a 2019 Tour? I think they still want to. Whether they can or will remains to be seen.
Lots to be excited about, & lots to worry about.