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

Priority Club Members - important notice, please note.

Tikay10Tikay10 Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 160,129

Please see the changes posted today on the Priority Club Page

HERE






IMPORTANT NOTICE: We are disbanding our Priority Club in its current form and the benefits that go along with it. These benefits include:

• Priority Prize Draw
• Birthday Bonus
• Final Table Jackpot boost
• Bubble Insurance
• Dedicated service team access

We will continue to award 10% rakeback for reaching 10,000 points in a month as well as the current silver, gold and platinum tiers up to receiving 20% rakeback for reaching 50,000 points. These will continue to be credited on the 1st of each month. November will be the final month that you can make Priority status meaning you will continue to receive your Priority benefits in December but these will no longer apply from January 1st.
«1

Comments

  • Options
    Tikay10Tikay10 Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 160,129
    edited December 2020
    Please note these changes are not by choice, nor are they about saving money. The regulatory/compliance landscape is changing rapidly & the term "VIP" has to be laid to rest. The term "Priority" as we know it will disappear from Sky Poker as of 1st January & VIP treatment as we know it in Gaming has to cease.

    The various rakeback tiers for 10,000 points or more in a month will continue as normal.

  • Options
    Jac35Jac35 Member Posts: 6,473
    edited December 2020
    Make a small increase in rakeback payments to compensate?

    With regulation/compliance
    Shouldn’t all players receive the same amount of % rakeback regardless of volume?
  • Options
    Allan23Allan23 Member Posts: 864
    Tikay10 said:

    Please note these changes are not by choice, nor are they about saving money. The regulatory/compliance landscape is changing rapidly & the term "VIP" has to be laid to rest. The term "Priority" as we know it will disappear from Sky Poker as of 1st January & VIP treatment as we know it in Gaming has to cease.

    The various rakeback tiers for 10,000 points or more in a month will continue as normal.

    Isn't the Sky rewards system (and any rakeback "system") essentially "VIP", "priority" or any term you want to call it treatment? E.g the more you spend on our site the more you'll get back? Or is it enough of a grey area that rewards can continue as long as obvious labels aren't applied to it?
  • Options
    K0BAYASHlK0BAYASHl Member Posts: 2,027
    Thats a great shame. So if you made priority In November there will still be a prize draw on 1st Janurary?
  • Options
    DoublemeDoubleme Member Posts: 1,545
    Allan23 said:

    Tikay10 said:

    Please note these changes are not by choice, nor are they about saving money. The regulatory/compliance landscape is changing rapidly & the term "VIP" has to be laid to rest. The term "Priority" as we know it will disappear from Sky Poker as of 1st January & VIP treatment as we know it in Gaming has to cease.

    The various rakeback tiers for 10,000 points or more in a month will continue as normal.

    Isn't the Sky rewards system (and any rakeback "system") essentially "VIP", "priority" or any term you want to call it treatment? E.g the more you spend on our site the more you'll get back? Or is it enough of a grey area that rewards can continue as long as obvious labels aren't applied to it?
    id assume not because by that definition every single player on sky is a vip since you get different rewards for hitting 50 points in a week (free rolls) 100 points (free rolls plus tokens) and then different cash back tiers after 500 points.

    the issue is due to legislation come in sites now have to do affordability checks on anyone who is considered vip. Though its not clear exactly what these affordability checks are, and to my best understanding that would be due to the site to decide, they would need to show stringent checks had been done.

    To check every single member of priority for affordability would be a costly endevour.

    I doubt many if any people hit priority club level if they are losing players, since it costs £1000 in rake to hit priority. if someone is a rec/fish/casual play raking £1000+ a month they also are paying the rake + ROI of the winning players and this would obviously be very costly. I may be wrong though.

    Personally I think deposit limits for a particular period eg week month year etc, are the most appropiate forms of affordability checks/ restrictions. However with more regulation coming out all the time this could soon be the end of online poker in the UK for most of us or potentially even all of us.

    Hopefully not though.


  • Options
    Tikay10Tikay10 Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 160,129
    K0BAYASHl said:

    Thats a great shame. So if you made priority In November there will still be a prize draw on 1st Janurary?

    @K0BAYASHl

    That's not the way I read it but I've sent a note up & will confirm either way some time tomorrow. (The chap I need to speak to is unavailable today).


    "November will be the final month that you can make Priority status meaning you will continue to receive your Priority benefits in December but these will no longer apply from January 1st."
  • Options
    MattBatesMattBates Member Posts: 4,118
    Doubleme said:

    Allan23 said:

    Tikay10 said:

    Please note these changes are not by choice, nor are they about saving money. The regulatory/compliance landscape is changing rapidly & the term "VIP" has to be laid to rest. The term "Priority" as we know it will disappear from Sky Poker as of 1st January & VIP treatment as we know it in Gaming has to cease.

    The various rakeback tiers for 10,000 points or more in a month will continue as normal.

    Isn't the Sky rewards system (and any rakeback "system") essentially "VIP", "priority" or any term you want to call it treatment? E.g the more you spend on our site the more you'll get back? Or is it enough of a grey area that rewards can continue as long as obvious labels aren't applied to it?
    id assume not because by that definition every single player on sky is a vip since you get different rewards for hitting 50 points in a week (free rolls) 100 points (free rolls plus tokens) and then different cash back tiers after 500 points.

    the issue is due to legislation come in sites now have to do affordability checks on anyone who is considered vip. Though its not clear exactly what these affordability checks are, and to my best understanding that would be due to the site to decide, they would need to show stringent checks had been done.

    To check every single member of priority for affordability would be a costly endevour.

    I doubt many if any people hit priority club level if they are losing players, since it costs £1000 in rake to hit priority. if someone is a rec/fish/casual play raking £1000+ a month they also are paying the rake + ROI of the winning players and this would obviously be very costly. I may be wrong though.

    Personally I think deposit limits for a particular period eg week month year etc, are the most appropiate forms of affordability checks/ restrictions. However with more regulation coming out all the time this could soon be the end of online poker in the UK for most of us or potentially even all of us.

    Hopefully not though.


    I bet there are losing players that make priority.

    I don't think it would be that costly an endeavour to check affordability for all priority members (we aren't talking about that many individuals, maybe 150 is it?) when for lots it is a simple thing as saying they are a winning poker player so the affordability is they fund their account through poker winnings.
  • Options
    mushroom1mushroom1 Member Posts: 645
    MattBates said:

    Doubleme said:

    Allan23 said:

    Tikay10 said:

    Please note these changes are not by choice, nor are they about saving money. The regulatory/compliance landscape is changing rapidly & the term "VIP" has to be laid to rest. The term "Priority" as we know it will disappear from Sky Poker as of 1st January & VIP treatment as we know it in Gaming has to cease.

    The various rakeback tiers for 10,000 points or more in a month will continue as normal.

    Isn't the Sky rewards system (and any rakeback "system") essentially "VIP", "priority" or any term you want to call it treatment? E.g the more you spend on our site the more you'll get back? Or is it enough of a grey area that rewards can continue as long as obvious labels aren't applied to it?
    id assume not because by that definition every single player on sky is a vip since you get different rewards for hitting 50 points in a week (free rolls) 100 points (free rolls plus tokens) and then different cash back tiers after 500 points.

    the issue is due to legislation come in sites now have to do affordability checks on anyone who is considered vip. Though its not clear exactly what these affordability checks are, and to my best understanding that would be due to the site to decide, they would need to show stringent checks had been done.

    To check every single member of priority for affordability would be a costly endevour.

    I doubt many if any people hit priority club level if they are losing players, since it costs £1000 in rake to hit priority. if someone is a rec/fish/casual play raking £1000+ a month they also are paying the rake + ROI of the winning players and this would obviously be very costly. I may be wrong though.

    Personally I think deposit limits for a particular period eg week month year etc, are the most appropiate forms of affordability checks/ restrictions. However with more regulation coming out all the time this could soon be the end of online poker in the UK for most of us or potentially even all of us.

    Hopefully not though.


    I bet there are losing players that make priority.

    I don't think it would be that costly an endeavour to check affordability for all priority members (we aren't talking about that many individuals, maybe 150 is it?) when for lots it is a simple thing as saying they are a winning poker player so the affordability is they fund their account through poker winnings.
    100% nailed on certainty.
  • Options
    DoublemeDoubleme Member Posts: 1,545
    MattBates said:

    Doubleme said:

    Allan23 said:

    Tikay10 said:

    Please note these changes are not by choice, nor are they about saving money. The regulatory/compliance landscape is changing rapidly & the term "VIP" has to be laid to rest. The term "Priority" as we know it will disappear from Sky Poker as of 1st January & VIP treatment as we know it in Gaming has to cease.

    The various rakeback tiers for 10,000 points or more in a month will continue as normal.

    Isn't the Sky rewards system (and any rakeback "system") essentially "VIP", "priority" or any term you want to call it treatment? E.g the more you spend on our site the more you'll get back? Or is it enough of a grey area that rewards can continue as long as obvious labels aren't applied to it?
    id assume not because by that definition every single player on sky is a vip since you get different rewards for hitting 50 points in a week (free rolls) 100 points (free rolls plus tokens) and then different cash back tiers after 500 points.

    the issue is due to legislation come in sites now have to do affordability checks on anyone who is considered vip. Though its not clear exactly what these affordability checks are, and to my best understanding that would be due to the site to decide, they would need to show stringent checks had been done.

    To check every single member of priority for affordability would be a costly endevour.

    I doubt many if any people hit priority club level if they are losing players, since it costs £1000 in rake to hit priority. if someone is a rec/fish/casual play raking £1000+ a month they also are paying the rake + ROI of the winning players and this would obviously be very costly. I may be wrong though.

    Personally I think deposit limits for a particular period eg week month year etc, are the most appropiate forms of affordability checks/ restrictions. However with more regulation coming out all the time this could soon be the end of online poker in the UK for most of us or potentially even all of us.

    Hopefully not though.


    I bet there are losing players that make priority.

    I don't think it would be that costly an endeavour to check affordability for all priority members (we aren't talking about that many individuals, maybe 150 is it?) when for lots it is a simple thing as saying they are a winning poker player so the affordability is they fund their account through poker winnings.
    MattBates said:

    Doubleme said:

    Allan23 said:

    Tikay10 said:

    Please note these changes are not by choice, nor are they about saving money. The regulatory/compliance landscape is changing rapidly & the term "VIP" has to be laid to rest. The term "Priority" as we know it will disappear from Sky Poker as of 1st January & VIP treatment as we know it in Gaming has to cease.

    The various rakeback tiers for 10,000 points or more in a month will continue as normal.

    Isn't the Sky rewards system (and any rakeback "system") essentially "VIP", "priority" or any term you want to call it treatment? E.g the more you spend on our site the more you'll get back? Or is it enough of a grey area that rewards can continue as long as obvious labels aren't applied to it?
    id assume not because by that definition every single player on sky is a vip since you get different rewards for hitting 50 points in a week (free rolls) 100 points (free rolls plus tokens) and then different cash back tiers after 500 points.

    the issue is due to legislation come in sites now have to do affordability checks on anyone who is considered vip. Though its not clear exactly what these affordability checks are, and to my best understanding that would be due to the site to decide, they would need to show stringent checks had been done.

    To check every single member of priority for affordability would be a costly endevour.

    I doubt many if any people hit priority club level if they are losing players, since it costs £1000 in rake to hit priority. if someone is a rec/fish/casual play raking £1000+ a month they also are paying the rake + ROI of the winning players and this would obviously be very costly. I may be wrong though.

    Personally I think deposit limits for a particular period eg week month year etc, are the most appropiate forms of affordability checks/ restrictions. However with more regulation coming out all the time this could soon be the end of online poker in the UK for most of us or potentially even all of us.

    Hopefully not though.


    I bet there are losing players that make priority.

    I don't think it would be that costly an endeavour to check affordability for all priority members (we aren't talking about that many individuals, maybe 150 is it?) when for lots it is a simple thing as saying they are a winning poker player so the affordability is they fund their account through poker winnings.
    Well I know of a few who lose to the rake but are beating the standard and are profitable once rakeback is taken into account but are losing players before that. I meant players who are losing players if we exclude the rake.

    Anyway I am not quite sure how affordability checks would work its why they scare me.

    I have always been profitable on sky, I have never had the record that you have or many of the other top players have. unlike quite a few of the players on sky I have a day job as I have not previously shown the figures to justify doing this for a living.

    I would not be surprised if a few of the top players on sky own a property or two that they are renting out and can class that as an income as well as poker winnings. Or some other form of investments.

    However if ones only income is poker winnings it seems concerning with new legislation because it is currently unclear how that would be classed and if that could count.

    What has happened in Germany in recent months is scary if it gets echoed over here online poker is dead for any hope of income.

    You know they discussed £100 a month deposit limit for the whole country well for my personal circumstances I would be okay with that.

    not sure if the current eco system on sky would have significant changes though.

    I have seen people lose to me in several games at the £5 stakes and then move up to face Alancarr and Alvez and I am like if you cant beat a £5 reg why do you suddenly think you can take a £100 or £200 reg?

    They normally give those guys a few games too. Maybe these people make priority.

    I dont really want to be splitting families up, or causing vulnerable people to kill themselves, in order for me to make money. if that's what it takes for me to make it big in poker I guess I would rather remain doing min wage work.

    However I also do not want draconian restrictions on myself or my opportunity to make decent money if I am skilled enough too.

    I google this stuff fairly often gambling safety news and laws etc. Its not really clear what is coming.

    In my personal opinion they should just have deposit limits that way it is easy people losing money at a faster pace then they can afford will be hindered/protected, whilst profitable or sensible players monitoring they performance and playing within their means will remain unaffected/unhindered everyone wins.

    However what happened in Germany shows their is a real possibility that common sense may not win out.

  • Options
    Tikay10Tikay10 Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 160,129
    Tikay10 said:

    K0BAYASHl said:

    Thats a great shame. So if you made priority In November there will still be a prize draw on 1st Janurary?

    @K0BAYASHl

    That's not the way I read it but I've sent a note up & will confirm either way some time tomorrow. (The chap I need to speak to is unavailable today).


    "November will be the final month that you can make Priority status meaning you will continue to receive your Priority benefits in December but these will no longer apply from January 1st."
    @K0BAYASHl

    I understand there WILL be one last Prio Prize Draw on January 1st for those that qualify.
  • Options
    biggirlbiggirl Member Posts: 68
    Doubleme said:

    MattBates said:

    Doubleme said:

    Allan23 said:

    Tikay10 said:

    Please note these changes are not by choice, nor are they about saving money. The regulatory/compliance landscape is changing rapidly & the term "VIP" has to be laid to rest. The term "Priority" as we know it will disappear from Sky Poker as of 1st January & VIP treatment as we know it in Gaming has to cease.

    The various rakeback tiers for 10,000 points or more in a month will continue as normal.

    Isn't the Sky rewards system (and any rakeback "system") essentially "VIP", "priority" or any term you want to call it treatment? E.g the more you spend on our site the more you'll get back? Or is it enough of a grey area that rewards can continue as long as obvious labels aren't applied to it?
    id assume not because by that definition every single player on sky is a vip since you get different rewards for hitting 50 points in a week (free rolls) 100 points (free rolls plus tokens) and then different cash back tiers after 500 points.

    the issue is due to legislation come in sites now have to do affordability checks on anyone who is considered vip. Though its not clear exactly what these affordability checks are, and to my best understanding that would be due to the site to decide, they would need to show stringent checks had been done.

    To check every single member of priority for affordability would be a costly endevour.

    I doubt many if any people hit priority club level if they are losing players, since it costs £1000 in rake to hit priority. if someone is a rec/fish/casual play raking £1000+ a month they also are paying the rake + ROI of the winning players and this would obviously be very costly. I may be wrong though.

    Personally I think deposit limits for a particular period eg week month year etc, are the most appropiate forms of affordability checks/ restrictions. However with more regulation coming out all the time this could soon be the end of online poker in the UK for most of us or potentially even all of us.

    Hopefully not though.


    I bet there are losing players that make priority.

    I don't think it would be that costly an endeavour to check affordability for all priority members (we aren't talking about that many individuals, maybe 150 is it?) when for lots it is a simple thing as saying they are a winning poker player so the affordability is they fund their account through poker winnings.
    MattBates said:

    Doubleme said:

    Allan23 said:

    Tikay10 said:

    Please note these changes are not by choice, nor are they about saving money. The regulatory/compliance landscape is changing rapidly & the term "VIP" has to be laid to rest. The term "Priority" as we know it will disappear from Sky Poker as of 1st January & VIP treatment as we know it in Gaming has to cease.

    The various rakeback tiers for 10,000 points or more in a month will continue as normal.

    Isn't the Sky rewards system (and any rakeback "system") essentially "VIP", "priority" or any term you want to call it treatment? E.g the more you spend on our site the more you'll get back? Or is it enough of a grey area that rewards can continue as long as obvious labels aren't applied to it?
    id assume not because by that definition every single player on sky is a vip since you get different rewards for hitting 50 points in a week (free rolls) 100 points (free rolls plus tokens) and then different cash back tiers after 500 points.

    the issue is due to legislation come in sites now have to do affordability checks on anyone who is considered vip. Though its not clear exactly what these affordability checks are, and to my best understanding that would be due to the site to decide, they would need to show stringent checks had been done.

    To check every single member of priority for affordability would be a costly endevour.

    I doubt many if any people hit priority club level if they are losing players, since it costs £1000 in rake to hit priority. if someone is a rec/fish/casual play raking £1000+ a month they also are paying the rake + ROI of the winning players and this would obviously be very costly. I may be wrong though.

    Personally I think deposit limits for a particular period eg week month year etc, are the most appropiate forms of affordability checks/ restrictions. However with more regulation coming out all the time this could soon be the end of online poker in the UK for most of us or potentially even all of us.

    Hopefully not though.


    I bet there are losing players that make priority.

    I don't think it would be that costly an endeavour to check affordability for all priority members (we aren't talking about that many individuals, maybe 150 is it?) when for lots it is a simple thing as saying they are a winning poker player so the affordability is they fund their account through poker winnings.
    Well I know of a few who lose to the rake but are beating the standard and are profitable once rakeback is taken into account but are losing players before that. I meant players who are losing players if we exclude the rake.

    Anyway I am not quite sure how affordability checks would work its why they scare me.

    I have always been profitable on sky, I have never had the record that you have or many of the other top players have. unlike quite a few of the players on sky I have a day job as I have not previously shown the figures to justify doing this for a living.

    I would not be surprised if a few of the top players on sky own a property or two that they are renting out and can class that as an income as well as poker winnings. Or some other form of investments.

    However if ones only income is poker winnings it seems concerning with new legislation because it is currently unclear how that would be classed and if that could count.

    What has happened in Germany in recent months is scary if it gets echoed over here online poker is dead for any hope of income.

    You know they discussed £100 a month deposit limit for the whole country well for my personal circumstances I would be okay with that.

    not sure if the current eco system on sky would have significant changes though.

    I have seen people lose to me in several games at the £5 stakes and then move up to face Alancarr and Alvez and I am like if you cant beat a £5 reg why do you suddenly think you can take a £100 or £200 reg?

    They normally give those guys a few games too. Maybe these people make priority.

    I dont really want to be splitting families up, or causing vulnerable people to kill themselves, in order for me to make money. if that's what it takes for me to make it big in poker I guess I would rather remain doing min wage work.

    However I also do not want draconian restrictions on myself or my opportunity to make decent money if I am skilled enough too.

    I google this stuff fairly often gambling safety news and laws etc. Its not really clear what is coming.

    In my personal opinion they should just have deposit limits that way it is easy people losing money at a faster pace then they can afford will be hindered/protected, whilst profitable or sensible players monitoring they performance and playing within their means will remain unaffected/unhindered everyone wins.

    However what happened in Germany shows their is a real possibility that common sense may not win out.

    Do you believe in Extra-terrestrials?
  • Options
    DoublemeDoubleme Member Posts: 1,545
    biggirl said:

    Doubleme said:

    MattBates said:

    Doubleme said:

    Allan23 said:

    Tikay10 said:

    Please note these changes are not by choice, nor are they about saving money. The regulatory/compliance landscape is changing rapidly & the term "VIP" has to be laid to rest. The term "Priority" as we know it will disappear from Sky Poker as of 1st January & VIP treatment as we know it in Gaming has to cease.

    The various rakeback tiers for 10,000 points or more in a month will continue as normal.

    Isn't the Sky rewards system (and any rakeback "system") essentially "VIP", "priority" or any term you want to call it treatment? E.g the more you spend on our site the more you'll get back? Or is it enough of a grey area that rewards can continue as long as obvious labels aren't applied to it?
    id assume not because by that definition every single player on sky is a vip since you get different rewards for hitting 50 points in a week (free rolls) 100 points (free rolls plus tokens) and then different cash back tiers after 500 points.

    the issue is due to legislation come in sites now have to do affordability checks on anyone who is considered vip. Though its not clear exactly what these affordability checks are, and to my best understanding that would be due to the site to decide, they would need to show stringent checks had been done.

    To check every single member of priority for affordability would be a costly endevour.

    I doubt many if any people hit priority club level if they are losing players, since it costs £1000 in rake to hit priority. if someone is a rec/fish/casual play raking £1000+ a month they also are paying the rake + ROI of the winning players and this would obviously be very costly. I may be wrong though.

    Personally I think deposit limits for a particular period eg week month year etc, are the most appropiate forms of affordability checks/ restrictions. However with more regulation coming out all the time this could soon be the end of online poker in the UK for most of us or potentially even all of us.

    Hopefully not though.


    I bet there are losing players that make priority.

    I don't think it would be that costly an endeavour to check affordability for all priority members (we aren't talking about that many individuals, maybe 150 is it?) when for lots it is a simple thing as saying they are a winning poker player so the affordability is they fund their account through poker winnings.
    MattBates said:

    Doubleme said:

    Allan23 said:

    Tikay10 said:

    Please note these changes are not by choice, nor are they about saving money. The regulatory/compliance landscape is changing rapidly & the term "VIP" has to be laid to rest. The term "Priority" as we know it will disappear from Sky Poker as of 1st January & VIP treatment as we know it in Gaming has to cease.

    The various rakeback tiers for 10,000 points or more in a month will continue as normal.

    Isn't the Sky rewards system (and any rakeback "system") essentially "VIP", "priority" or any term you want to call it treatment? E.g the more you spend on our site the more you'll get back? Or is it enough of a grey area that rewards can continue as long as obvious labels aren't applied to it?
    id assume not because by that definition every single player on sky is a vip since you get different rewards for hitting 50 points in a week (free rolls) 100 points (free rolls plus tokens) and then different cash back tiers after 500 points.

    the issue is due to legislation come in sites now have to do affordability checks on anyone who is considered vip. Though its not clear exactly what these affordability checks are, and to my best understanding that would be due to the site to decide, they would need to show stringent checks had been done.

    To check every single member of priority for affordability would be a costly endevour.

    I doubt many if any people hit priority club level if they are losing players, since it costs £1000 in rake to hit priority. if someone is a rec/fish/casual play raking £1000+ a month they also are paying the rake + ROI of the winning players and this would obviously be very costly. I may be wrong though.

    Personally I think deposit limits for a particular period eg week month year etc, are the most appropiate forms of affordability checks/ restrictions. However with more regulation coming out all the time this could soon be the end of online poker in the UK for most of us or potentially even all of us.

    Hopefully not though.


    I bet there are losing players that make priority.

    I don't think it would be that costly an endeavour to check affordability for all priority members (we aren't talking about that many individuals, maybe 150 is it?) when for lots it is a simple thing as saying they are a winning poker player so the affordability is they fund their account through poker winnings.
    Well I know of a few who lose to the rake but are beating the standard and are profitable once rakeback is taken into account but are losing players before that. I meant players who are losing players if we exclude the rake.

    Anyway I am not quite sure how affordability checks would work its why they scare me.

    I have always been profitable on sky, I have never had the record that you have or many of the other top players have. unlike quite a few of the players on sky I have a day job as I have not previously shown the figures to justify doing this for a living.

    I would not be surprised if a few of the top players on sky own a property or two that they are renting out and can class that as an income as well as poker winnings. Or some other form of investments.

    However if ones only income is poker winnings it seems concerning with new legislation because it is currently unclear how that would be classed and if that could count.

    What has happened in Germany in recent months is scary if it gets echoed over here online poker is dead for any hope of income.

    You know they discussed £100 a month deposit limit for the whole country well for my personal circumstances I would be okay with that.

    not sure if the current eco system on sky would have significant changes though.

    I have seen people lose to me in several games at the £5 stakes and then move up to face Alancarr and Alvez and I am like if you cant beat a £5 reg why do you suddenly think you can take a £100 or £200 reg?

    They normally give those guys a few games too. Maybe these people make priority.

    I dont really want to be splitting families up, or causing vulnerable people to kill themselves, in order for me to make money. if that's what it takes for me to make it big in poker I guess I would rather remain doing min wage work.

    However I also do not want draconian restrictions on myself or my opportunity to make decent money if I am skilled enough too.

    I google this stuff fairly often gambling safety news and laws etc. Its not really clear what is coming.

    In my personal opinion they should just have deposit limits that way it is easy people losing money at a faster pace then they can afford will be hindered/protected, whilst profitable or sensible players monitoring they performance and playing within their means will remain unaffected/unhindered everyone wins.

    However what happened in Germany shows their is a real possibility that common sense may not win out.

    Do you believe in Extra-terrestrials?
    Yes they want communion.
  • Options
    K0BAYASHlK0BAYASHl Member Posts: 2,027
    Tikay10 said:

    Tikay10 said:

    K0BAYASHl said:

    Thats a great shame. So if you made priority In November there will still be a prize draw on 1st Janurary?

    @K0BAYASHl

    That's not the way I read it but I've sent a note up & will confirm either way some time tomorrow. (The chap I need to speak to is unavailable today).


    "November will be the final month that you can make Priority status meaning you will continue to receive your Priority benefits in December but these will no longer apply from January 1st."
    @K0BAYASHl

    I understand there WILL be one last Prio Prize Draw on January 1st for those that qualify.
    Thank you
  • Options
    KerrnalKerrnal Member Posts: 132
    Will the birthday bonus still be payed out this month?
  • Options
    Tikay10Tikay10 Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 160,129
    Kerrnal said:

    Will the birthday bonus still be payed out this month?

    @Kerrnal

    I would assume so, yes, as the notice stated;


    November will be the final month that you can make Priority status meaning you will continue to receive your Priority benefits in December but these will no longer apply from January 1st.
  • Options
    SkyIsSoftSkyIsSoft Member Posts: 28
    Doubleme said:

    biggirl said:

    Doubleme said:

    MattBates said:

    Doubleme said:

    Allan23 said:

    Tikay10 said:

    Please note these changes are not by choice, nor are they about saving money. The regulatory/compliance landscape is changing rapidly & the term "VIP" has to be laid to rest. The term "Priority" as we know it will disappear from Sky Poker as of 1st January & VIP treatment as we know it in Gaming has to cease.

    The various rakeback tiers for 10,000 points or more in a month will continue as normal.

    Isn't the Sky rewards system (and any rakeback "system") essentially "VIP", "priority" or any term you want to call it treatment? E.g the more you spend on our site the more you'll get back? Or is it enough of a grey area that rewards can continue as long as obvious labels aren't applied to it?
    id assume not because by that definition every single player on sky is a vip since you get different rewards for hitting 50 points in a week (free rolls) 100 points (free rolls plus tokens) and then different cash back tiers after 500 points.

    the issue is due to legislation come in sites now have to do affordability checks on anyone who is considered vip. Though its not clear exactly what these affordability checks are, and to my best understanding that would be due to the site to decide, they would need to show stringent checks had been done.

    To check every single member of priority for affordability would be a costly endevour.

    I doubt many if any people hit priority club level if they are losing players, since it costs £1000 in rake to hit priority. if someone is a rec/fish/casual play raking £1000+ a month they also are paying the rake + ROI of the winning players and this would obviously be very costly. I may be wrong though.

    Personally I think deposit limits for a particular period eg week month year etc, are the most appropiate forms of affordability checks/ restrictions. However with more regulation coming out all the time this could soon be the end of online poker in the UK for most of us or potentially even all of us.

    Hopefully not though.


    I bet there are losing players that make priority.

    I don't think it would be that costly an endeavour to check affordability for all priority members (we aren't talking about that many individuals, maybe 150 is it?) when for lots it is a simple thing as saying they are a winning poker player so the affordability is they fund their account through poker winnings.
    MattBates said:

    Doubleme said:

    Allan23 said:

    Tikay10 said:

    Please note these changes are not by choice, nor are they about saving money. The regulatory/compliance landscape is changing rapidly & the term "VIP" has to be laid to rest. The term "Priority" as we know it will disappear from Sky Poker as of 1st January & VIP treatment as we know it in Gaming has to cease.

    The various rakeback tiers for 10,000 points or more in a month will continue as normal.

    Isn't the Sky rewards system (and any rakeback "system") essentially "VIP", "priority" or any term you want to call it treatment? E.g the more you spend on our site the more you'll get back? Or is it enough of a grey area that rewards can continue as long as obvious labels aren't applied to it?
    id assume not because by that definition every single player on sky is a vip since you get different rewards for hitting 50 points in a week (free rolls) 100 points (free rolls plus tokens) and then different cash back tiers after 500 points.

    the issue is due to legislation come in sites now have to do affordability checks on anyone who is considered vip. Though its not clear exactly what these affordability checks are, and to my best understanding that would be due to the site to decide, they would need to show stringent checks had been done.

    To check every single member of priority for affordability would be a costly endevour.

    I doubt many if any people hit priority club level if they are losing players, since it costs £1000 in rake to hit priority. if someone is a rec/fish/casual play raking £1000+ a month they also are paying the rake + ROI of the winning players and this would obviously be very costly. I may be wrong though.

    Personally I think deposit limits for a particular period eg week month year etc, are the most appropiate forms of affordability checks/ restrictions. However with more regulation coming out all the time this could soon be the end of online poker in the UK for most of us or potentially even all of us.

    Hopefully not though.


    I bet there are losing players that make priority.

    I don't think it would be that costly an endeavour to check affordability for all priority members (we aren't talking about that many individuals, maybe 150 is it?) when for lots it is a simple thing as saying they are a winning poker player so the affordability is they fund their account through poker winnings.
    Well I know of a few who lose to the rake but are beating the standard and are profitable once rakeback is taken into account but are losing players before that. I meant players who are losing players if we exclude the rake.

    Anyway I am not quite sure how affordability checks would work its why they scare me.

    I have always been profitable on sky, I have never had the record that you have or many of the other top players have. unlike quite a few of the players on sky I have a day job as I have not previously shown the figures to justify doing this for a living.

    I would not be surprised if a few of the top players on sky own a property or two that they are renting out and can class that as an income as well as poker winnings. Or some other form of investments.

    However if ones only income is poker winnings it seems concerning with new legislation because it is currently unclear how that would be classed and if that could count.

    What has happened in Germany in recent months is scary if it gets echoed over here online poker is dead for any hope of income.

    You know they discussed £100 a month deposit limit for the whole country well for my personal circumstances I would be okay with that.

    not sure if the current eco system on sky would have significant changes though.

    I have seen people lose to me in several games at the £5 stakes and then move up to face Alancarr and Alvez and I am like if you cant beat a £5 reg why do you suddenly think you can take a £100 or £200 reg?

    They normally give those guys a few games too. Maybe these people make priority.

    I dont really want to be splitting families up, or causing vulnerable people to kill themselves, in order for me to make money. if that's what it takes for me to make it big in poker I guess I would rather remain doing min wage work.

    However I also do not want draconian restrictions on myself or my opportunity to make decent money if I am skilled enough too.

    I google this stuff fairly often gambling safety news and laws etc. Its not really clear what is coming.

    In my personal opinion they should just have deposit limits that way it is easy people losing money at a faster pace then they can afford will be hindered/protected, whilst profitable or sensible players monitoring they performance and playing within their means will remain unaffected/unhindered everyone wins.

    However what happened in Germany shows their is a real possibility that common sense may not win out.

    Do you believe in Extra-terrestrials?
    Yes they want communion.
    They want to become Christians?
  • Options
    DoublemeDoubleme Member Posts: 1,545
    SkyIsSoft said:

    Doubleme said:

    biggirl said:

    Doubleme said:

    MattBates said:

    Doubleme said:

    Allan23 said:

    Tikay10 said:

    Please note these changes are not by choice, nor are they about saving money. The regulatory/compliance landscape is changing rapidly & the term "VIP" has to be laid to rest. The term "Priority" as we know it will disappear from Sky Poker as of 1st January & VIP treatment as we know it in Gaming has to cease.

    The various rakeback tiers for 10,000 points or more in a month will continue as normal.

    Isn't the Sky rewards system (and any rakeback "system") essentially "VIP", "priority" or any term you want to call it treatment? E.g the more you spend on our site the more you'll get back? Or is it enough of a grey area that rewards can continue as long as obvious labels aren't applied to it?
    id assume not because by that definition every single player on sky is a vip since you get different rewards for hitting 50 points in a week (free rolls) 100 points (free rolls plus tokens) and then different cash back tiers after 500 points.

    the issue is due to legislation come in sites now have to do affordability checks on anyone who is considered vip. Though its not clear exactly what these affordability checks are, and to my best understanding that would be due to the site to decide, they would need to show stringent checks had been done.

    To check every single member of priority for affordability would be a costly endevour.

    I doubt many if any people hit priority club level if they are losing players, since it costs £1000 in rake to hit priority. if someone is a rec/fish/casual play raking £1000+ a month they also are paying the rake + ROI of the winning players and this would obviously be very costly. I may be wrong though.

    Personally I think deposit limits for a particular period eg week month year etc, are the most appropiate forms of affordability checks/ restrictions. However with more regulation coming out all the time this could soon be the end of online poker in the UK for most of us or potentially even all of us.

    Hopefully not though.


    I bet there are losing players that make priority.

    I don't think it would be that costly an endeavour to check affordability for all priority members (we aren't talking about that many individuals, maybe 150 is it?) when for lots it is a simple thing as saying they are a winning poker player so the affordability is they fund their account through poker winnings.
    MattBates said:

    Doubleme said:

    Allan23 said:

    Tikay10 said:

    Please note these changes are not by choice, nor are they about saving money. The regulatory/compliance landscape is changing rapidly & the term "VIP" has to be laid to rest. The term "Priority" as we know it will disappear from Sky Poker as of 1st January & VIP treatment as we know it in Gaming has to cease.

    The various rakeback tiers for 10,000 points or more in a month will continue as normal.

    Isn't the Sky rewards system (and any rakeback "system") essentially "VIP", "priority" or any term you want to call it treatment? E.g the more you spend on our site the more you'll get back? Or is it enough of a grey area that rewards can continue as long as obvious labels aren't applied to it?
    id assume not because by that definition every single player on sky is a vip since you get different rewards for hitting 50 points in a week (free rolls) 100 points (free rolls plus tokens) and then different cash back tiers after 500 points.

    the issue is due to legislation come in sites now have to do affordability checks on anyone who is considered vip. Though its not clear exactly what these affordability checks are, and to my best understanding that would be due to the site to decide, they would need to show stringent checks had been done.

    To check every single member of priority for affordability would be a costly endevour.

    I doubt many if any people hit priority club level if they are losing players, since it costs £1000 in rake to hit priority. if someone is a rec/fish/casual play raking £1000+ a month they also are paying the rake + ROI of the winning players and this would obviously be very costly. I may be wrong though.

    Personally I think deposit limits for a particular period eg week month year etc, are the most appropiate forms of affordability checks/ restrictions. However with more regulation coming out all the time this could soon be the end of online poker in the UK for most of us or potentially even all of us.

    Hopefully not though.


    I bet there are losing players that make priority.

    I don't think it would be that costly an endeavour to check affordability for all priority members (we aren't talking about that many individuals, maybe 150 is it?) when for lots it is a simple thing as saying they are a winning poker player so the affordability is they fund their account through poker winnings.
    Well I know of a few who lose to the rake but are beating the standard and are profitable once rakeback is taken into account but are losing players before that. I meant players who are losing players if we exclude the rake.

    Anyway I am not quite sure how affordability checks would work its why they scare me.

    I have always been profitable on sky, I have never had the record that you have or many of the other top players have. unlike quite a few of the players on sky I have a day job as I have not previously shown the figures to justify doing this for a living.

    I would not be surprised if a few of the top players on sky own a property or two that they are renting out and can class that as an income as well as poker winnings. Or some other form of investments.

    However if ones only income is poker winnings it seems concerning with new legislation because it is currently unclear how that would be classed and if that could count.

    What has happened in Germany in recent months is scary if it gets echoed over here online poker is dead for any hope of income.

    You know they discussed £100 a month deposit limit for the whole country well for my personal circumstances I would be okay with that.

    not sure if the current eco system on sky would have significant changes though.

    I have seen people lose to me in several games at the £5 stakes and then move up to face Alancarr and Alvez and I am like if you cant beat a £5 reg why do you suddenly think you can take a £100 or £200 reg?

    They normally give those guys a few games too. Maybe these people make priority.

    I dont really want to be splitting families up, or causing vulnerable people to kill themselves, in order for me to make money. if that's what it takes for me to make it big in poker I guess I would rather remain doing min wage work.

    However I also do not want draconian restrictions on myself or my opportunity to make decent money if I am skilled enough too.

    I google this stuff fairly often gambling safety news and laws etc. Its not really clear what is coming.

    In my personal opinion they should just have deposit limits that way it is easy people losing money at a faster pace then they can afford will be hindered/protected, whilst profitable or sensible players monitoring they performance and playing within their means will remain unaffected/unhindered everyone wins.

    However what happened in Germany shows their is a real possibility that common sense may not win out.

    Do you believe in Extra-terrestrials?
    Yes they want communion.
    They want to become Christians?
    no They have their own faith and ideology they want a different form of communion its kind of hard to explain, read communion by whitley striber I know from first hand experience this is an accurate source.

  • Options
    DoublemeDoubleme Member Posts: 1,545
    so in all seriousness some questions about how priority or the rakeback etc works.

    if we hit 10000 points in a month we get 10% rakeback is that paid on the rake we generated that month or is that paid on the following month?

    eg if I hit 10000 points in dec does that mean I get £100 at the beggining of jan or does it simply mean i get +10 % rakeback throughout the month of jan?

    also points awarded are not always constant eg some games tournies which charge 15p count this as 2 points and 25p as 3 points etc rounding up.

    so if i exclusively played 3334 5.25 games then I would have 10002 points but my actual rake would have been £833.50 so would my rakeback be based on points eg £100.02 or would it be £83.35?

    further how do promos that affect point generation affect all this?
  • Options
    MattBatesMattBates Member Posts: 4,118
    Doubleme said:

    so in all seriousness some questions about how priority or the rakeback etc works.

    if we hit 10000 points in a month we get 10% rakeback is that paid on the rake we generated that month or is that paid on the following month?

    eg if I hit 10000 points in dec does that mean I get £100 at the beggining of jan or does it simply mean i get +10 % rakeback throughout the month of jan?

    also points awarded are not always constant eg some games tournies which charge 15p count this as 2 points and 25p as 3 points etc rounding up.

    so if i exclusively played 3334 5.25 games then I would have 10002 points but my actual rake would have been £833.50 so would my rakeback be based on points eg £100.02 or would it be £83.35?

    further how do promos that affect point generation affect all this?

    If you get 10k+ points in December you get a rakeback payment on the 1st of January based on the rake paid in December.

    The weekly payment is a points based payment so if you get points by double points promo etc it is better for your weekly (and gives you a better chance of making the higher prio levels and therefore higher RB % levels) but your monthly is a rake back payment based on rake paid so your payment will be effected by you having paid less rake.
  • Options
    DoublemeDoubleme Member Posts: 1,545
    MattBates said:

    Doubleme said:

    so in all seriousness some questions about how priority or the rakeback etc works.

    if we hit 10000 points in a month we get 10% rakeback is that paid on the rake we generated that month or is that paid on the following month?

    eg if I hit 10000 points in dec does that mean I get £100 at the beggining of jan or does it simply mean i get +10 % rakeback throughout the month of jan?

    also points awarded are not always constant eg some games tournies which charge 15p count this as 2 points and 25p as 3 points etc rounding up.

    so if i exclusively played 3334 5.25 games then I would have 10002 points but my actual rake would have been £833.50 so would my rakeback be based on points eg £100.02 or would it be £83.35?

    further how do promos that affect point generation affect all this?

    If you get 10k+ points in December you get a rakeback payment on the 1st of January based on the rake paid in December.

    The weekly payment is a points based payment so if you get points by double points promo etc it is better for your weekly (and gives you a better chance of making the higher prio levels and therefore higher RB % levels) but your monthly is a rake back payment based on rake paid so your payment will be effected by you having paid less rake.
    ty for clearing that up.

Sign In or Register to comment.